|
London Eye
Recently Mayor Ken Livingston wanted to settle the dispute over the London
Eye by saying he'll take care of things himself if given control ......Does that mean he'll add a congestion charge to every pod that has more than one person in it much as he's done with the congestion charge in London? Glen -- I was an only child.....eventually! |
London Eye
"gay merrington" wrote in message ... Recently Mayor Ken Livingston wanted to settle the dispute over the London Eye by saying he'll take care of things himself if given control ......Does that mean he'll add a congestion charge to every pod that has more than one person in it much as he's done with the congestion charge in London? Glen Hu? The London Congestion charge is based on vehicle occupancy? I've never heard that before. |
London Eye
"Paul Cummins" wrote in message ... In article , (JB) wrote: The London Congestion charge is based on vehicle occupancy? I've never heard that before. Yup - if you drive a vehicle with only enough wheels and seats to carry 1 or 2 people, it's free. I hadn't thought about motorcycles I have to admit, but that's not the same as vehicle occupancy. It's just that motorcycles are included as of the exemptions. |
London Eye
"JB" wrote in message ... "gay merrington" wrote in message ... Recently Mayor Ken Livingston wanted to settle the dispute over the London Eye by saying he'll take care of things himself if given control ......Does that mean he'll add a congestion charge to every pod that has more than one person in it much as he's done with the congestion charge in London? Glen Hu? The London Congestion charge is based on vehicle occupancy? I've never heard that before. Neither have I. As far as I was aware, it was based on the vehicle. |
London Eye
"Geordie the Forgery" wrote in message ... "JB" wrote in message ... "gay merrington" wrote in message ... Recently Mayor Ken Livingston wanted to settle the dispute over the London Eye by saying he'll take care of things himself if given control ......Does that mean he'll add a congestion charge to every pod that has more than one person in it much as he's done with the congestion charge in London? Glen Hu? The London Congestion charge is based on vehicle occupancy? I've never heard that before. Neither have I. As far as I was aware, it was based on the vehicle. PS What is this doing on :- uk.rec.humour? (Apart from the fact that London Transport *IS* a joke!) |
London Eye
In article ,
(JB) wrote: "Paul Cummins" wrote in message ... In article , (JB) wrote: The London Congestion charge is based on vehicle occupancy? I've never heard that before. Yup - if you drive a vehicle with only enough wheels and seats to carry 1 or 2 people, it's free. I hadn't thought about motorcycles I have to admit, but that's not the same as vehicle occupancy. It's just that motorcycles are included as of the exemptions. Isn't that as much the difficulty of using the chosen enforcement system on motorbikes as any wish to encourage them? -- Colin Rosenstiel |
London Eye
On Sun, 5 Jun 2005 22:41:05 +0000 (UTC), "Geordie the Forgery"
wrote: PS What is this doing on :- uk.rec.humour? I suspect the OP thought he was being funny. [FU set, which should give a clue as to how funny I think the first post was.] |
London Eye
"JB" wrote in message ... "gay merrington" wrote in message ... Recently Mayor Ken Livingston wanted to settle the dispute over the London Eye by saying he'll take care of things himself if given control ......Does that mean he'll add a congestion charge to every pod that has more than one person in it much as he's done with the congestion charge in London? Glen Hu? The London Congestion charge is based on vehicle occupancy? I've never heard that before. No it isnt based on occupancy...it is based on screwing the car owner for as much as possible. |
London Eye
In article ,
(Colin Rosenstiel) wrote: Isn't that as much the difficulty of using the chosen enforcement system on motorbikes as any wish to encourage them? A motorcycle can carry as much luggage as a small car, and 2 people, in 1/4 the road space. Thus 4 motorcycles, carrying a minimum of 4 people, can fit in the same space as 1 car. -- Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead Wasting Bandwidth since 1981 I'm Backing Blair - www.backingblair.co.uk |
London Eye
In article ,
(Paul Cummins) wrote: In article , (Colin Rosenstiel) wrote: Isn't that as much the difficulty of using the chosen enforcement system on motorbikes as any wish to encourage them? A motorcycle can carry as much luggage as a small car, and 2 people, in 1/4 the road space. Thus 4 motorcycles, carrying a minimum of 4 people, can fit in the same space as 1 car. I'm not disagreeing with you. It's just that I doubt that Ken was thinking what you're thinking when he decided to exempt motorcycles from the congestion charge. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
London Eye
