Steve Firth wrote:

Paul Weaver wrote:


Traveling over land from the Mediterranean to the Channel in 12 hours is
evil.


I'll say, it takes me 11 hours to get from the southern Adriatic to the
Channel. To take as long as 12 hours from the Med, I'd have to be
driving a truck.

I have to ask, How? Brindisi/Calais used to take me two long days driving.

Usenet wrote:

In message , Chris Jones
writes

Surely new roads giving people new possibilities to travel, meet
friends and relatives, and go for days out should be celebrated? After
all, that means our standard of living has increased, surely.


New roads promise the idea of emancipation, when they really only offer
a new version of hell.
1. Any new road is quickly filled by drivers doing exactly what you're
doing; taking advantage of a supposedly easier way to travel from 'here'
to 'there'.

And why shouldn't they if that's what they want, who are you to deny them?

2. New roads cost. Not just the building cost, but all those other
factors: loss of trade to local shops, loss of views, communities cut
off from each other, and my favourite bete-noire - the bloody noise!
There are vast areas of Southern England where it's now impossible to
get away from the sound of cars and motor-bikes screaming along at top
speed (a jam on the M25 now provides a gentle respite for the
communities alongside it - say anywhere up to 3 miles away).

If we (the people) can afford it and that's what we (the majority) want,
Why not? Your objections seem selfishly based.

3. Older road-planing cost us loads. The way roads are/were costed was
to value the land, meaning it was always cheaper to go though areas
which weren't farmland or housing. Trouble was, in these over-crowded
islands, that meant the areas that were cheapest were also the areas
that benefited least from roads: common land, woodland, SSI, etc. Still,
it gives a nice view from the car, doesn't it?

Yeah great view, especially for those who are stuck with living in
concrete jungles, If they can get access to a car they can at least
experience what life is like beyond walking/bus distances.

iantheengineer wrote:

"Paul Weaver" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 02 Nov 2003 09:59:51 +0000, iantheengineer wrote:

What about all the other people???? Do you forget the miners strikes
when

I don't much care. You see in the private industry if your company doesnt
sell Cheaply, it goes bust, shareholders lose big time, normal workers
move to other industries, they adapt, or should.


good ol MT decided to close all of the pits so we imported cheap coal
from Africa. Now most of the pits have closed Africas coal price has
risen dramatically, oh yeah she was an absolute genius! Any 5 year old
could have seen that coming

Of course instead of depleteing our coal reserves we still have them, so
in 50 years When there's hardly any left, we can reopen the pits and make
big bucks.


Okay who is going to fund the re-opening of the flooded and unsafe mines???

You??


Anyone who can see a profit in it

In article ,
says...
Yeah whatever I think you will find I am right

The facts have been posted. You are quite wrong.

David

On Mon, 03 Nov 2003 01:01:08 GMT, "Richard J."
wrote:


"derek" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 2 Nov 2003 20:17:40 -0000, "iantheengineer"
wrote:


France has a different geographic population split, they are far less
spread
with concentrations of individuals in cities and very little in between,
thus a lesser need to travel.

??? WTF does that lot mean?

Some facts..

France has 4x the land area of the UK.

Where did you learn this "fact". France actually has 2.23 times the land
area of the UK.

Must have been From a Frenchman. Does that figure include Martinique
etc? ;-)

DG

"Paul Weaver" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 02 Nov 2003 10:09:26 +0000, iantheengineer wrote:
Oh my god she converted somone, live in the South par chance?????

My family were always big Maggie fans. When she Started we lived in Brum,
then moved up to Manchester. Throws your stereotype out a little don't it?

Oh your the one then

"Nick Finnigan" wrote in message
...
"iantheengineer" wrote in message
...

Not at all I have a car my wife has a car we enjoy days out in the car.
The
continentals actually have higher levels of car ownership, just they use
them less.

Can you give details of that lower car use than the UK ?



Does anyone quote the sopurce of facts in this NG but anyway

this makes part of the point

http://www.cfit.gov.uk/reports/ebptbench/05.htm

about modal split.

The rest of the point was in the broadsheets, however it is repeated here
for your enjoyment.

http://www.cfit.gov.uk/research/ebp/key/01.htm

It would be easy to find research with the opposite conclusion.

For example:
http://www.conservatives.com/getfile.../1664&type=pdf

"NM" wrote

Yeah great view, especially for those who are stuck with living in
concrete jungles, If they can get access to a car they can at least
experience what life is like beyond walking/bus distances.

Most concrete jungles and drab housing estates seem to have been created
around the car. Had they not been built perhaps people would not be
screaming to get out.

"iantheengineer" wrote in message
...

"Nick Finnigan" wrote in message
...
"iantheengineer" wrote in message
...

Not at all I have a car my wife has a car we enjoy days out in the car.
The
continentals actually have higher levels of car ownership, just they use
them less.

Can you give details of that lower car use than the UK ?

Does anyone quote the sopurce of facts in this NG but anyway

this makes part of the point

http://www.cfit.gov.uk/reports/ebptbench/05.htm

about modal split.

The claim that a higher proportion of journeys is by car,
even if true, does not show that there is higher car use.

The rest of the point was in the broadsheets, however it is repeated here
for your enjoyment.

http://www.cfit.gov.uk/research/ebp/key/01.htm

I can't see anything there about levels of car use.