Sept 28. London Demo against Westminster Council M/C parking charges

I use that approach when I'm talking to idiots.

Of course they won't. The councilors will spend any spare money on
their xmas party.

Aren't huge doesn't mean they cost **** all.

So the council should be setting their budget to allow for revenue
gained from fines for illegal parking rather than revenue gained from
legal parking?

I don't live in Westminster and I certainly can't be arsed to google
to see where their money is going and anything else is irrelevant.

Nobody will be using you registering your card to pay for car parking
as a way to monitor your movements, they've got cctv for that game.

Btw, calling it a cuntcil tax is abut as lame as typing micro$oft.

 

With the greatest of respect, I think you're missing the point.

Residents within the area concerned will not benefit from revenue
raised from these charges, much as the council would like you to
believe it.

The bulk of the bays within that particular area have existed for
years without charges being levied upon them, ergo they, and the bays
put in last year, aren't a huge financial burden.

Even if they were, revenue collected from parking fines on just bikes
etc, *more* than covers the cost?

As you're probably aware, cuntcil tax has been going up risen in
recent years at much higher rate than inflation, and yet you get
little more, if not less, for your money.

IMHO, this is just yet another bureaucratic wheeze to squeeze more
money out of the general public, never mind the fact that the only way
to pay the charges concerned is, IIRC, by phone or text, and by
registering a debit / credit card with the cuntcil concerned - yet
more monitoring of your movements.

 

I thought it was the council who would be receiving the money.

which will then be spent to the benefit of the local residents, so it
is by no means evident that this is a bad thing.

You seem to be in a rut of "us" the public versus "them" the council,
which is muddying your thinking.

 

Yes... and the general theme from the pro camp appears to be 'and so
local residents will benefit as a result' - you've even said as much
below?

Will it? Are you privvy to exactly what they intend to spend this new
windfall on, then?

Nor is there anything to determine its for the good of the public,
either.

I'm in the rut of seeing ever increasing taxation being bestowed upon
us, be it by fair means or foul, and on occasion with the flimsiest of
justification presented as the need for it to exist.

Personally, I'd prefer it if we had administrations in place, be it at
local or national level, whereby we have confidence in what they're
telling us is the truth, and that they really are acting in the
interests of the greater good.

 

Listen sunshine. If you're arguing to help develop arguments to beat
Westminster council then thank you. But if you're trying to score points
then you can FOAD. In case you hadn't noticed M/C in the UK is a
repressed minority and an easy touch. And this is just one more example
of a small group of unaccountable bureaucrats taking the piss[1]. How
about a little solidarity, eh?

The deal on privatising parking is that the money raised is to go into
transport amenities not the general council coffers. Westminster's
justification for the charge is an increase in M/C parking places and
the introduction of security devices. By their own admission the scheme
will pay for itself in under 2 years. They are unable to explain what
the subsequent profit will be used for. They have increased the places a
little but security devices are currently being trial-ed in 2 (2!)
resident only bays.

Make no mistake about it. This is a revenue generating scheme. And the
revenue is not from the £1.50 a day but the £40/80 fines. And if they
succeed, you can be damn sure it will spread to other councils.

[1]Bus lanes. Increases in road tax. Inclusion in congestion charging.
Making it harder and harder to get a license. DVLA losing your M/C right
on licenses. Police crackdowns on number plates. GPS tracking and
automatic speed limiters. Now it's charged parking. and on. and on. But
it feels like that lot hasn't made you mad as hell and not going to take
it any more. It seems to have turned you into the classic little
Englander who's leaning over the fence saying "you don't want to do
that, you want to use public transport you do."

 

I don't believe the council needs beating. I'm making the point that I don't
support the campaign and I have been developing the argument to show why I
disagree with you. This is a public forum and you don't get things all your
own way.

Wherever the money goes it's money that won't come from the local residents.
I support improving transport amenities so that people get a better service.
It doesn't make sense to use private transport into a large city with good
public transport (although I accept there are some cases where people will
find it necessary).

What fines? There aren't any fines if you pay what is due.

I have real issues with the erosion of civil liberties and I don't like the
way they now expect you to pay. I will not support GPS tracking or automatic
speed limiters but those are completely separate issues. I do support
charging bikes for parking. Simple as that.

 

On a Sunday?

That'll learn 'em.

 

if i took the combination of train, tube, bus, and walking in the rain it
would require for me to commute to work on public transport instead of using
my bike, it would (1) cost me approximately 225% of the cost of fuel,
insurance and annual servicing of the bike, and (2) take approximately
175% of the time. i therefore repudiate your assertion.

 

And the bit where I said there are some occasions when it is reasonable?

 

well, there's not much point making sweeping generalisations when they don't
apply in 99% of cases. it's a bit like saying "all geordies are in fact male,
well, apart from the ones that aren't, of course".

 

hahahah.

 

There are no UK cities with good public transport.

And anyway we're all rufty tufty bikers here who wouldn't be seen dead
on public transport when there's a bike to ride.

 

And neither do you. See what I did there?

 

I'd say between train, bus and Metro, Tyneside comes close.

Except when the public transport is free some of us can't resist it on
occasion.

 

You don't have to pay for it, though.

 

My 750 was horrible in traffic. The fan kicks out the hot air from the
engine via vents just below your left thigh, causing much discomfort.

I hope this was work related, rather than your idea of fun...

 

Just pick the pushbikes up, weigh them in for scrap and forget about
the problem.

 

But the residents of Westminster apparently do... what with this being
a scheme to directly lower their council tax bills and all.

I read it in here, ergo, it must be true.

 

Meaning?

Am I missing out on something obvious where my paying for bike parking
in Westminster is assisting somebody to monitor my movements when the
government doesn't already know where I am for 90% of the time?

As to the name calling: I wasn't calling you an idiot. I was just
pointing out that starting off with the words " with the greatest of
respect" is how you treat idiots and you used them, not me.

Yeah right, when you can show me where the council tax payer is going
to lose out on this one then I'll sign up for your ideas but until
then I'll mark them down as bollocks.

Very intelligent response.

It didn't.

So far you've dished out the standard crap like the "with the greatest
respect" bit and "blinkered" then followed up with the "you've not
really thought this one through, have you..." then went for the
jugular with the old time favourite of "HTH"

I'm not really sure what your problem is but it's obviously a major
one. I don't see why anyone should object to paying for the right to
park a motorbike but it seems obvious that you seem to think that
makes me some kind of a retard. Well hey, we're all entitled to our
opinions and if me thinking that paying for parking isn't such a bad
thing makes me dumb then I'm cool with that.

I've seen a lot worse things posted on ukrm and I've never felt the
need to change my posting name to cover up for the stupid things I've
said previously.

 

I may well be an idiot, but at least I'm not a blinkered one in this
particular instance.

Like I said, blinkered.

You've really not thought this one through, have you...

It's a tax payable to a shower of cunts.

HTH

(1) I'm more than aware that the money raised isn't just spent at the
level at which it is raised.