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
Please note that it is not permitted to have referral links posted in your signature. Keep these links contained in the appropriate forum. Thank you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

New Minister for Transport Eamon Ryan

12357…13

Comments

  • #202
    kirving
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,059 ✭✭✭kirving


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    When you have drivers here claiming that complying with a basic legal requirement like driving in a manner that allows you stop within the distance you can see to be clear as 'totally impractical', you'll forgive me for making assumptions about responsibility.

    And this is just as disingenuous.

    You know full well what the meaning of that law is but spout it out consistently as a means to blame car drivers 100% for every collision and further your argument.

    As I said earlier, you driving in your car at any speed on any road, would not be able to stop if I chose to run in front of you, but by your own logic, you would be at fault. Correct?


  • #203
    Strumms
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,815 ✭✭✭✭Strumms


    It’s pretty poor appointment on Martins behalf with all that’s going on, to be making this sort of grandstanding appointment. We need a steady hand that the public can rely on...


  • #204
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,478 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Kevin Irving wrote: »
    And this is just as disingenuous.

    You know full well what the meaning of that law is but spout it out consistently as a means to blame car drivers 100% for every collision and further your argument.

    As I said earlier, you driving in your car at any speed on any road, would not be able to stop if I chose to run in front of you, but by your own logic, you would be at fault. Correct?

    Yes, I know the meaning of the law. It's not difficult to understand. It means that drivers should drive in a manner that allows them to stop within the distance they can see to be clear.

    If you were in a position to run out in front of me, I would have clocked you as a risk and adjusted my driving accordingly.

    If you find this requirement to be 'completely impractical', I can only suggest that you take some defensive driving lessons.


  • #205
    Jizique
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,949 ✭✭✭Jizique


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    Psst, enlightened EU countries got bombed t’fcuk in WW2. They were able to rebuild much wider streets, much more room for cycling infrastructure etc.

    Any pictures of the destruction of Paris?


  • #206
    Jizique
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,949 ✭✭✭Jizique


    Sam Russell wrote: »
    There is a car sharing service where you hire the car for €9 per hour all in - petrol, insurance, motor tax, parking.

    I have never used it but it sounds great. Now it would not work for commuting because I think you have to return it to where you got it. [I am not sure of that]. It would be good for the shopping trip from the village to the local town.

    It is not a daft idea at all. Most of the cars in the street I live on are left parked all day, every day, except for the occasional foray out. I am sure a short term rental would suit most people living here, and it would certainly be cheaper. A car costs about €5k per year, or €14 per day (365 days per year) or 1.5 hours per day compared with GoCar, or 11 hours per week. Now I could have underestimated the cost of owning a car by 100%, but that only makes the figures better.

    [Edit: Just checked and I am out - it is €10,671 per year according to the AA.]

    Sounds good, I must check it out.

    They have one way systems in Germany - they are class; 4-5k cars dotted around a city, you check for nearest on your app, it opens by phone, you take it and drive eg to airport or to another pet of city and park it there, and the charge is typically a couple of euro; we need that rather than the Irish system where the car must be brought back to the starting spot


  • #207
    TrailerBob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,519 ✭✭✭TrailerBob


    Seth Brundle wrote: »
    So he didn't have bull bars fitted to his vehicle?

    If it was a van//truck there would have been a similar outcome sadly.. I don't advocate the use of front bars in this country, they are by and large not necessary. It's the use of this incident as an argument that all SUVs are death traps that I took issue with. Any large vehicle travelling at a given speed will do the same thing.

    As for the statement from Andrew about no such thing as an accident... If you want to be pedantic, that's fine. Call it unintended consequences or what have you, but there's a distinction between that and wrecklwss behavior by drivers.

    Anyway, Eamon Ryan is not the enemy of the people, but he will try to push his agenda .. which will have unintended consequences... An accident if you will.