Colin Rosenstiel wrote: In article , (Paul Cummins) wrote: In article , (Colin Rosenstiel) wrote: Isn't that as much the difficulty of using the chosen enforcement system on motorbikes as any wish to encourage them? A motorcycle can carry as much luggage as a small car, and 2 people, in 1/4 the road space. Thus 4 motorcycles, carrying a minimum of 4 people, can fit in the same space as 1 car. I'm not disagreeing with you. It's just that I doubt that Ken was thinking what you're thinking when he decided to exempt motorcycles from the congestion charge. Really? He seems to like buses (more people in less space) surely motorcycles are exempt for the same reason? |
London Eye
"Geezer" wrote in message eenews.net... "JB" wrote in message Hu? The London Congestion charge is based on vehicle occupancy? I've never heard that before. No it isnt based on occupancy... As I thought. it is based on screwing the car owner for as much as possible. Get yourself an exempt vehicle and you'll be ok. |
London Eye
London Transport is a joke,as is Ken Livingston,and the congestion charge is
(was) meant to decrease the amount of cars....Or have we forgotten???The joke being that if there is more than one person in the pod,to decrease congestion IN the pod,he adds an extra charge.....Geez I didn't think the Canadian sense of humour was THAT different to the English,or should I have used the Canadian to British translation book again? GRIN Glen -- I was an only child.....eventually! "Geordie the Forgery" wrote in message ... "Geordie the Forgery" wrote in message ... "JB" wrote in message ... "gay merrington" wrote in message ... Recently Mayor Ken Livingston wanted to settle the dispute over the London Eye by saying he'll take care of things himself if given control ......Does that mean he'll add a congestion charge to every pod that has more than one person in it much as he's done with the congestion charge in London? Glen Hu? The London Congestion charge is based on vehicle occupancy? I've never heard that before. Neither have I. As far as I was aware, it was based on the vehicle. PS What is this doing on :- uk.rec.humour? (Apart from the fact that London Transport *IS* a joke!) |
London Eye
gay merrington wrote:
London Transport is a joke,as is Ken Livingston,and the congestion charge is (was) meant to decrease the amount of cars....Or have we forgotten???The joke being that if there is more than one person in the pod,to decrease congestion IN the pod,he adds an extra charge.....Geez I didn't think the Canadian sense of humour was THAT different to the English,or should I have used the Canadian to British translation book again? GRIN Glen Yes. Francis |
London Eye
"gay merrington" wrote in message ... London Transport is a joke,as is Ken Livingston,and the congestion charge is (was) meant to decrease the amount of cars....Or have we forgotten???The joke being that if there is more than one person in the pod,to decrease congestion IN the pod,he adds an extra charge.....Geez I didn't think the Canadian sense of humour was THAT different to the English,or should I have used the Canadian to British translation book again? GRIN Glen -- The joke is that the congestion charge worked. It did reduce the amount of cars so well that they are not getting in the money. I was an only child.....eventually! "Geordie the Forgery" wrote in message ... "Geordie the Forgery" wrote in message ... "JB" wrote in message ... "gay merrington" wrote in message ... Recently Mayor Ken Livingston wanted to settle the dispute over the London Eye by saying he'll take care of things himself if given control ......Does that mean he'll add a congestion charge to every pod that has more than one person in it much as he's done with the congestion charge in London? Glen Hu? The London Congestion charge is based on vehicle occupancy? I've never heard that before. Neither have I. As far as I was aware, it was based on the vehicle. PS What is this doing on :- uk.rec.humour? (Apart from the fact that London Transport *IS* a joke!) |
London Eye
On Sun, 5 Jun 2005 16:32:49 +0100, "gay merrington"
wrote: Recently Mayor Ken Livingston wanted to settle the dispute over the London Eye by saying he'll take care of things himself if given control ......Does that mean he'll add a congestion charge to every pod that has more than one person in it much as he's done with the congestion charge in London? How sweet! Did your Mummy and Daddy help you with that post, or did you manage it all on your own? -- Nick Cooper [Carefully remove the detonators from my e-mail address to reply!] The London Underground at War: http://www.cwgcuser.org.uk/personal/...ra/lu/tuaw.htm 625-Online - classic British television: http://www.625.org.uk 'Things to Come' - An Incomplete Classic: http://www.thingstocome.org.uk |
London Eye
And how many bikes (aside from those with sidecars) have you seen that carry
