Saturday 12th & Sunday 13th October 2019

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 1:49 pm

Lost Soul wrote:then read the Observer - Corbyn ( and I allow this is the paper's slant ) seems set on a 'Labour' brexit as a preference.

Any Labour Brexit 'deal' has to sit next to Remain in the EU in a referendum
That's Labour's policy

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 1:56 pm

Incidentally, can someone tell me why people can't simply take their polling card along to vote?

I know there will be some who maybe didn't receive one but the vast majority of people will have them - I've seen people turn up holding them.

My mum had a passport but it expired once my dad died and she never drove - so no passport and no driving licence. It actually caused me a problem when trying to get some documents signed.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 1:56 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:
tinyclanger2 wrote: What’s the word?
Johannesberg!

[youtube]Wglq9xFk1Qc[/youtube]

Marvellous. Thank you!

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 2:14 pm

tinyclanger2 wrote:I don’t think it’s me that’s being defeatist. But not being defeatist means avoiding a route that clearly will not work - and choosing instead a route that might.

I responded to one post of yours containing a statement expressing defeatism. You're right; avoiding failure and enhancing the chances of success are the opposite of defeatism. I think you and I want the same things. Some include, sustainable practices protecting our environment, UK remaining in the EU, government investment in emaciated public services neglected by nearly ten years of Tory governments.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 2:20 pm

Lost Soul wrote:then read the Observer - Corbyn ( and I allow this is the paper's slant ) seems set on a 'Labour' brexit as a preference.

My (serious) advice on that is - don't read the Observer.

An absolutely rancid and dishonest publication, much more so than its daily stablemate.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 2:22 pm

tinyclanger2 wrote:And while we’re on the subject of being doomed, does anyone have to hand the figures on the amount of fossil fuels used to provide energy to electric cars?

No. However, I do know swapping every motor vehicle using petrol with electric motor vehicles isn't going to work; it's not sustainable. Free, comprehensive provision of reliable public transportation dramatically reduces motor vehicles on the road.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 2:30 pm

The skills regular people learned and use in an industry can be used in other endeavours.
Renewable energy projects and public transportation provision requires peoples' labour creating and maintaining it.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 2:34 pm

Pushing for a referendum commitment makes sense if you think that any deal Johnson gets might pass the Commons later this month (possibly because of rebel Labour MPs)

That means he will have to extend A50 until some time in 2020, and does not preclude an election taking place in the interim.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 2:34 pm

Many people employed in the automotive industry are rightly concerned about they're going to make a living if most people don't buy motor vehicles any more.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 2:38 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Pushing for a referendum commitment makes sense if you think that any deal Johnson gets might pass the Commons later this month (possibly because of rebel Labour MPs)

That means he will have to extend A50 until some time in 2020, and does not preclude an election taking place in the interim.

(cJA bold)
That scares me. It's why Starmer recently stated any Johnson deal passed in the House must be subject to referendum approval.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 2:44 pm

My issue isn’t with cars per se (though can’t help noticing that more people are killed by cars than terrorists in the UK). It’s with the ultimate sources of their energy.

PS: cyclists often as bad as motorists vis a vis attitudes to speed / pedestrians / other users of planet for getting from a) to b)

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 3:20 pm

tinyclanger2 wrote:My issue isn’t with cars per se (though can’t help noticing that more people are killed by cars than terrorists in the UK). It’s with the ultimate sources of their energy.

PS: cyclists often as bad as motorists vis a vis attitudes to speed / pedestrians / other users of planet for getting from a) to b)

I won't be killed by cyclists' attitudes
The more cyclists on the road, the safer my walk

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 4:27 pm

You might be surprised.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 4:39 pm

Cyclists are equally capable of causing death and harm both directly and indirectly,have no tests to fulfill and on the pavements.People are the problem,no matter what the potential "weapon"IMHO

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 4:40 pm

https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/rise ... ons-396047" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 4:50 pm

I've knocked a few children down "running"with the high-five thing,myself,such is my speed(once ,I was over exuberant,the child was small ,no injury was sustained.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 5:12 pm

HindleA wrote:Cyclists are equally capable of causing death and harm both directly and indirectly,have no tests to fulfill and on the pavements.People are the problem,no matter what the potential "weapon"IMHO

No, cyclists aren't equally capable of killing people on the road. You're making a mistake equalising dangers caused by a person using a motor vehicle with a person on a bike.
Bikes weigh about 8 kg & travel at about 15 miles per hour
Motor vehicles weigh about 1,500 kg & travel at anywhere from 30 to 50 miles per hour on all use roads

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 5:14 pm

tinyclanger2 wrote:You might be surprised.

I'm surprised by this response from you.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 5:19 pm

Responsibly protecting ourselves and others requires knowing what is and isn't causing the harm.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 5:49 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:Incidentally, can someone tell me why people can't simply take their polling card along to vote?

I know there will be some who maybe didn't receive one but the vast majority of people will have them - I've seen people turn up holding them.

My mum had a passport but it expired once my dad died and she never drove - so no passport and no driving licence. It actually caused me a problem when trying to get some documents signed.

Some places trialled polling cards, I think with barcodes. Whether they were as effective as photo id in deterring fraud is probably hard to tell, given the low to non-existent occurrence of fraud to begin with. I'm not sure how you judge what's been a success with so little data to go on. It's always irritating when the Tories trial stuff even though they have no intention of paying attention to the results of those tests, I know I shouldn't expect any better, but it annoys me every time.

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 7:06 pm

tinyclanger2 wrote:And while we’re on the subject of being doomed, does anyone have to hand the figures on the amount of fossil fuels used to provide energy to electric cars?

Not really about electric cars, but an interesting (long) thread on solar power.

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

gilsey · Post by **gilsey** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 7:24 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:Incidentally, can someone tell me why people can't simply take their polling card along to vote?

I know there will be some who maybe didn't receive one but the vast majority of people will have them - I've seen people turn up holding them.

My mum had a passport but it expired once my dad died and she never drove - so no passport and no driving licence. It actually caused me a problem when trying to get some documents signed.

Can someone tell me how Johnson could get this, or indeed anything else, through the House?
Does he expect the disaffected tories to vote with him on everything except Brexit?

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 8:25 pm

Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal would make people worse off than Theresa May’s
According to our study, the deal now being discussed would reduce per capita GDP by 6.4%, as opposed to 4.9%
Anand Menon & Jonathan Portes
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... -may-trade" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The economic impact of Boris Johnson’s Brexit proposals
Professor Anand Menon
https://ukandeu.ac.uk/wp-content/upload ... posals.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 8:26 pm

gilsey wrote:
RogerOThornhill wrote:Incidentally, can someone tell me why people can't simply take their polling card along to vote?

I know there will be some who maybe didn't receive one but the vast majority of people will have them - I've seen people turn up holding them.

My mum had a passport but it expired once my dad died and she never drove - so no passport and no driving licence. It actually caused me a problem when trying to get some documents signed.
Can someone tell me how Johnson could get this, or indeed anything else, through the House?
Does he expect the disaffected tories to vote with him on everything except Brexit?

(cJA bold)
I wish I could confidently surmise they would not vote with him on everything except Brexit.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 9:23 pm

I saw this on a reply about ID being needed to vote...

ged
‏

@gedspears
2h2 hours ago
More
councils will be giving out I.D. for those without it, free of charge

It hasn't quite through to him yet that someone will have to pay for it to be done- odd for an obvious Tory who normally bleat about things not being "free"...

Sky'sGoneOut · Post by **Sky'sGoneOut** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 9:31 pm

I think the most important news of the day is I have a nasty cold.

And being male this means I'm the sickest human on the face of the earth right now and deserve enormous amounts of sympathy.

Sky'sGoneOut · Post by **Sky'sGoneOut** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 9:45 pm

HindleA wrote:Cyclists are equally capable of causing death and harm both directly and indirectly,have no tests to fulfill and on the pavements.People are the problem,no matter what the potential "weapon"IMHO

I'm with CJA, this is nuts Hindle.

You'd have to try pretty damn hard to kill someone with a bike and you'd be just as likely to kill yourself.

I guess the best way would be to get one of those carbon fibre framed ones that weigh next to nothing and wield it as a makeshift weapon, but how would that be equivalent to a car? Maybe a Formula 1 car if you removed the engine and tyres, still reckon it would weigh a lot more than a bike though. I doubt even Huw Edwards could wave one around. It's all about mass and inertia and even at very slow speeds a car is going to crush humans way more effectively than another human on a weedy frame precariously balanced on a couple of thin wheels.

Sky'sGoneOut · Post by **Sky'sGoneOut** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 10:12 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:My mum had a passport but it expired once my dad died and she never drove - so no passport and no driving licence. It actually caused me a problem when trying to get some documents signed.

I don't drive and my passport expired months ago (although I was able to use it as a form of ID at a post office recently), apparently the idea is to get councils to offer free voter ID, presumably on request.

Let's not beat about the bush here this is flagrant vote rigging via the disenfranchisement of those least likely to be able to prove their identity. It's an answer to a problem that does not exist and it's a direct import of American Republican shenanigans. Not having photo ID doesn't hamper me in any way in any other walk of life. I can use banks, shops, restaurants, venues, public transport, order stuff online, get a credit card, claim benefits, go about my business like any other citizen and yet apparently it suddenly becomes a problem when it comes to voting? Bollocks.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 10:14 pm

120 pedestrians seriously injured by cyclists in UK in 2017 and 3 killed.

Post by **adam** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 10:25 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:I saw this on a reply about ID being needed to vote...

ged
‏

@gedspears
2h2 hours ago
More
councils will be giving out I.D. for those without it, free of charge
It hasn't quite through to him yet that someone will have to pay for it to be done- odd for an obvious Tory who normally bleat about things not being "free"...

There is also the question of what ID you will have to produce in order to get the free ID.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 10:26 pm

Moreover - 470 pedestrians killed in UK 2017; 3 by cyclists
Meanwhile in terms of road miles 1.3 % are done by cyclists compared to 98.7 by vehicles.
So: different, but not SO different.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 10:28 pm

tinyclanger2 wrote:Moreover - 470 pedestrians killed in UK 2017; 3 by cyclists
Meanwhile in terms of road miles 1.3 % are done by cyclists compared to 98.7 by vehicles.
So: different, but not SO different.

What are you quoting from, please?

Post by **adam** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 10:30 pm

tinyclanger2 wrote:120 pedestrians seriously injured by cyclists in UK in 2017 and 3 killed.

24,381 seriously injured by cars (and so on) in 2017 and 1793 killed.

170,993 casualties 'of all severities' by road traffic. Death or serious injury by cyclists works out as 0.0007% of road traffic accidents as a whole. That's not non existent - 3 deaths is 3 deaths and 120 serious injuries is a lot of families and friends, but it's also a very good statistical definition of negligible. It's not negligible as a percentage of road miles but it's still an awful lot fewer.

There is also a question about how many of the problems caused by cyclists are by cyclists who (even though they clearly shouldn't) are on pavements because they don't dare cycle on roads because cars make them so dangerous for them. I'm not aware of ever having caused an accident on a bike but I often end up on the pavement because three or four people every year are killed by cars on the road I have to go down. (And in fact I stopped cycline in ages ago because in part of this).

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 10:32 pm

Hmmm.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 10:34 pm

Your figures include car to car incidents. I’m looking solely at pedestrians.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 10:36 pm

To be clear I don’t have a problem with cyclists - I have a problem with problem cyclists.

Post by **adam** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 10:37 pm

tinyclanger2 wrote:Your figures include car to car incidents. I’m looking solely at pedestrians.

I've edited my earlier post so many times so quickly I've made it look like you're only replying piecemeal, not really fair on you, sorry.

I don't have terribly strong views on this, I wouldn't get into a fight over it, and I know that cyclists can be every bit as arrogant as anybody else about what they're doing. But I think the figures seem to support the idea that cars are dangerous in a way that bikes aren't, as a first generalisation.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 10:42 pm

Indeed, and my original post was about cars. The bit about bikes was a by-the-way.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 10:43 pm

Anyway ....

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 10:47 pm

“Timely deal feared ‘impossible’”
Apparently.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 10:48 pm

Mysteriously missed the "indirectly"as I have seen it happen of course I disagree.I do wish people in general would actually read with more precision.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 10:52 pm

tinyclanger2 wrote:Your figures include car to car incidents. I’m looking solely at pedestrians.

Where? What source are you using?

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 11:02 pm

And as advocators of replacing/more common usage of even bigger vehicles than cars, the relative/weight dimension thing seems a bit strange.

Sky'sGoneOut · Post by **Sky'sGoneOut** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 11:02 pm

HindleA wrote:Mysteriously missed the "indirectly"as I have seen it happen of course I disagree.I do wish people in general would actually read with more precision.

I did and discounted it because while dicks on bikes cycling irresponsibly annoy me immensely the number of deaths they cause will be vanishingly small.

I broke my arm flying over the handlebars of my bike in 1977 because my flares came out of the football socks they were tucked into and got caught in the chain. How many other times do you reckon that happened to other people in 1977, or indeed ever? Wouldn't you agree it would be ridiculous to use that single event to colour your entire opinion on the safety of cycling or indeed forcing a child to wear hand me down flares in the late 1970s?

They were brown corduroy if anyone was wondering.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 11:03 pm

HindleA wrote:Mysteriously missed the "indirectly"as I have seen it happen of course I disagree.I do wish people in general would actually read with more precision.

What individuals see is anecdotal information. It's useful but it lacks the rigour of statistical data reports. The laws of physics are very evidence-based too.

Post by **adam** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 11:09 pm

Are we going to talk ourselves back into a barney here?

Post by **adam** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 11:09 pm

I have sour cherry turkish delight, help yourselves. Happy birthday to me for yesterday.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 11:10 pm

HindleA wrote:And as advocators of replacing/more common usage of even bigger vehicles than cars, the relative/weight dimension thing seems a bit strange.

There are fewer of them freeing up overall space. Buses also have a more consistent route than do a bunch of individuals in their individual motor vehicles going to the same place but not having realised it otherwise they'd have carpooled. Trains and trams most often keep to their tracks, making navigation around them less fraught than attempting to cross the street on foot at the cross-walk while ten thousand people in motor vehicles on their mobiles ignore the red light and sorry didn't see you.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 11:13 pm

adam wrote:I have sour cherry turkish delight, help yourselves. Happy birthday to me for yesterday.

Happy Birthday, adam!

Sky'sGoneOut · Post by **Sky'sGoneOut** » Sun 13 Oct, 2019 11:16 pm

Happy birthday fellah.

[youtube]qAY_o36paQ0[/youtube]