  • #208
    RandomViewer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,191 ✭✭✭RandomViewer


    Seth Brundle wrote: »
    I pay motor tax.
    I also pay income tax.
    I also pay many other forms of taxation.
    So as a cyclist I contribute towards the running of the country including funding roads.
    So, no. I won't shut up when someone pipes up with daft ideas about public taxation and spending.

    If the bike costs more than €500 it should be taxed, that leaves kids bikes unaffected, more expensive bikes are just a dick measuring competition among cyclists


  • #209
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,478 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    RandomViewer wrote: »
    If the bike costs more than €500 it should be taxed, that leaves kids bikes unaffected, more expensive bikes are just a dick measuring competition among cyclists

    Are more expensive cars just a small dick measuring competition between drivers?

    Bikes are already taxed, at the point of purchase btw.

    But do have a look at what smarter countries are doing to encourage cycling, with vouchers for bike repairs, actually paying cyclists to cycle.

    While you think extra barriers are a solution?


  • #210
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    Jizique wrote: »
    Any pictures of the destruction of Paris?

    Google.


  • Advertisement
  • #211
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,478 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    TrailerBob wrote: »

    As for the statement from Andrew about no such thing as an accident... If you want to be pedantic, that's fine. Call it unintended consequences or what have you, but there's a distinction between that and wrecklwss behavior by drivers.

    We have 98% of drivers breaking urban speed limits. We have the majority of drivers using their phones while driving. We have drivers killing 2 or 3 people each week on the roads. We have drivers telling us that basic legal requirements are 'completely impractical'.

    We passed the bar for wreckless behaviour a long way back.


  • #212
    alias no.9
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,339 ✭✭✭alias no.9


    Kevin Irving wrote: »
    It was never environmental in reality. Well, it was about CO2, at the determent of just about every other pollutant, but that was only because the Germans were top of the game at building diesel engines.

    The Swedes long had other ideas in terms of CO2 reduction (bioethanol), but the Germans had more influence in the EU, so the Irish government removed the tax incentives, and then unfairly taxed bioethanol to prevent the public from taking that option.

    German and French diesels were conciously incentivised over other alternatives to reduce our CO2 output - by FF and the Greens.

    The biofuels strategy was changed from incentivising a tiny number of new car buyers to buy one of a handful of cars that could run on a high percentage of biofuels which also had to be discounted at the pump to the much more impactful strategy of having a low percentage of biofuels in every litre of petrol and diesel sold. This was the correct way to go as far as I am concerned.

    CO2 road tax and VRT was a mistake, ignoring other tailpipe pollutants was a mistake and while dieselgate was a stunning lack of ethics from the automakers, there is no shame in having higher expectations from them. The shift towards vehicles with higher NOx output (even if the had been compliant) was utterly predictable.

    What I would like to know however is where Eamonn Ryan buys his biodiesel that he supposedly runs his Caravelle on because there are no longer any retailers offering biodiesel at the pump since the tax relief was abolish. Is the duty fully paid on it?


  • #213
    TrailerBob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,519 ✭✭✭TrailerBob


    Nice statistics Andrew.. you work for the CSO?

    I'm happy to debate, but wildly made up statements and generalisations are where I bow out.


  • #214
    Truthvader
    Registered Users Posts: 1,826 ✭✭✭Truthvader


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    Not everyone owns a car.

    But they wish they did


  • #215
    Truthvader
    Registered Users Posts: 1,826 ✭✭✭Truthvader


    Jizique wrote: »
    Nothing to do with jealousy; inappropriate and over engineered product that take up too much space and are more dangerous for pedestrians and other road users; the companies love selling them as they make really high margins but 95% of them are diesels which should not be in built up areas

    Pedestrians should not be roadusers. The ones that are will create a "Darwin" solution to their existence


  • #216
    tabby aspreme
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,037 ✭✭✭tabby aspreme


    ReginaldSmythV wrote: »
    People need to be very careful before laziness sets in too much in that respect. A lot of companies will realise that some lad in Delhi can also sit at home and do the job for a tiny fraction of the cost if it becomes too much the norm.
    You might end up with less people on the road but you’ll also have a wasteland with no economy.

    I agree, I know a few people who work in Dublin for MNCs and they are looking at their options to continue working from sunnier climes, with cheaper property, and a kinder tax system.


  • Advertisement
  • #217
    Duckjob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,859 ✭✭✭Duckjob


    Truthvader wrote: »
    Pedestrians should not be roadusers. The ones that are will create a "Darwin" solution to their existence

    Yeah, Get off my road right? Only its not your road.


  • #218
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,478 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    TrailerBob wrote: »
    Nice statistics Andrew.. you work for the CSO?

    I'm happy to debate, but wildly made up statements and generalisations are where I bow out.

    The 98% is from the RSA Speed Survey 2018. The majority of drivers using their phones is from the Liberty Insurance survey, 2019 I think. The 2 or 3 people killed each week is from the RSA death statistics.

    Is there anything else I can help you with?


  • #219
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,478 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Truthvader wrote: »
    But they wish they did

    Have you asked them? With eBikes and cargo bikes and car share schemes and better public transport , lots of people are choosing not to pour money into a depreciating asset.


  • #220
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 40,320 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    TrailerBob wrote: »
    If it was a van//truck there would have been a similar outcome sadly.. I don't advocate the use of front bars in this country, they are by and large not necessary. It's the use of this incident as an argument that all SUVs are death traps that I took issue with. Any large vehicle travelling at a given speed will do the same thing.
    In fairness, that's just evading the point.
    Bullbars should only be on farm vehicles and not on a road!
    The front of a van or truck will have some element of VRU safety designed into them. Sticking bullbars on the front of a vehicle removes any element of safety for a VRU and increases the likleihood of a fatality.
    Given that you claimed to have knowledge of the incident which resulted in a young boy being killed, did the vehicle have bullbars fitted?


  • #221
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,478 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Truthvader wrote: »
    Pedestrians should not be roadusers. The ones that are will create a "Darwin" solution to their existence

    You know that most road deaths are motorists killing themselves, other motorists and passengers. Pedestrians are not the problem.


  • Advertisement
  • #222
    TrailerBob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,519 ✭✭✭TrailerBob


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    The 98% is from the RSA Speed Survey 2018. The majority of drivers using their phones is from the Liberty Insurance survey, 2019 I think. The 2 or 3 people killed each week is from the RSA death statistics.

    Is there anything else I can help you with?

    Would you have any availability for driving lessons?


  • #223
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 40,320 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    Truthvader wrote: »
    Pedestrians should not be roadusers. The ones that are will create a "Darwin" solution to their existence
    You do know that the vast majority of our roads have no footpath?
    As for those pedestrians who do choose to walk and create a Darwin solution, are you really saying that if someone was to walk on the road then they get what they deserve?
    Have cars become so dominant that you think people should not walk on the roads?
    Do you realise how utterly stupid your point is?


  • #224
    RandomViewer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,191 ✭✭✭RandomViewer


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    You know that most road deaths are motorists killing themselves, other motorists and passengers. Pedestrians are not the problem.

    Not so
    https://www.garda.ie/en/roads-policing/statistics/roads-policing-fatalities-to-date-for-2020/


  • #225
    Truthvader
    Registered Users Posts: 1,826 ✭✭✭Truthvader


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    You know that most road deaths are motorists killing themselves, other motorists and passengers. Pedestrians are not the problem.

    Pedestrians on the road are clearly a problem. Try it yourself and we'll see if you are around tomorrow to post anything


  • #226
    kirving
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,059 ✭✭✭kirving


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    Yes, I know the meaning of the law. It's not difficult to understand. It means that drivers should drive in a manner that allows them to stop within the distance they can see to be clear.

    If you were in a position to run out in front of me, I would have clocked you as a risk and adjusted my driving accordingly.

    If you find this requirement to be 'completely impractical', I can only suggest that you take some defensive driving lessons.

    So my completely unreasonable and unexpected behaviour is entirely your responsibility since your in a car? Nice.

    I could do with a bit of cash actually, and I'm already injured at the moment, so how about you let me know the next car journey you're taking and reg and we can put this to the test.

    Never been in an accident when I've been driving, mostly due to my defensive driving, but have avoided plenty of suicidal pedestrians, cyclists and other drivers.

    This has well and truly derailed, but I do hope the Greens take a long term view of what this country needs transport infrastructure wise and bide their time in achieving it rather than quickly screwing over rural dwellers.

    I'd love to see some of my taxes go toward things like segregated cycle ways and financial incentives for cycling, but the real thing we need
    at all costs is mass transit in our cities.


  • #227
    Truthvader
    Registered Users Posts: 1,826 ✭✭✭Truthvader


    The same rage and malice goes on and on. Reality. Ask any 17 year old what they want to get first when they get out of school. A car is the answer. Because more than any other sector they have already lived Ryans bicycle/ public transport wet dream and know first hand what a crock of **** it is.


  • #228
    TrailerBob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,519 ✭✭✭TrailerBob


    Seth Brundle wrote: »
    In fairness, that's just evading the point.
    Bullbars should only be on farm vehicles and not on a road!
    The front of a van or truck will have some element of VRU safety designed into them. Sticking bullbars on the front of a vehicle removes any element of safety for a VRU and increases the likleihood of a fatality.
    Given that you claimed to have knowledge of the incident which resulted in a young boy being killed, did the vehicle have bullbars fitted?

    I'm not aware specifically if the vehicle had or not, my in-laws know the family of the boy... They didn't feel it polite to ask.

    I don't disagree at all about the effect bars have on impact by the way. I do feel we are a long way from what Eamon Ryan can or cannot control, being that it has been illegal to fit proper bull bars to lgvs here since 2003. I also don't buy that trucks would be much safer, the front of our Fuso Canter wouldn't be too forgiving to anybody either. But hey, we could argue the toss all night. This incident is not what this thread was about.


  • #229
    RandomViewer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,191 ✭✭✭RandomViewer


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    We have 98% of drivers breaking urban speed limits. We have the majority of drivers using their phones while driving. We have drivers killing 2 or 3 people each week on the roads. We have drivers telling us that basic legal requirements are 'completely impractical'.

    We passed the bar for wreckless behaviour a long way back.

    No "W"


  • #230
    Strumms
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,815 ✭✭✭✭Strumms


    Cars are a necessity for a lot of people in this country, that’s a reality.

    Public transport, especially rurally but in large population centers too is not up to the needs of the citizens.

    Madrid, Barcelona, Paris, London, marseille, Lyon, Lille, Berlin, Hamburg, Munich, Genoa, Milan, Rome, Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Bucharest, Bilbao, Glasgow, Newcastle... there are 19 European cites equipment with a metro for starters, out of about 42....42 cities across this continent in 2020 have a metro to move and transport people safely, effectively and efficiently. To work and back, to social events, the pub, the gym, football, cinema, to see friends and family, whatever..

    There are approximately 1.4 million people living in Dublin, many of whom need to commute... they / we need a functioning, efficient, viable, safe, comfortable system to transport us. We’ve needed it 15 years ago, longer.

    When the metro is built and working, then we can ‘look’ at the number of cars.


  • #231
    RandomViewer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,191 ✭✭✭RandomViewer


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    Are more expensive cars just a small dick measuring competition between drivers?

    Bikes are already taxed, at the point of purchase btw.

    But do have a look at what smarter countries are doing to encourage cycling, with vouchers for bike repairs, actually paying cyclists to cycle.

    While you think extra barriers are a solution?

    Bike isn't exactly rocket science, if you need someone else to fix it I think it's time you had a hard look at yourself , question how you have let yourself become so inadequate , high end sports cars were always considered as such, very sheltered existence Andy?


  • Advertisement
  • #232
    kirving
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,059 ✭✭✭kirving


    alias no.9 wrote: »
    The biofuels strategy was changed from incentivising a tiny number of new car buyers to buy one of a handful of cars that could run on a high percentage of biofuels which also had to be discounted at the pump to the much more impactful strategy of having a low percentage of biofuels in every litre of petrol and diesel sold. This was the correct way to go as far as I am concerned.

    Fair enough on the strategy to distribute it over all vehicles, but that's assuming that manufacturers wouldn't tailor their offerings to what was financially favourable to buyers. Just like many engines are designed to be 1998cc or a car tuned to be 1g/km or CO2 below a tax band. It's a simple modification to most engine designs to run E85. It's very popular in the US.


  • #233
    donvito99
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,818 ✭✭✭donvito99


    Strumms wrote: »
    Cars are a necessity for a lot of people in this country, that’s a reality.

    Public transport, especially rurally but in large population centers too is not up to the needs of the citizens.

    Madrid, Barcelona, Paris, London, marseille, Lyon, Lille, Berlin, Hamburg, Munich, Genoa, Milan, Rome, Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Bucharest, Bilbao, Glasgow, Newcastle... there are 19 European cites equipment with a metro for starters, out of about 42....42 cities across this continent in 2020 have a metro to move and transport people safely, effectively and efficiently. To work and back, to social events, the pub, the gym, football, cinema, to see friends and family, whatever..

    There are approximately 1.4 million people living in Dublin, many of whom need to commute... they / we need a functioning, efficient, viable, safe, comfortable system to transport us. We’ve needed it 15 years ago, longer.

    When the metro is built and working, then we can ‘look’ at the number of cars.

    70% of people commuting into Dublin city are not in cars already so a metro isn't required in order to deal with the traffic caused by the private car at rush hour.


  • #234
    Feisar
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,703 ✭✭✭Feisar


    Deleted User wrote: »
    You can't punish people for using a healthy and environmentally friendly mode of transport.

    Punish? Please don't view it like that, it's a civic contribution.

    First they came for the socialists...



  • #235
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,478 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    RandomViewer wrote: »
    Bike isn't exactly rocket science, if you need someone else to fix it I think it's time you had a hard look at yourself , question how you have let yourself become so inadequate , high end sports cars were always considered as such, very sheltered existence Andy?

    Oh, the macho approach - if that's your best shot, I think I'm on fairly solid ground.

    But if you want to go there, take a look in the maintenance questions in the cycling forum, and the stories of people with far more skills and far more of the specialised tools that are increasingly needed, and see the kind of problems people run into.

    I used to be do reasonably complex maintenance in the past. Whether for reasons of age or laziness or lack of time, I leave anything beyond changing a tube to the local bike shop, who look after me well. I did get spare brake pads from them during the lock down, so I'm looking forward to trying that complex task myself.

    But this macho nonsense, that people 'need' to be able to maintain their own bikes is one of many factors that puts many people off cycling, dare I say it, especially females.

    Some people do their own maintenance, many people don't, and just about everyone will need their local bike shop at some stage.

    The idea of the voucher in the UK was to encourage people to get the bike at the back of the shed out, and get the brakes and gears sorted so it could be used again, while public transport was overloaded - a sensible strategy.
    Truthvader wrote: »
    The same rage and malice goes on and on. Reality. Ask any 17 year old what they want to get first when they get out of school. A car is the answer. Because more than any other sector they have already lived Ryans bicycle/ public transport wet dream and know first hand what a crock of **** it is.

    Now look a bit deeper at that question and think about why most 17 year olds want a car? Partially because Mammy and Daddy have brought them everywhere door-to-door since they were born. Mine tell me regularly that they are the ones that navigate public transport for their friends, as most have no idea how to get around.

    And partially because of cultural issues, and partially because of planning issues, and partially because you have schools doing stupid stuff like this. https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=113799853
    and partially because of the helmet/hi-vis dangerisation nonsense that we've seen on this thread and elsewhere.

    Now have a look at what happens in Netherlands.

    Kevin Irving wrote: »
    So my completely unreasonable and unexpected behaviour is entirely your responsibility since your in a car? Nice.
    I didn't write the law, Kevin - but the requirements are clear. If you're unable to comply, you know what to do.
    Kevin Irving wrote: »

    Never been in an accident when I've been driving, mostly due to my defensive driving, but have avoided plenty of suicidal pedestrians, cyclists and other drivers.
    The data on road deaths and serious injuries would suggest that you've avoided way more drivers than others on the road.
    Kevin Irving wrote: »
    I'd love to see some of my taxes go toward things like segregated cycle ways and financial incentives for cycling, but the real thing we need
    at all costs is mass transit in our cities.
    Agreed.
    Truthvader wrote: »
    Pedestrians on the road are clearly a problem. Try it yourself and we'll see if you are around tomorrow to post anything
    I'm on the road most days, crossing them, as are many other people. If you're unable to share the road with other legal road users, you're the problem.

    RandomViewer wrote: »
    Not so
    https://www.garda.ie/en/roads-policing/statistics/roads-policing-fatalities-to-date-for-2020/
    Did you add up the stats? 42 deaths in cars, 19 for pedestrians.
    TrailerBob wrote: »
    Would you have any availability for driving lessons?
    Beats engaging on the issues, eh Bob?
    RandomViewer wrote: »
    No "W"
    ?
    Strumms wrote: »
    Cars are a necessity for a lot of people in this country, that’s a reality.

    Cars are a necessity because we've built society around them. We've granted planning permission up every boreen, so that every journey to every social engagement, every school trip, every shopping trip requires a car. We've poorly funded public transport, and not funded cycling facilities.

    These are the things that need to change.


  • #236
    Feisar
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,703 ✭✭✭Feisar


    ReginaldSmythV wrote: »
    People need to be very careful before laziness sets in too much in that respect. A lot of companies will realise that some lad in Delhi can also sit at home and do the job for a tiny fraction of the cost if it becomes too much the norm.
    You might end up with less people on the road but you’ll also have a wasteland with no economy.

    There's already an industry around this, see below.

    First they came for the socialists...



  • #237
    TrailerBob
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,519 ✭✭✭TrailerBob


    I tried engaging on the issue Andrew, but the broad general statements that all SUVs are death traps and the like are enough for me. The issue on the thread was Ryan's policies.. I outlined my objection based on my experience in rural Ireland. You may disagree but you display a sense of self assurance in every response here that sits uneasy with me. You are right no doubt


  • #238
    namloc1980
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,330 ✭✭✭✭namloc1980


    Lundstram wrote: »
    Tax cyclists. They use the road, cause traffic disruption and get the same benefits as cars.

    €100 per year flat tax. Subject them to the same punishments as motorists if caught without.

    Will Santa bring the money for this tax when he delivers a new bike at Christmas?


  • #239
    mikeecho
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭mikeecho


    Guys.. nothing will change.
    The taxes on motoring will continue to increase.

    Eventually the yearly motor tax for EVs will be in the hundreds of euro.

    They have to get the tax somewhere, and if you're not buying petrol/diesel fuel, and they can't excessively tax electricity, cos even vegans need to boil a kettle and occasionally use an electric shower (joke).

    The only option.. lots and lots and lots of lovely motor tax on EVs.

    And it'll be a lot more than the €710 for a pre 08 2L
    I honestly think motor tax will be in the 1,000s


  • #240
    Mississippi.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 283 ✭✭Mississippi.


    Moragle wrote: »
    Where in donegal? I live in rural west donegal and I don't think we've lost power more than twice in the last year, once from a thunderstorm and once from a major power outage that hit the whole of area from dungloe to dunfanaghy


    Last Wednesday alone it was out in Ardara from 10am to 11am and in Leiter it was out for 11 hours.
    Ardara and Glenties do get regular outages.