more than 2 people? Glen -- I was an only child.....eventually! "Colin Rosenstiel" wrote in message ... In article , (JB) wrote: "Paul Cummins" wrote in message ... In article , (JB) wrote: The London Congestion charge is based on vehicle occupancy? I've never heard that before. Yup - if you drive a vehicle with only enough wheels and seats to carry 1 or 2 people, it's free. I hadn't thought about motorcycles I have to admit, but that's not the same as vehicle occupancy. It's just that motorcycles are included as of the exemptions. Isn't that as much the difficulty of using the chosen enforcement system on motorbikes as any wish to encourage them? -- Colin Rosenstiel |
London Eye
Nope....BTW thanks for the help with the spelling you gave me when I typed
it up!Much appreciated!Never let it be said that the English aren't a helpful lot....That's why I just love it here! Glen -- I was an only child.....eventually! "Nick Cooper" wrote in message ... On Sun, 5 Jun 2005 16:32:49 +0100, "gay merrington" wrote: Recently Mayor Ken Livingston wanted to settle the dispute over the London Eye by saying he'll take care of things himself if given control .......Does that mean he'll add a congestion charge to every pod that has more than one person in it much as he's done with the congestion charge in London? How sweet! Did your Mummy and Daddy help you with that post, or did you manage it all on your own? -- Nick Cooper [Carefully remove the detonators from my e-mail address to reply!] The London Underground at War: http://www.cwgcuser.org.uk/personal/...ra/lu/tuaw.htm 625-Online - classic British television: http://www.625.org.uk 'Things to Come' - An Incomplete Classic: http://www.thingstocome.org.uk |
London Eye
Nothing wrong with cutting down on congestion,though in other cities what
has worked is occupancy within the cars.What they do is that they have cameras (similar to the speed cameras here) that take a picture of the car,and within certain hours of the day (7am-7pm) any car that has more than 2 seats (ie Smart Cars would be exempt for example) that have les than 3 passengers are ticketed/fined/sent a bill for carrying less than the alloted 3 passengers with the exception of motorcycles,cabs,commercial vehicles (read in delivery vans/company vehicles on call/or applied for exemption) or similar types of vehicles.Seems to me that would work equally as well in reducing the congestion within London.Just a thought of what I've seen work elsewhere. Glen -- I was an only child.....eventually! "Trev" trevbowdenATdsl.pipexDOTnet wrote in message ... "gay merrington" wrote in message ... London Transport is a joke,as is Ken Livingston,and the congestion charge is (was) meant to decrease the amount of cars....Or have we forgotten???The joke being that if there is more than one person in the pod,to decrease congestion IN the pod,he adds an extra charge.....Geez I didn't think the Canadian sense of humour was THAT different to the English,or should I have used the Canadian to British translation book again? GRIN Glen -- The joke is that the congestion charge worked. It did reduce the amount of cars so well that they are not getting in the money. I was an only child.....eventually! "Geordie the Forgery" wrote in message ... "Geordie the Forgery" wrote in message ... "JB" wrote in message ... "gay merrington" wrote in message ... Recently Mayor Ken Livingston wanted to settle the dispute over the London Eye by saying he'll take care of things himself if given control ......Does that mean he'll add a congestion charge to every pod that has more than one person in it much as he's done with the congestion charge in London? Glen Hu? The London Congestion charge is based on vehicle occupancy? I've never heard that before. Neither have I. As far as I was aware, it was based on the vehicle. PS What is this doing on :- uk.rec.humour? (Apart from the fact that London Transport *IS* a joke!) |
London Eye
|
London Eye
Since when did the uk.transport.london newsgroup constitute as humour?....Or
are you doing like others have suggested here and saying the London Transport system IS a joke? Just asking,as that's the newsgroup it was posted in....Posted it myself! Glen -- I was an only child.....eventually! "Martin" wrote in message ... On Tue, 7 Jun 2005 11:39:40 +0100, "gay merrington" wrote: Nothing wrong with cutting down on congestion,though in other cities what has worked is occupancy within the cars.What they do is that they have cameras (similar to the speed cameras here) that take a picture of the car,and within certain hours of the day (7am-7pm) any car that has more than 2 seats (ie Smart Cars would be exempt for example) that have les than 3 passengers are ticketed/fined/sent a bill for carrying less than the alloted 3 passengers with the exception of motorcycles,cabs,commercial vehicles (read in delivery vans/company vehicles on call/or applied for exemption) or similar types of vehicles.Seems to me that would work equally as well in reducing the congestion within London.Just a thought of what I've seen work elsewhere. Glen Can you stop cross posting to urm. It's a group for humour. -- Martin |
London Eye
On Tue, 7 Jun 2005 11:30:05 +0100, "gay merrington"
wrote: And how many bikes (aside from those with sidecars) have you seen that carry more than 2 people? I've been one of 20 people on a bicycle made for 20. Owned by Hares back in the 1970s. Actually it had a sidecar for a brakeman. -- Terry Harper Website Coordinator, The Omnibus Society http://www.omnibussoc.org |
London Eye
"gay merrington" wrote in message ... Nope....BTW thanks for the help with the spelling you gave me when I typed it up!Much appreciated!Never let it be said that the English aren't a helpful lot....That's why I just love it here! Glen Especially the beer. Mercan *beer* is like making love in a punt. |
London Eye
"Geordie the Forgery" wrote in message ... "gay merrington" wrote in message ... Nope....BTW thanks for the help with the spelling you gave me when I typed it up!Much appreciated!Never let it be said that the English aren't a helpful lot....That's why I just love it here! Glen Especially the beer. Mercan *beer* is like making love in a punt. Both very close to f***ing water. |
London Eye
On Wed, 8 Jun 2005, Miss L. Toe wrote:
"Geordie the Forgery" wrote in message ... "gay merrington" wrote in message ... Nope....BTW thanks for the help with the spelling you gave me when I typed it up!Much appreciated!Never let it be said that the English aren't a helpful lot....That's why I just love it here! Especially the beer. Mercan *beer* is like making love in a punt. Both very close to f***ing water. ITYM they're both ****ing close to water. Of course, depends on who's in the punt with you, so YMMV. tom -- SAWING CHASING CRUNCHING ROBOTIC DEMOLITION |
London Eye
Tom Anderson wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jun 2005, Miss L. Toe wrote: "Geordie the Forgery" wrote in message ... "gay merrington" wrote in message ... Nope....BTW thanks for the help with the spelling you gave me when I typed it up!Much appreciated!Never let it be said that the English aren't a helpful lot....That's why I just love it here! Especially the beer. Mercan *beer* is like making love in a punt. Both very close to f***ing water. ITYM they're both ****ing close to water. Of course, depends on who's in the punt with you, so YMMV. MRD :-) I will explain if pressed, but that was probably what she said... |
London Eye
"Tom Anderson" wrote in message .li... On Wed, 8 Jun 2005, Miss L. Toe wrote: "Geordie the Forgery" wrote in message ... "gay merrington" wrote in message ... Nope....BTW thanks for the help with the spelling you gave me when I typed it up!Much appreciated!Never let it be said that the English aren't a helpful lot....That's why I just love it here! Especially the beer. Mercan *beer* is like making love in a punt. Both very close to f***ing water. ITYM they're both ****ing close to water. Of course, depends on who's in the punt with you, so YMMV. Actually, couldn't it work both ways? ****ing close to water does sound more straight forward, but close to ****ing water sounds more like the Viz profanisaurus entries you read - one slip and ****ing water is all you'll be doing? Perhaps that would apply more to sex on a raft? Hmm - need to think about this one. |
London Eye
Geez,I thought that was American beer where thier STRONG beer is still only
4% (light beer by British or Canadian standards) and light beer is only 2-3%.....Near-beer by anyone's standards! Glen -- I was an only child.....eventually! "Miss L. Toe" wrote in message eenews.net... "Geordie the Forgery" wrote in message ... "gay merrington" wrote in message ... Nope....BTW thanks for the help with the spelling you gave me when I typed it up!Much appreciated!Never let it be said that the English aren't a helpful lot....That's why I just love it here! Glen Especially the beer. Mercan *beer* is like making love in a punt. Both very close to f***ing water. |
London Eye
-- I was an only child.....eventually! "Malaika" wrote in message ... "Tom Anderson" wrote in message .li... On Wed, 8 Jun 2005, Miss L. Toe wrote: "Geordie the Forgery" wrote in message ... "gay merrington" wrote in message ... Nope....BTW thanks for the help with the spelling you gave me when I typed it up!Much appreciated!Never let it be said that the English aren't a helpful lot....That's why I just love it here! Especially the beer. Mercan *beer* is like making love in a punt. Both very close to f***ing water. ITYM they're both ****ing close to water. Of course, depends on who's in the punt with you, so YMMV. Actually, couldn't it work both ways? ****ing close to water does sound more straight forward, but close to ****ing water sounds more like the Viz profanisaurus entries you read - one slip and ****ing water is all you'll be doing? Perhaps that would apply more to sex on a raft? Hmm - need to think about this one. We call that sort of beer Canoe....Both F'ing close to water Glen |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 03:10 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk