Do you want to discuss boring politics? (37 Viewers)

[PVA]

That’s lovely. Shame if they own a non compliant Land Rover with a price guide of £18,000 - still line up the mini folks

This is a terrible example.

Someone who owns an 18k car can afford the ULEZ charge. If they really can't, or they just don't want to pay it, then there are plenty of 18k cars that do meet it (including land rovers).

They really aren't the demographic that's affected by ULEZ.

 

---

[skybluetony176]

Where is the source of this data?

Mate, you’re the one misrepresenting already flawed data made on presumption's. I googled what you said and it took me straight to the RAC report where it instantly said “could” lead to 700K non compliant vehicles not 100% will be 700K as you tried to represent it and within the first paragraph tells you it has worked that number out based on the assumption that no cars registered before the Euro 6 standard or the Euro 4 standard became law for new registrations were non compliant. You think you’re the industry expert. You know that the manufacturing commitments came in a year before the registration deadlines and you know that they were making compliant cars long before that deadline. The Mini being the perfect example they were building them in petrol meeting Euro 4 compliance 4 years before Euro 4 became law.

I know you’re wrong and have given the data to prove it. If you think I’m wrong you provide the data. It would certainly help your case more than pretending to be stupid.

 

[skybluetony176]

This is a terrible example.

Someone who owns an 18k car can afford the ULEZ charge. If they really can't, or they just don't want to pay it, then there are plenty of 18k cars that do meet it (including land rovers).

They really aren't the demographic that's affected by ULEZ.

They should have bought a Volvo, BMW etc etc equivalent in the first place. All the self proclaimed JLR executive has demonstrated is that JLR didn’t future proof their cars while their competitors were. Not sure how ULEZ can be blamed for JLR’s competitors keeping up with the pace while JLR didn’t.

 

[Grendel]

This is a terrible example.

Someone who owns an 18k car can afford the ULEZ charge. If they really can't, or they just don't want to pay it, then there are plenty of 18k cars that do meet it (including land rovers).

They really aren't the demographic that's affected by ULEZ.

It was an extreme case to illustrate the absurdity of Tony’s argument. My rather lovely brand new Mercedes of course would qualify so why would I care. I can wave at the plebs now standing at the bus stop as they can’t afford the fee.

 

[PVA]

It was an extreme case to enable me to boast about my new car.

Ok.

 

[skybluetony176]

It was an extreme case to illustrate the absurdity of Tony’s argument. My rather lovely brand new Mercedes of course would qualify so why would I care. I can wave at the plebs now standing at the bus stop as they can’t afford the fee.

And it backfired in your face instantly. First page of google and I found out that any equivalent car made by anyone else almost certainly had been compliant. No wonder you brought German.

Actually you should be able to answer this. How did JLR so spectacularly fail to future proof their cars? Was it because their executives spent all their time on football forums instead of doing their jobs?

 

[wingy]

My Peugeot I have to say has been a bargain used as a van for work a holiday vehicle probably capable of travelling to the Euro's if so inclined and quite cheaply when 5 7 seat's used crossing,road tolls, diesel,and my old one before that used two gallons at most on a journey into the capitol avoiding the congestion charge, chugged along beautifully living there in the week and leaving around 7pm on Friday!

 

[Grendel]

And it backfired in your face instantly. First page of google and I found out that any equivalent car made by anyone else almost certainly had been compliant. No wonder you brought German.

Actually you should be able to answer this. How did JLR so spectacularly fail to future proof their cars? Was it because their executives spent all their time on football forums instead of doing their jobs?

It didn’t Tony because my basic point is the only people inconvenienced are the poorest - in looks like your inner Tory is returning

 

[wingy]

It didn’t Tony because my basic point is the only people inconvenienced are the poorest - in looks like your inner Tory is returning

But there not are they based on myself as a case in point?

 

[Grendel]

But there not are they based on myself as a case in point?

The people who have to pay the fine or be unconvinced are people with older vehicles.

Now who are these people likely to side with at an election?

Are they likely to think - “oh yes I’ll inconvenience myself and save the planet” or will they look to a political party that would back them and remove this tax that inconveniences them?

 

[wingy]

The people who have to pay the fine or be unconvinced are people with older vehicles.

Now who are these people likely to side with at an election?

Are they likely to think - “oh yes I’ll inconvenience myself and save the planet” or will they look to a political party that would back them and remove this tax that inconveniences them?

Depends on what the central funding is doesn't it.
Now I don't know what that's been historically, but I've a feeling the last bloke spaffed a fair bit,no one likes big brother but it pervades our lives?

 

[skybluetony176]

The people who have to pay the fine or be unconvinced are people with older vehicles.

Now who are these people likely to side with at an election?

Are they likely to think - “oh yes I’ll inconvenience myself and save the planet” or will they look to a political party that would back them and remove this tax that inconveniences them?

Well the last London Mayoral election was only in May and the person who inconvenienced them with this “tax” won by a landslide so I guess the answer is yes. Most people accept the necessity of ULEZ to get the gains in air quality and health benefits that brings. A few noisy frothers, aside the policy is A) popular and B) successful in what it aims to achieve.

 

[Grendel]

Well the last London Mayoral election was only in May and the person who inconvenienced them with this “tax” won by a landslide so I guess the answer is yes. Most people accept the necessity of ULEZ to get the gains in air quality and health benefits that brings. A few noisy frothers, aside the policy is A) popular and B) successful in what it aims to achieve.

Point proven

 

[SBAndy]

I just don’t think banning new ICE vehicles from 2030, when the rest of the EU which Starmer loves is aiming for 2035. I am totally unconvinced that the generating and distribution capacity will be there, nor the public charging system. The roads will need massive investment to take the increase in average weight. I certainly wont be going anywhere near multi storey car parks.

As others have commented, reducing the weight of ICE vehicle’s would help. Reverse we some of the safety requirements, put an end to all the autonomous driving kit.

Theresa May initially brought in the 2030 deadline. I recall when Johnson extended it to 2035 the automotive industry weren’t happy as they’d accelerated their investment plans on the understanding that ICE would be phased out by 2030 and it presented a risk that uptake would be slower than they’d forecast for. Returning to 2030 is likely working with business to keep their investment plans on track, increasing supply of vehicles due to ramp-up of production and likely resulting in a reduced price point.

 

[MalcSB]

Theresa May initially brought in the 2030 deadline. I recall when Johnson extended it to 2035 the automotive industry weren’t happy as they’d accelerated their investment plans on the understanding that ICE would be phased out by 2030 and it presented a risk that uptake would be slower than they’d forecast for. Returning to 2030 is likely working with business to keep their investment plans on track, increasing supply of vehicles due to ramp-up of production and likely resulting in a reduced price point.

But the EU is 2035 And most of the car manufacturers are European.
I'm pretty sure I watched a Shell tv ad this week extolling their electric infrastructure plans to be achieved by 2035. I’m not sure Starmers move is anything to do with the industry, more likely to make Labour appealing to Greens and eco warriors.

I remain unconvinced about infrastructure etc. Let’s hope the lights stay on in 2031.

Any more of Theresa’s plans you would endorse?

 

[Grendel]

Theresa May initially brought in the 2030 deadline. I recall when Johnson extended it to 2035 the automotive industry weren’t happy as they’d accelerated their investment plans on the understanding that ICE would be phased out by 2030 and it presented a risk that uptake would be slower than they’d forecast for. Returning to 2030 is likely working with business to keep their investment plans on track, increasing supply of vehicles due to ramp-up of production and likely resulting in a reduced price point.

90% of vehicles sold in Europe will be some form of ICE through 2030 - 35 and its utterly bonkers for one market to rebel against that

 

[skybluejelly]

Has anybody else seen Keir starmers interview with Nicky Campbell, where a caller asks him about 25% tax free allowance on your pension, and he says they are not going to renew it when it runs out in a couple of years, as they need the money for there manifesto pledges , all hell.breaks loose and labour say he misunderstood the question and thought the question was about mortgages...yeah righty oh

Sent from my CPH2025 using Tapatalk

 

[MalcSB]

Has anybody else seen Keir starmers interview with Nicky Campbell, where a caller asks him about 25% tax free allowance on your pension, and he says they are not going to renew it when it runs out in a couple of years, as they need the money for there manifesto pledges , all hell.breaks loose and labour say he misunderstood the question and thought the question was about mortgages...yeah righty oh

Sent from my CPH2025 using Tapatalk

Does it ”run out in a couple of years”?

 

[Grendel]

Has anybody else seen Keir starmers interview with Nicky Campbell, where a caller asks him about 25% tax free allowance on your pension, and he says they are not going to renew it when it runs out in a couple of years, as they need the money for there manifesto pledges , all hell.breaks loose and labour say he misunderstood the question and thought the question was about mortgages...yeah righty oh

Sent from my CPH2025 using Tapatalk

Amazed no one else mentioned it - yes deeply disturbing

 

[skybluejelly]

Does it ”run out in a couple of years”?

I bloody hope not , from what I can see it was supposed to go up to 57 , but neither does mortgage relief run out in two years , Google the interview , and he seems quite adamant that they will stop the 25% tax free when it runs out

 

[Grendel]

Does it ”run out in a couple of years”?

nope

 

[wingy]

Lkkkjj

I bloody hope not , from what I can see it was supposed to go up to 57 , but neither does mortgage relief run out in two years , Google the interview , and he seems quite adamant that they will stop the 25% tax free when it runs out

So doesn't that suggest it's not going up and remaining the same?

 

[MalcSB]

I bloody hope not , from what I can see it was supposed to go up to 57 , but neither does mortgage relief run out in two years , Google the interview , and he seems quite adamant that they will stop the 25% tax free when it runs out

He got it mixed up with stamp duty relief for first time buyers which will end in April 25. Labour won’t be extending it. That should be helpful for first time buyers - not. Probably see another increase in house prices in the run up as well.

Stamp duty for first-time buyers would rise in 2025 under Labour government

Party says it would allow threshold for stamp duty to fall back to £300,000 after it was raised temporarily in 2022

www.theguardian.com

 

[fernandopartridge]

I just can't get over the incoming government promising more senseless austerity

Very serious people indeed

How the ‘unforced error’ of austerity wrecked Britain

The Tories’ cuts were an obvious economic blunder, but their disastrous consequences are still piling up – and there is little hope Labour will reverse the damage

www.theguardian.com

 

[Deleted member 5849]

He got it mixed up with stamp duty relief for first time buyers which will end in April 25. Labour won’t be extending it. That should be helpful for first time buyers - not. Probably see another increase in house prices in the run up as well.

Stamp duty for first-time buyers would rise in 2025 under Labour government

Party says it would allow threshold for stamp duty to fall back to £300,000 after it was raised temporarily in 2022

www.theguardian.com

If first time buyers are all heading for £300k+ houses, we really are fucked...

 

[MalcSB]

If first time buyers are all heading for £300k+ houses, we really are fucked...

You are a miserable so and so aren’t you. Or are you suggesting that nobody benefitted from that tax break?

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

How are they so bad at this?

They managed to make me dislike Labour a bit less by hearing that, so fair play to them for that.

He got it mixed up with stamp duty relief for first time buyers which will end in April 25. Labour won’t be extending it. That should be helpful for first time buyers - not. Probably see another increase in house prices in the run up as well.

Stamp duty for first-time buyers would rise in 2025 under Labour government

Party says it would allow threshold for stamp duty to fall back to £300,000 after it was raised temporarily in 2022

www.theguardian.com

Not a great look for Starmer to confuse his own policies.

 

[skybluejelly]

He got it mixed up with stamp duty relief for first time buyers which will end in April 25. Labour won’t be extending it. That should be helpful for first time buyers - not. Probably see another increase in house prices in the run up as well.

Stamp duty for first-time buyers would rise in 2025 under Labour government

Party says it would allow threshold for stamp duty to fall back to £300,000 after it was raised temporarily in 2022

www.theguardian.com

Yes because it sounds exactly the same when someone says are you going to stop their 25% tax free when they take there pension ...I can see how it sounds exactly the same ..

Sent from my CPH2025 using Tapatalk

 

[wingy]

You are a miserable so and so aren’t you. Or are you suggesting that nobody benefitted from that tax break?

Depends if the owner's jacked it again like the last time, it's a signal after all in an already overcooked market isn't it or wasn't it when it came in tbf?

 

[Deleted member 5849]

You are a miserable so and so aren’t you. Or are you suggesting that nobody benefitted from that tax break?

You said first time buyers would suffer from it, I'd suggest that at £300k+, first time buyers who can afford that are doing rather well for themselves and most are certainly not buying at that level.

I mean, I can't help it if you just spout reactionary bollocks can I?

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Average house price for a home bought with a mortgage in Coventry is £228,000 btw. First time buyers? £196k...

 

[Sick Boy]

How common/popular is LPG in the UK? I got it fitted in my car to get around pollution laws and pay around €30 or a tank (Audi A3).

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

​

Day 15: Migration​ Click here to listen to an audio recording of this reflection.​ Ruth 1.15-18 ‘Where you go, I will go; where you lodge, I will lodge; your people shall be my people, and your God my God.’ Ruth decides to cross the boundaries between Moab and Israel with Naomi, her mother-in-law. For Ruth, Naomi is the family she has, and she decides to stick with her. Their experience resonates with millions of migrants today. People move seeking security and often end up in places where they have family connections. Ruth will be considered an ‘alien’ in Israel. But even aliens were to be cared for in the community – at least that was God’s commandment. God wanted a community that would welcome foreigners who would end up in their midst. Hospitality, not hostility, was the expected approach. Once Ruth makes her decision to join Naomi in her journey to Bethlehem, Naomi becomes Ruth’s advocate and supporter. Ruth then finds the strong support of Naomi’s kinsman Boaz, too. We pray today for all migrants and asylum seekers; for those who support and welcome them; for those who set and implement policy and care. ​ Look with mercy on those who flee from danger, homeless and hungry. Bless those who work to bring them relief, and inspire generosity and compassion in all our hearts. Hear us, good Lord.

 

[MalcSB]

You said first time buyers would suffer from it, I'd suggest that at £300k+, first time buyers who can afford that are doing rather well for themselves and most are certainly not buying at that level.

I mean, I can't help it if you just spout reactionary bollocks can I?

FFS, the stamp duty break is for first time buyers. I didn’t invent it, nor did I invent Starmers fuck up. According to you it won’t be missed at all - so it will be no great loss.

Unlike winter fuel allowance, bus passes and free prescriptions for pensioners.

 

[MalcSB]

Average house price for a home bought with a mortgage in Coventry is £228,000 btw. First time buyers? £196k...

Shame not all first timers buy a house in Coventry.