  • Advertisement
  • #241
    Strumms
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,815 ✭✭✭✭Strumms


    donvito99 wrote: »
    70% of people commuting into Dublin city are not in cars already so a metro isn't required in order to deal with the traffic caused by the private car at rush hour.

    There is more to Dublin then the ‘city’... and wider consideration and planning needs to be happening for the suburbs and wider county.


  • #242
    Shefwedfan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,958 ✭✭✭✭Shefwedfan


    Agent_47 wrote: »
    Horse and cart will be the next form of public transport. No one wants to use the buses or trains at the moment. Bit like that farce that is the liffey ferry that runs with no passengers

    Horse and cart it is so

    Why does nobody want to use buses or trains?


  • #243
    Truthvader
    Registered Users Posts: 1,826 ✭✭✭Truthvader


    Shefwedfan wrote: »
    Horse and cart it is so

    Why does nobody want to use buses or trains?

    Have you ever been on one?

    Right, well they're exactly the same except this this time they are a kind of petri dish of covid 19 possibilities in addition to the normal filth hostility and unreliability


  • #244
    Strumms
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,815 ✭✭✭✭Strumms


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »


    Cars are a necessity because we've built society around them. We've granted planning permission up every boreen, so that every journey to every social engagement, every school trip, every shopping trip requires a car. We've poorly funded public transport, and not funded cycling facilities.

    These are the things that need to change.

    We’ve had to, the country until recently didn’t have the wherewithal to plan and build this metro.. this isn’t costing a few millions, it’s a few billion.


  • #245
    RandomViewer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,191 ✭✭✭RandomViewer


    Shefwedfan wrote: »
    Horse and cart it is so

    Why does nobody want to use buses or trains?

    Filthy animals slobbering over everything, slack cleaning practices by bus/ train companies


  • #246
    Jizique
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,949 ✭✭✭Jizique


    RandomViewer wrote: »
    Filthy animals slobbering over everything, slack cleaning practices by bus/ train companies

    And the cure is an underground metro system?


  • Advertisement
  • #247
    kirving
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,059 ✭✭✭kirving


    RandomViewer wrote: »
    Bike isn't exactly rocket science, if you need someone else to fix it I think it's time you had a hard look at yourself , question how you have let yourself become so inadequate , high end sports cars were always considered as such, very sheltered existence Andy?


    As much as I disagree with AndrewJRenko on plenty of topics - what are you on about with this rubbish?!

    I recently spent a lot of money on tools, and hours of my time to get equipped and learn how to change bearings on my full suspension carbon bike.

    Be it lack of standards, or intentionally complicated to ward off DIYers, I'm not sure, but even the part numbers were more complicated to decipher than on any industrial equipment I've ever seen, and way more difficult than on my car which has wonderfully sequential part numbers per subsystem printed on every component, and a full list available online.

    Not easy to maintain a bike a bike properly in an apartment either.

    It's not worth most people's time or investment to tool up and do that job, so they give it to a shop who do it for a reasonable fee.

    No harm to introduce people to proper bike maintenance by a voucher scheme that comes with the bike. It turns cycling into a joy rather than a curse, and keeps another potential car driver off the road. Plenty of people I know have never, ever maintained their bike after buying it, and so it sits in the shed.

    Once they see the benefit, they can pay for their own maintenance.


  • #248
    Truthvader
    Registered Users Posts: 1,826 ✭✭✭Truthvader


    Now look a bit deeper at that question and think about why most 17 year olds want a car? Partially because Mammy and Daddy have brought them everywhere door-to-door since they were born. Mine tell me regularly that they are the ones that navigate public transport for their friends, as most have no idea how to get around.

    And partially because of cultural issues, and partially because of planning issues, and partially because you have schools doing stupid stuff like this. https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=113799853
    and partially because of the helmet/hi-vis dangerisation nonsense that we've seen on this thread and elsewhere.

    Now have a look at what happens in Netherlands.

    As before - the ones who want a car the most are the ones who have already suffered the bicycle/ bus misery. The ones getting driven are more likely to be conned into thinking its a good idea. But they learn quickly.


    Inclined to think the more spiteful anti car posters here were in fact the ones who got driven but cannot afford a car of their own as adults and are now rationalising their lack of success by playing the virtue signalling game and pretending their miserable 10 mile bike ride is an actual choice they have made


  • #249
    Jizique
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,949 ✭✭✭Jizique


    Truthvader wrote: »
    Now look a bit deeper at that question and think about why most 17 year olds want a car? Partially because Mammy and Daddy have brought them everywhere door-to-door since they were born. Mine tell me regularly that they are the ones that navigate public transport for their friends, as most have no idea how to get around.

    And partially because of cultural issues, and partially because of planning issues, and partially because you have schools doing stupid stuff like this. https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=113799853
    and partially because of the helmet/hi-vis dangerisation nonsense that we've seen on this thread and elsewhere.

    Now have a look at what happens in Netherlands.

    As before - the ones who want a car the most are the ones who have already suffered the bicycle/ bus misery. The ones getting driven are more likely to be conned into thinking its a good idea. But they learn quickly.


    Inclined to think the more spiteful anti car posters here were in fact the ones who got driven but cannot afford a car of their own as adults and are now rationalising their lack of success by playing the virtue signalling game and pretending their miserable 10 mile bike ride is an actual choice they have made

    You probably mean me.
    I rarely drive, but I did the other day - it makes me agitated in the city; the traffic, the other road users; drivers are incredibly aggressive.
    I enjoy an occasional spin on the motorway to Galway but city driving is awful.


  • #250
    Jizique
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,949 ✭✭✭Jizique


    Truthvader wrote: »
    Now look a bit deeper at that question and think about why most 17 year olds want a car? Partially because Mammy and Daddy have brought them everywhere door-to-door since they were born. Mine tell me regularly that they are the ones that navigate public transport for their friends, as most have no idea how to get around.

    And partially because of cultural issues, and partially because of planning issues, and partially because you have schools doing stupid stuff like this. https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=113799853
    and partially because of the helmet/hi-vis dangerisation nonsense that we've seen on this thread and elsewhere.

    Now have a look at what happens in Netherlands.

    As before - the ones who want a car the most are the ones who have already suffered the bicycle/ bus misery. The ones getting driven are more likely to be conned into thinking its a good idea. But they learn quickly.


    Inclined to think the more spiteful anti car posters here were in fact the ones who got driven but cannot afford a car of their own as adults and are now rationalising their lack of success by playing the virtue signalling game and pretending their miserable 10 mile bike ride is an actual choice they have made

    Oh and data I have seen from the US shows around 75% of under 25s have a license now, down from 92% a decade ago - car sharing and Uber the main reasons.
    And in London, according to work colleagues, kids want an Uber account (funded by parents) rather than a car when they reach 17/18. Insurance, parking, ability to socialise, cost (uni fees) the main reasons.


  • #251
    galwaytt
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,793 ✭✭✭✭galwaytt


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    You can't punish people for using a healthy and environmentally friendly mode of transport.

    Two points:
    1. Says who ?
    2. And existing owners aren't taxed for being unhealthy: vehicle taxes are ownership taxes. Should apply to everyone or no-one

    Ode To The Motorist

    “And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, generates funds to the exchequer. You don't want to acknowledge that as truth because, deep down in places you don't talk about at the Green Party, you want me on that road, you need me on that road. We use words like freedom, enjoyment, sport and community. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent instilling those values in our families and loved ones. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the tax revenue and the very freedom to spend it that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise I suggest you pick up a bus pass and get the ********* ********* off the road” 



  • Advertisement
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement