Like most things the BIG C is not being serious and is doing it for a crack.
However if he did stand and got elected I for one would be quite peed off
He has nothng to do with London, does not live there, does not pay local taxes, does not drive there (he gets cheuffered around), does not use public transport, and cant even find his way to the second biggest building in London in a car.
Given the above, he should really keep his trap shut about London and worry about the smell of cow dung outside his country mansion in the cotswolds or the tourists leaving litter outside his tax haven mansion on the isle of man.
As an entertainer on TV he is entertaining and ammusing. As a serious contender with any controls or influence over our lives I would have more faith in Crusty the Clown. Crusty has a better grasp of the real world.
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
>>Like most things the BIG C is not being serious
You're gonna get a slap, you are.
|
Try it slap head
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
|
The thing about Jeremy Claxon (I call him this because it sounds a bit like his name and he is very loud - I am funny) is that although many may hate him for his un-PC stance, that's exactly what this country needs. Whether you agree or disagree with some or all of what he says the guy isn't afraid to state what he believes and isn't afraid to insult people who need to be insulted. He's the type of guy who would happily take the warning labels off everything and let society sort out its own stupidity problem.
Yes there are times when he says stuff just to get a reaction and you know he doesn't really believe it, but when he speaks from his heart the guy comes out with more sense than just about anyone I've encountered before him. Politicians these days are quite happy to push their own agenda while going on the record stating "I'm not pushing my own agenda" but are scared to make any decisions that might change anything at all for fear of the possibility of losing a few votes.
Claxon on the other hand would quite happily go around personally ripping up speed humps and not care about annoying voters, politicians or anyone else if it's what he believed was right. I'm not saying things would necessarily be better - but they'd certainly be more interesting.
|
You are funny! You are.
I am enjoying the "lively political debate" between TVM and No FM2R. It's a lot more intellectual than the House of Commons.
My own view? I think JC is a sensationalist, but a shrewd one. I don't like him on TG but I kind of admire him. I like him in real mode, when he did "Greatest Britons" I gained a great deal more respect for him.
|
Electing Clarkson for mayor would be much more liberal than allowing the government to be formed by the Back Room.
Number_Cruncher
|
|
Well if he does get elected, I hope his official car is a Vectra.
|
So even you admit a vectra is a pile of merde then DD?
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
So even you admit a vectra is a pile of merde then DD?
No, not at all. I meant it in the sense that it would serve him right for continually slagging them off.
|
>>it would serve him right
Seems pretty extreme punishment to me....
|
|
|
|
Seriously though they are.
|
|
|
|
|
If he was elected I think like lots of "celeb" turned politico types they'll realise how intractable alot of supposedly easy to solve problems are - Arnie has faced no end of trouble in California dealing with alot of thorny problems that don't lend easily to obvious solutions.
Also if JC moved to London he'd realise that contrary to his view that buses run empty are in fact busy almost all the time and are used by those in lower economic groups who have benefitted significantly from Ken's investment in buses and prioritisation and an effective modern ticketing system (oyster). There would be precious little JC could do in many traffic problems in London unless he mandates mass bull dozing of chunks of the city for urban freeways.
|
Are people prejudiced against the letter K? First we have TVM misspelling Krusty the Clown, then the worthy Mr Klaxon's name was misspelled.
Is something sinister going on? Is there a plot to rationalise and modernise the alphabet by secret manipulation of the internet conventions?
I think we should be told.
|
I thinc you're reading too much into things Lud.
|
Lud
I have written some tripe on here in my time, I have misspelt all sorts of things, puntuaction has been appaling, and have manged to upset and insult everyone (without exception) at some time or other.
I have never apologised, but I do so now
I am traumatised that I misspelt Krustie the Clown.
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
::Throws head into hands::
|
|
|
|
Also if JC moved to London
I thought he always had a flat in London. No?
he'd realise that contrary to his view that buses run empty
They do. Average of 8 people per km of bus run was the number used I believe. Buses might be half full between Oxford Street and Tottenham Crt. Rd. but for the rest of their journey they usually carry an odd drunk sleeping at the back and a lot of air conditioned space.
almost all the time and are used by those in lower economic groups who have benefitted significantly from Ken's investment in buses and prioritisation and an effective modern ticketing system (oyster).
Lower economic groups seem to be the only ones benefitting actually. Vast parts of todays London are inhabited by coucil housed, unemployed ghetto huggers and work evading minorities whos chuffed well being and unrestricted transportation is being prioritized above tradesmen and commuters that were outpriced and pushed out of city boundries in last decade without much consideration or pardon. Why count on local voters when you can bring your own electorate in, right? Ask people from the last upper middle class indigenous Londoner enclaves, such as Kensington & Chelsea or Richmond what they think of capital under livingstonial fascist regime.
precious little JC could do in many traffic problems in London unless he mandates mass bull dozing of chunks of the city for urban freeways.
Certainly better idea than throwing money at Millenium Dome on the outskirts of nowhere, olympics in the middle of slums, CC charge that only benefits technical operators, new rail system that somehow manage to avoid all areas that always needed trains and many, many other fantastic investments...
--------------------
[Nissan 2.2 dCi are NOT Renault engines. Grrr...]
|
TVM,
I'm feeling left out, although i'm fairly new to these pages, you've yet to insult me.
Oh and i'd vote for Clarkson tomorrow..........
with Red Ken, my council tax bills are horrendous, quite appalling.... he advocates speed bumps, which the local council have thankfully been taking out, as they've cost me nearly £600 to date on repairing the car. Then there's the refusal to widen the North Circular 'cos he's anti-car, God knows what this does to business as it is a permanent car park in places........ free travel for the kids...so that the older ones can graffiti all the buses and travel easier to mug people...marvellous.
Vote Clarkson, you know it makes sense.
|
Dont worry piggy - it wont be long.
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
|
|
|
Well 8 people per km of bus cannot be a valid figure in my bit of inner south London. Try waiting for a 3 or 133 in the morning going northbound you'll have a job getting on...and even in the middle of the day I reckon they are 50% full on average.
So poorer people working in lower paid service jobs eg in shops and restaurants or cleaners etc should not get access to affordable and more efficient transport? Arguably alot of the improvement of transport relating to buses has reduced social and economic exclusion for such people - more reliable faster journeys and easy to understand and use fare structures. But of course under your rationale then such people are less important than higher earning tradesmen or commuters....The proportion of people actually driving into London has been a minority of relatively wealthy car drivers, the vast majority of lower and middle class consumers always have used public transport for commuting (see the hordes of white middle class types streaming off trains at Waterloo and "shock horror" getting on a bus and sharing the improvements to the service with said poorer people coming in from the Old Kent Road and the Elephant....) and continue to benefit from the focus on public transport in London.
Also I hope you're not the person who's house is buldozed for the next urban freeway that divides and separates another community.
|
Well 8 people per km of bus cannot be a valid figure in my bit of inner south London. Try waiting for a 3 or 133 in the morning going northbound you'll have a job getting on...and even in the middle of the day I reckon they are 50% full on average.
Spent better part of 8 years worth of cigarette breaks watching nearly empty buses of various hights and sizes stream down High Holborn. 10 o'clock, like a charm, crowd gone, seats empty, endless chains of bendies chasing one another. Such is problem with congestion that with office penchant to 9 to 5 routines everyone wants to hop on transportaion at the same time and go to the same places.
So poorer people working in lower paid service jobs eg in shops and restaurants or cleaners etc should not get access to affordable and more efficient transport?
Of course they should and they always have. But they are not the only road users. In fact, pressed by congestion, they actually have other means of public transportation unlike those who can't carry their services and equipment on trains and underground.
But of course under your rationale then such people are less important than higher earning tradesmen or commuters....
Yes they are. Between kitchen porter responsible for preping tuna mayo in your favourite sandwich bar and a stock broker responsible for multiplying your retirement funds, who would you rather see late to work? Or would you rather choose between late engineers to fix your servers and late parking gestapo to ticket their car parked in front of your office? ;)
The proportion of people actually driving into London has been a minority of relatively wealthy car drivers,
Wrong, wrong, completely wrong. I'm not wealthy, but having choice of 1.5 hour car journey or 3 times more expensive yet even slower train and underground combo I have very little choice, reallisticly. So does my brother, who is not wealthy either but let's face it, you want your bog fixed and yet there is very little chance anyone would let him into the tube with few lengths of copper pipe and a sweet white china bowl. People need to get their monocles pulled out from between their buttocks and have a deep and unbiased look around, outside white collar and office desk there is wider world where people need to move around and believe me, that mythical rich bunch that drive around city in rush hour only because they like to get stuck in traffic all day for pleasure is so marginal they couldn't even pass for Ken Livingstone's electorate.
--------------------
[Nissan 2.2 dCi are NOT Renault engines. Grrr...]
|
Well clearly u have a fixed mindset and somehow seem to have existed in a different London to the one that I've lived in for the past 13 yrs.
Can you explain how a low paid person has access to other forms of transport then other than buses, which cost half the price of the tube (a huge difference to those on a low wage - even witness how busy buses like the 155 and 133 are that mirror tube routes near me yet are as busy as other routes) and connect the less well off neighbourhoods in South London (eg Peckham, Camberwell, New Cross etc) with the City and the West end...
I'd like everyone's transport needs to be addressed on an equal basis. I do not believe one persons right to a living is more important than someone else's. If said sandwich worker cannot get to work on time then said stockbroker has no lunch...think the stockbroker might notice slightly quicker than the opposite situation. The lower paid have less choice about travel options (typically not owning or having easy access to a car) and are making more sensitive to differences in travel costs so think it is eminently sensible that Ken has targeted such people by focussing on bus improvements to get the biggest bang for his buck - ie make a bigger difference to a lot of more people per £
Yes obviously those who travel about with tools and other stuff still can - central london is not pedestrianised...you can drive where you want but where you are using scarce commodity of central london roadspace you are now paying a fee for using it at busy times and have free access to the massive area of London not in the congestion charge...so plenty of painters and decorators can still get to their clients - the vast majority of their customers being the general population is outside the zone.
|
I have no time or will to try and explain to someone who has public transport in front of their nose that there is slightly bigger world out there where extending every day journey to include train or tube just for the sake of sick ideology at private expense of money and time will simply not cut bread on my table. Don't measure others lives with your tea spoon. Wake up, look around. Why is low wage worker commuting more important than my commuting and why do i have to be penalized £8 a day just so the kitchen porter from our example has his bus longer rather than taller and his travel reduced by mere 18%? Who pays for this whole malarky? His £1 fare? Who benefits? More and more people forced out of their cars and unable to catch rush hour bus? What do you propose happens - even more people on the tube? Even more people on train station platforms? Even longer buses for 3 hours a day and empty throughout the rest of the day?
Perhaps problem is approached from wrong direction. Perhaps pressure should be put on breaking the 9-5, 10-6, spreading rush hour, disallowing deliveries and HGV traffic in rush hour, decentralizing office spaces rather than penalizing people for car commuting.
--------------------
[Nissan 2.2 dCi are NOT Renault engines. Grrr...]
|
|
that mythical rich bunch
Come to W1 where I work. They are certainly not mythical.
I have seen more Astons, Ferraris, Porsches, premium 4x4's (X5, Lexus RX, RR Sport, Mercedes ML etc), Bentleys, AMG Mercedes, M series BMWs and Rolls Royces in the 8 months I've been there than I've seen probably in last 3 years. That is not an exaggeration.
If you discount taxis, vans, trucks and motorcycle couriers, none of whom could do what they do without taking their vehicle into town, I would argue that over half of what's left would be the kind of car above.
Cheers
DP
|
Come to W1 where I work. They are certainly not mythical. I have seen more Astons, Ferraris, Porsches, premium 4x4's (X5, Lexus RX, RR Sport, Mercedes ML etc), Bentleys, AMG Mercedes, M series BMWs and Rolls Royces in the 8 months I've been there than I've seen probably in last 3 years. That is not an exaggeration.
Must be some barrister enclave. None of these queue on A2 with me or park next to my Almera in Old Street area, I can assure you. Even so, this still poses few questions - a) Does having flashy car make his commute even less important than that of a kitchen porter on a bendy? b) Why on earth would we expect someone who has to wear Armani to work to just go and glue themselves to bubble gum on bus seat or hang under someone's armpit on Picadilly Line? c) Completely off topic - Why do you think it is we all feel like watching his misfortune of using public transport would make our day ;)
--------------------
[Nissan 2.2 dCi are NOT Renault engines. Grrr...]
|
Wonder why JC doesn't stand for election in his home town?
That I'd love to see!
Steve.
---
Xantia HDi.
Buy a Citroen and get to know the local GSF staff better...
|
|
|
>>- a) Does having flashy car make his commute evenless important than that of a kitchen porter on a bendy?
Not at all. What I dislike about the congestion charge is that it implies the opposite. Yes, Mr. Banker / barrister / property baron, you can afford to pay so come on in and enjoy the quieter roads. Everyone else - tough. Be late for work 1 day in 5 through signal failures, mechanical breakdowns "security alerts", communication equipment failures etc etc.
I would like to see the Charge scrapped altogether, but to my mind, if they are going to restrict car use, they could at least do it fairly. It would have been both more effective and fairer, not to mention a far more coherent message if Ken had blanket banned motor vehicles from Central London between 9 and 6. Of course there would need to be exclusions for couriers, taxis, emergency services and their workers, and tradesmen such as builders, engineers, plumbers etc who have to carry vanfuls of parts. Once that had been thrashed out, he should have then made EVERYONE else use public transport, not just those who can't afford to pay this tax.
As a bonus, maybe if some of the rich and powerful were forced onto the (at best) 80% reliable Tube network, the service might improve.
b) Why on earth would we expect someone who has to wear Armani to work to just go and glue themselves to bubble gum on bus seat or hang under someone's armpit on Picadilly Line
I wouldn't. This person has a choice, and good luck to them. What annoys me is that a choice that applied to almost everyone a few years ago has been taken away from only a certain section of society. I don't see how this can be considered to be progress.
c) Completely off topic - Why do you thinkit is we all feel like watching his misfortune of using public transport would make our day ;)
It wouldn't make me feel any better (I think.. ;-) No, seriously, I just think that his lot has improved at the expense of everyone else under this system. He still gets to choose how he gets to work in the morning, while others have lost the choice.
I have no issue with wealthy people at all. The guy probably worked to earn the nice car and the high paid job, and good luck to him. However, the fact that he can now drive this car on quieter roads with the message that because he can afford the charge, he's somehow exempt from the apparent environmental disaster that his car is creating is just plain wrong in my view. If the car really is that evil in our cities, ban it completely. Or (preferably) just leave it alone.
Cheers
DP
|
However, the fact that he can now drive this car on quieter roads with the message that because he can afford the charge, he's somehow exempt from the apparent environmental disaster that his car is creating is just plain wrong in my view. If the car really is that evil in our cities, ban it completely. Or (preferably) just leave it alone.
I think it is clear for quite some time now that CC has nothing to do with congestion or environment. If congestion was an issue mayor wouldn't spend first batch of CC money on buses that are almost three times longer than before, if environment was an issue those buses wouldn't be most poluting carriages in range. I understand he's a private car hater, is led by grudge and he likes to do things cuban way, however what worries me is that the whole plot has no possible happy ending - public transport, regardless of money thrown at it, is very finite resource, mainly because its stress points are time rather than fleet related. You can have twice as many trains, twice as many cabs and three times longer buses to your disposal, but growing in numbers won't make them move any quicker on already full tracks and roads. Train stations are threatning with rush hour charge, tube stations like Chancery Lane disable entries downstairs in morning hours because rivers of commuters arriving every 2 minutes need all three staircases and all gates set to way out to avoid life threatning overcrowding. Now imagine 120,000 of those who pay congestion charge jump on public transport. The idea was insane from the beginning and implementation was clearly thought up by someone who never drove a car to work in his entire life. And damage caused by this idea is slowly becoming close to irreversible.
--------------------
[Nissan 2.2 dCi are NOT Renault engines. Grrr...]
|
Now imagine 120,000 of those whopay congestion charge jump on public transport. The idea was insane from the beginning and implementation was clearly thought up by someone who never drove a car to work in his entire life. And damage caused by this idea is slowly becoming close to irreversible.
I couldn't agree more.
I catch my Tube a couple of stops from the terminus and almost always get a seat. Two or three stops after that, it's standing room only, and one stop after that, it's full. From then on, the train cannot take everyone waiting for it, and people are left standing there.
And that's without the access restrictions at stations that you mention.
The system would struggle to cope with another 1,200 never mind 120,000.
Cheers
DP
|
By no means all the buses bought by Ken are indeed the bendy buses. On the routes in my neighbourhood upand down the Brixton road (6 major bus routes) there are no bendy buses (one of the few ex routemaster routes the 159 is now a conventional double decker) and all the double deckers have been renewed in the last 3 years - so the oldest bus that plies that route is a 53 plate. Services are more frequent and run more regularly and journeys into town are definitely more predictable. I took the 59 bus to work for 4 years straddling the congestion charge and immediately I noticed firstly that the journey was consistently 10 minutes quicker but also was more predictable in terms of arrival time. I think the improvement in bus quality and reliability and the step change in useability resulting from the oyster card system has reduced the bad image of buses..I've noticed a wider demographic using buses now that things like Oyster prepay and a standardised fare structure mean there is no need directly to know "how to use the buses" in terms of knowing the exact fare/means of paying for an occasional bus ride. Hence there is greater encouragement among a wider potential ridership to use the system.
I'd love to know who are/were this army of moderately paid car commuters with access to free or cheap car parking in ZOne 1. In all the businesses that I've worked in the car park has been for directors to park their BMWs and Maseratis and the rest of us have taken public transport to work and have never had a choice to drive. They have benefited from a better bus service and improvements to the tube network. Again I think I am existing in a parallel universe to some people on here. The reliability of the tube and buses to me is much higher than 80%. I would say my journey to work is delayed or disrupted about 1 in 30 journeys on buses and mostly that has been due to road works in bus lanes. The tube itself I reckon I get a major cock up in terms of a line being out of action about once a quarter and even then you can reroute via another line or take the bus.
Road space is a finite resource...there is plenty of space on the roads (except Oxford Street I acknowledge which does seem to be a thorny problem) for enhanced bus provision. I walk alongside major routes to the Vauxhall interchange and around the Oval/Brixton and main routes are free flowing with well used bus lanes. Certainly never seen massive bus jams that you seem to imply exist everywhere.
|
The reliability of the tube and buses to me is much higher than 80%. I would say my journey to work is delayed or disrupted about 1 in 30 journeys on buses and mostly that has been due to road works in bus lanes. The tube itself I reckon I get a major cock up in terms of a line being out of action about once a quarter and even then you can reroute via another line or take the bus.
Depends how you define disruption. Yes, major cock ups are thankfully quite rare, but this week alone on the Met Line there have been two signal failures and a closed station. Each of these have added between 15 and 30 minutes to my normal 35 minute journey.
Oh yes, and with a large percentage of the Met Line being overground, it was among the hardest hit in the recent heatwave when the tracks buckled in the heat because a maintenance procedure had been ignored, and a blanket 20 mph speed limit was introduced over much of it for a week or so. That turned 35 minutes into nearly an hour.
If I average it out, and discount anything of 15 minutes or less, it's about one journey in ten that has a problem for me. In other words I am late to work, or late home once a week.
Cheers
DP
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
