Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Journalism and cycling

14950525455334

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,368 ✭✭✭Chuchote


    buffalo wrote: »
    If you let your lawyer friend have an opt-out, you'll find a lot of people have jobs for which their car is 'essential'. All the documents can be put on computer (encrypted for security and confidentiality), and then he/she can cycle around the many jails and hospitals with the laptop in a pannier. Simple!

    Not really. It's honestly not feasible to cycle from Naas Hospital to Mountjoy (long wait for processing) then over to Vincent's then to Connolly and back to James's in a day, with a tight, exact schedule, as would be normal for them. There are some jobs where you have to have a car.

    If you'd like another example, take a newspaper photographer covering stories all over the city, suburbs and nearby counties. There's a murder in Meath, a break-in in Kilbride, a protest in Jobstown, a business meeting near the airport…

    It's not hard to make sure the opt-outs are opting out for legitimate reasons, any more than it's hard to make sure all the taxis are legitimate taxis.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,360 ✭✭✭I love Sean nos


    Chuchote wrote: »
    Not really. It's honestly not feasible to cycle from Naas Hospital to Mountjoy (long wait for processing) then over to Vincent's then to Connolly and back to James's in a day, with a tight, exact schedule, as would be normal for them. There are some jobs where you have to have a car.
    Park and ride?
    Chuchote wrote: »
    If you'd like another example, take a newspaper photographer covering stories all over the city, suburbs and nearby counties. There's a murder in Meath, a break-in in Kilbride, a protest in Jobstown, a business meeting near the airport…
    Not sure why this is any more legitimate for your opt-out than any other job. Same with the above.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,368 ✭✭✭Chuchote


    I'd think anyone who possibly could should cycle - my ideal Dublin will have hordes of schoolkids and flocks of workers and plutocrats zipping along on bikes in wide, well-designed cycle lanes.

    But you don't have to be hardline about it. There are people whose work is only really possible if they drive. Not that many, but they do exist. And believe me, the freelance snapper who loses her work because another newspaper's photographer has got to the Naas murder scene in a car is not going to be happy cycling to the dole.


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 19,474 Mod ✭✭✭✭Weepsie


    Chuchote wrote: »
    I'd think anyone who possibly could should cycle - my ideal Dublin will have hordes of schoolkids and flocks of workers and plutocrats zipping along on bikes in wide, well-designed cycle lanes.

    But you don't have to be hardline about it. There are people whose work is only really possible if they drive. Not that many, but they do exist. And believe me, the freelance snapper who loses her work because another newspaper's photographer has got to the Naas murder scene in a car is not going to be happy cycling to the dole.

    Where as your friend's job might be an important one which benefits some people in need. The freelance snapper trying to hawk photos to the press for the highest bid isn't really.

    If the car is essential to the job, then it should also be registered as a commercial vehicle with the taxes and insurances that go with it (and I include your friend in that).


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 47,997 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    The case for bicycles' inevitable triumph over cars

    http://money.cnn.com/2017/05/05/technology/bikes-disrupt-cars/index.html


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,368 ✭✭✭Chuchote


    Weepsie wrote: »
    Where as your friend's job might be an important one which benefits some people in need. The freelance snapper trying to hawk photos to the press for the highest bid isn't really.

    If the car is essential to the job, then it should also be registered as a commercial vehicle with the taxes and insurances that go with it (and I include your friend in that).

    Well, not for the highest bid. A freelance journalist (or any journalist) is doing a valuable job of informing the public of what's going on in their city & country.


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,704 ✭✭✭✭RayCun


    Rather than a flat ban on driving in the canal zone, a congestion charge.

    If driving in the canal zone is necessary for your work, you pay the charge and pass it on to your customers.

    If companies want to pay the charge for employees, it gets taxed as a benefit.

    If you really don't like public transport or bikes, you pay the charge to stay in your car.

    Nobody is forbidden from driving, but for some people this is the thing that pushes them out of the car.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,368 ✭✭✭Chuchote


    RayCun wrote: »
    Rather than a flat ban on driving in the canal zone, a congestion charge.

    If driving in the canal zone is necessary for your work, you pay the charge and pass it on to your customers.

    If companies want to pay the charge for employees, it gets taxed as a benefit.

    If you really don't like public transport or bikes, you pay the charge to stay in your car.

    Nobody is forbidden from driving, but for some people this is the thing that pushes them out of the car.

    London has congestion charges and seems as jammed as ever, if not more so?

    I hate this business of buying your way out of pollution. It should be to do with being neighbourly, not how much you can pay.


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 19,474 Mod ✭✭✭✭Weepsie


    Chuchote wrote: »
    Well, not for the highest bid. A freelance journalist (or any journalist) is doing a valuable job of informing the public of what's going on in their city & country.

    You didn't say journalist. A journalist also doesn't necessarily have to be on the scene given the plethora of communication options. There is a rise in civic journalism too, in that people near scene can just snap and send.

    Information travels faster by numerous means than by the traditional methods that this refers too. There is no doubt a place for them, but they shouldn't get some form of exception.


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,704 ✭✭✭✭RayCun


    Chuchote wrote: »
    London has congestion charges and seems as jammed as ever, if not more so?
    The latest official estimate of the population of London comes from the Office for National Statistics. According to their data, the population of Greater London in July 2010 was 7,825,200. The population in 2016 is estimated to be as much as 8.63 million.
    Chuchote wrote: »
    I hate this business of buying your way out of pollution. It should be to do with being neighbourly, not how much you can pay.

    Yeah, I know what you mean. But I don't think the idea of completely banning some people, and excepting others from the ban, is workable. You end up with special pleading - as you did above - some group of people who have the job of deciding which pleas to accept, inevitable risks of corruption, delays, expanding bureaucracy, massive inefficiency...

    A congestion charge can be applied to everyone, and it is up to them to decide how to pay it, or if driving in the city is not worth paying for.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,368 ✭✭✭Chuchote


    RayCun wrote: »
    Yeah, I know what you mean. But I don't think the idea of completely banning some people, and excepting others from the ban, is workable. You end up with special pleading - as you did above - some group of people who have the job of deciding which pleas to accept, inevitable risks of corruption, delays, expanding bureaucracy, massive inefficiency...

    A congestion charge can be applied to everyone, and it is up to them to decide how to pay it, or if driving in the city is not worth paying for.

    Not really special pleading, imho. Some people genuinely need cars to work. Most don't. It would be simple enough to issue a special card for those who have to go from place to place all day.


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,704 ✭✭✭✭RayCun


    Chuchote wrote: »
    Not really special pleading, imho. Some people genuinely need cars to work. Most don't. It would be simple enough to issue a special card for those who have to go from place to place all day.

    Do you really need a car for that?
    Couldn't you go by bike?
    Or public transport?
    How awkward do the alternatives have to be? An extra 30 minutes travelling? An extra hour? Completely impossible?

    Who makes that decision? Is there a committee somewhere that will examine each case? Who goes on the committee?

    Do you just write a letter to this committee? Do you have to produce evidence? What kind of evidence is acceptable?

    How is this simple, compared to a charge that everyone has to pay?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,368 ✭✭✭Chuchote


    A typical day for my friend would involve around 5 separate prison and court and hospital visits, spanning three counties. There are lots of lawyers and social workers doing this.

    They're quite different from those lucky people who go in to an office at 10am, work to 6pm and go home. It's not really something we should be arguing about; the difference is clear.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,107 ✭✭✭mr spuckler


    The case for bicycles' inevitable triumph over cars

    http://money.cnn.com/2017/05/05/technology/bikes-disrupt-cars/index.html

    thanks for that, really interesting piece.

    this quote actually created the subsequent emoji reaction from me (hopefully in more of a human form)
    Beijing has more than 650,000 shared bicycles. They've all appeared in the last nine months.

    :eek:


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,704 ✭✭✭✭RayCun


    Chuchote wrote: »
    A typical day for my friend would involve around 5 separate prison and court and hospital visits, spanning three counties. There are lots of lawyers and social workers doing this.

    They're quite different from those lucky people who go in to an office at 10am, work to 6pm and go home. It's not really something we should be arguing about; the difference is clear.

    So your friend is at one end of a spectrum, car absolutely necessary for her job.
    At the opposite end of the spectrum is someone with a LUAS stop outside their house, and another outside their office, but they don't like public transport so they drive.
    And at all points in between are tens of thousands of people who drive in the city centre every day.

    Who decides where on the spectrum to draw the line between "okay, you need to drive", and "no driving for you!"? What is the process?


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 19,474 Mod ✭✭✭✭Weepsie


    Chuchote wrote: »
    A typical day for my friend would involve around 5 separate prison and court and hospital visits, spanning three counties. There are lots of lawyers and social workers doing this.

    They're quite different from those lucky people who go in to an office at 10am, work to 6pm and go home. It's not really something we should be arguing about; the difference is clear.

    Probably worried about claiming their mileage as much as anything.

    There are ways of scheduling things so that less travel is required. I'm not blaming your friend, but the systems in place should or could be improved for to aid this.

    Sorry no exception, and again, they should be paying commercial rates for insurance


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,339 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    Chuchote wrote: »
    A typical day for my friend would involve around 5 separate prison and court and hospital visits, spanning three counties. There are lots of lawyers and social workers doing this.

    They're quite different from those lucky people who go in to an office at 10am, work to 6pm and go home. It's not really something we should be arguing about; the difference is clear.

    I suppose the question is why can your friend not add this onto her cost of doing business if a congestion charge is implemented. She is running a business and in the car alot, presumably her petrol etc are all covered in her expenses, this would be no different.

    I wouldn't be against a list of specific jobs that are exempt but the truth of the matter is, you forget what country your living in, someone will find away around the rules, or mount a protest about how your friend is no better than Dave the Plumber as Dave is only working to feed his kids and keep them in school. Dave has a load of tools that he cannot bring any other way, no different than your friends paperwork. You will argue back that there is a clear difference, but the truth is, Dave is just trying to do a job, just like your friend. Dave will have to increase his costs to cover these charges, so should your friend.

    BTW, I know very few office workers who swan in at 10am but they are different, as they don't have the amount to carry around.

    Your friend needs to look at talking to work about reducing the paperwork load. I used to deal with the department of Ag who still insisted on faxes only 2 or 3 years ago, rather than e-mail. It was borderline criminal the waste of paper.

    The difference is clear to you, it is not clear to everyone.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,107 ✭✭✭mr spuckler


    Chuchote wrote: »
    London has congestion charges and seems as jammed as ever, if not more so?

    read a couple of stats on this recently...
    London has low levels of car ownership when compared to the rest of the United Kingdom. In 2011, as many as 70% per cent of households in London did not own a car, as opposed to 25 per cent of households in the rest of the country.

    and while i can't find the second quote, it might have been earlier in this thread where of 1.3 million commuters daily into London, only 50,000 were by car?

    looks like they're upping the ante on the congestion charge front too...


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,761 ✭✭✭Pinch Flat


    ...and while i can't find the second quote, it might have been earlier in this thread where of 1.3 million commuters daily into London, only 50,000 were by car?

    Yeah read this recently that more people drive into Dublin than London - I looked for the link myself, but I think it meant more the City of London, which in itself is quite a small area albeit with a huge population of people commuting.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,107 ✭✭✭mr spuckler


    Pinch Flat wrote: »
    Yeah read this recently that nore people drive into Dublin than London - I looked for the link myself, but I think it meant more the City of London, which in itself is quite a small area albeit with a huge population of people commuting.

    it probably did but then both stats (ie total commuters and motorists) referred to the same area.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11,735 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    If you want to discourage a behaviour, the simplest method is probably to charge more for it. However, crossing the line from charging nothing to charging something is perilous (c.f. water charges, or the Red Cross charging a nominal sum for doughnuts in the US Army).

    People really will drastically modify their behaviour and indeed their property to avoid paying charges. Look at all those old houses with windows bricked up to avoid the Window tax.

    220px-Window_Tax.jpg


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,368 ✭✭✭Chuchote


    Not ness-o, though. Remember that study about parents who were 'fined' for arriving late to collect their kids from creche? Parents invariably arrived late and paid the fine, treating it as an extra payment that entitled them to keep the carers working late. When the creches started instead paying the parents to arrive in time, punctuality rates immediately improved!


  • Registered Users Posts: 32,370 ✭✭✭✭rubadub


    I would certainly not like to to see the likes of photographers getting exemptions.

    If it costed an absolute fortune to drive around the city, they would just stick to their localities. So instead of a paper getting 5 sets of very similar photographs from 5 photographers, of 5 events. They now could be getting the 1set each of the 5 events from the 5 photographers. So they are all still in a job.

    It's like people moaning "my team lost the match, but sure it was raining" as though it wasn't raining on the other team.

    Stopping needless duplicate journeys by teams of photographers heading to the same event is a good example of why it IS a good idea. And if it did suddenly cost a lot for journeys I bet other people would suddenly take the time to consider how to make their processes more efficient and less car dependent -like these red tape lawyers cluttering up the roads.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,368 ✭✭✭Chuchote


    rubadub wrote: »
    I would certainly not like to to see the likes of photographers getting exemptions.

    If it costed an absolute fortune to drive around the city, they would just stick to their localities. So instead of a paper getting 5 sets of very similar photographs from 5 photographers, of 5 events. They now could be getting the 1set each of the 5 events from the 5 photographers. So they are all still in a job.

    It's like people moaning "my team lost the match, but sure it was raining" as though it wasn't raining on the other team.

    Stopping needless duplicate journeys by teams of photographers heading to the same event is a good example of why its a good idea. And if it did suddenly cost a lot for journeys I bet other people would suddenly take the time to consider how to make their processes more efficient and less car dependent -like these red tape lawyers cluttering up the roads.

    In the case of 'events', yes, I absolutely agree with you - and in fact, that's how it normally works now, other than the Dáil and Seanad and their satellites, which are cyclable anyway.

    But I'm not talking about that kind of thing, but about the kind of photographers and writers who have to rush to fires and murders - often, again, this is done by stringers who'll supply the same reports to multiple papers. But they do need to be able to cross the city.


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 19,474 Mod ✭✭✭✭Weepsie


    Chuchote wrote: »
    In the case of 'events', yes, I absolutely agree with you - and in fact, that's how it normally works now, other than the Dáil and Seanad and their satellites, which are cyclable anyway.

    But I'm not talking about that kind of thing, but about the kind of photographers and writers who have to rush to fires and murders - often, again, this is done by stringers who'll supply the same reports to multiple papers. But they do need to be able to cross the city.

    We really don't need people rushing off to get pictures of fires and murders. And again, there are so many people close to these things with the ability to snap, send and carry on that it really is needless.

    Technology has enabled people to not have to be in the heart of action to report in a massive way. It might force more writers and journalists to sit down, plan and do a bit of research and some investigative journalism rather than trying to get the latest gory details of someone's death on the front page.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,368 ✭✭✭Chuchote


    Weepsie wrote: »
    We really don't need people rushing off to get pictures of fires and murders. And again, there are so many people close to these things with the ability to snap, send and carry on that it really is needless.

    Technology has enabled people to not have to be in the heart of action to report in a massive way. It might force more writers and journalists to sit down, plan and do a bit of research and some investigative journalism rather than trying to get the latest gory details of someone's death on the front page.

    You're speaking from experience as a journalist here, I take it? :D


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,530 ✭✭✭dub_skav


    I don't think photographers, solicitors or plumbers are the problem here. The only major traffic issue in Dublin is rush hour congestion.
    The defenses of the above professions are that they need to make multiple trips to disparate locations between the rush hours.

    The congestion is caused by commuters who are generally going to one place and returning from it for their daily work.

    Unless I'm completely missing the point, which is quite possibly seeing as how this thread is moving about :P

    Edit to add: In journalism and photography, a professional being at the scene may notice something completely different or a better angle than the "snap and send" amateurs


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,735 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    Chuchote wrote: »
    Not ness-o, though. Remember that study about parents who were 'fined' for arriving late to collect their kids from creche? Parents invariably arrived late and paid the fine, treating it as an extra payment that entitled them to keep the carers working late. When the creches started instead paying the parents to arrive in time, punctuality rates immediately improved!

    I remember reading about that alright. I guess it's always a balance between how people value the service or good they're paying for and how they value the alternative. For quite a lot of people the fine (or payment) for late arrival would be lower in value than what they'd earn by working longer at work, or else the good will they'd get at work would exceed the bad will they'd generate at the creche.

    I suspect a lot of people will pay quite a bit to continue to drive through the city centre, but a lot of people who aren't so determined or wealthy will just give in. Depends on how much the charge is, and whether determined populists manage to harness the energy.


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,704 ✭✭✭✭RayCun


    Chuchote wrote: »
    But they do need to be able to cross the city.

    So, their cost of business has gone up, and they charge more for photos. And maybe the photographers who figure out how not to use a car (staying local, using a bike, whatever) have a competitive advantage because their prices don't go up. Or everyone is stuck with cars, so everyone's prices go up, and nobody is at a disadvantage. Or some photographers drop out of the business, because their margins are now too tight, and there are fewer photographers left.

    Rather than saying freelance photographers don't have to pay the congestion charge.

    ("Oh really?.... did I mention that I'm a freelance photographer?"
    "I thought you worked in an office?"
    "Yeeessss, but that's just my day job. My heart is in freelance photography"
    "how much money have you earned from your freelance photography work? Do you have invoices? Records?"
    "Oh, so now it's only successful freelance photographers that are exempt? What about the little guy, trying to break in, chasing the dream...?"
    etc etc)


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,141 ✭✭✭Doctor Bob


    and while i can't find the second quote, it might have been earlier in this thread where of 1.3 million commuters daily into London, only 50,000 were by car?

    It was in the Andrew Gilligan interview I posted up-thread: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=103263267&postcount=1401


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement