Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This is likely to be another example of a reasonable concept being over-zealously and unreasonably applied by the little Hitlers who run our councils. However, the general population are so lazy that, however good an idea is, some form of enforcement is necessary as people won’t get off their backsides and walk to places unless forced to." Controlling people’s movement can only be described as over reach at best. This is a concept straight out of the stasi handbook. I no longer wish to live in this country if this is the level of state control on the public. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This is likely to be another example of a reasonable concept being over-zealously and unreasonably applied by the little Hitlers who run our councils. However, the general population are so lazy that, however good an idea is, some form of enforcement is necessary as people won’t get off their backsides and walk to places unless forced to. Controlling people’s movement can only be described as over reach at best. This is a concept straight out of the stasi handbook. I no longer wish to live in this country if this is the level of state control on the public. " I don’t get the fear. No body is controlling anybodies movement. You can still move around those locations. All that’s happening is that you can’t always use your car. Where does this BS about needing “passports” come from? It’s emotive crap. That article focuses on Oxford. I like my car but I wouldn’t want to drive it through Central Oxford. It’s a bloody nightmare at the best of times and the car fumes are often horrendous. If the locals want to vote for someone who proposes to make the whole of Oxford a pedestrian zone then what’s wrong with that? If the locals don’t want that then they can vote them out and replace them with someone who wants to turn it into a race track. The DVLA is already used to send tickets to people for speeding etc. No one seriously thinks that a speeding car shouldn’t have its ownership checked do they? We can argue over what is the right speed limit for a road (hint: blanketing a country in 20 mph is probably mad) but that doesn’t “restrict people’s movement”. I think people need to stop and really think through what’s being proposed. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This is likely to be another example of a reasonable concept being over-zealously and unreasonably applied by the little Hitlers who run our councils. However, the general population are so lazy that, however good an idea is, some form of enforcement is necessary as people won’t get off their backsides and walk to places unless forced to. Controlling people’s movement can only be described as over reach at best. This is a concept straight out of the stasi handbook. I no longer wish to live in this country if this is the level of state control on the public. I don’t get the fear. No body is controlling anybodies movement. You can still move around those locations. All that’s happening is that you can’t always use your car. Where does this BS about needing “passports” come from? It’s emotive crap. That article focuses on Oxford. I like my car but I wouldn’t want to drive it through Central Oxford. It’s a bloody nightmare at the best of times and the car fumes are often horrendous. If the locals want to vote for someone who proposes to make the whole of Oxford a pedestrian zone then what’s wrong with that? If the locals don’t want that then they can vote them out and replace them with someone who wants to turn it into a race track. The DVLA is already used to send tickets to people for speeding etc. No one seriously thinks that a speeding car shouldn’t have its ownership checked do they? We can argue over what is the right speed limit for a road (hint: blanketing a country in 20 mph is probably mad) but that doesn’t “restrict people’s movement”. I think people need to stop and really think through what’s being proposed." This is what’s being proposed. Having to apply for a permit to travel. “Oxford is testing the proposals, with the city divided into six “15-minute neighbourhoods”. Under the scheme's rules, drivers must acquire a residents’ permit that allows 100 days of free travel per year through six traffic filters during operating hours.” | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This is likely to be another example of a reasonable concept being over-zealously and unreasonably applied by the little Hitlers who run our councils. However, the general population are so lazy that, however good an idea is, some form of enforcement is necessary as people won’t get off their backsides and walk to places unless forced to. Controlling people’s movement can only be described as over reach at best. This is a concept straight out of the stasi handbook. I no longer wish to live in this country if this is the level of state control on the public. I don’t get the fear. No body is controlling anybodies movement. You can still move around those locations. All that’s happening is that you can’t always use your car. Where does this BS about needing “passports” come from? It’s emotive crap. That article focuses on Oxford. I like my car but I wouldn’t want to drive it through Central Oxford. It’s a bloody nightmare at the best of times and the car fumes are often horrendous. If the locals want to vote for someone who proposes to make the whole of Oxford a pedestrian zone then what’s wrong with that? If the locals don’t want that then they can vote them out and replace them with someone who wants to turn it into a race track. The DVLA is already used to send tickets to people for speeding etc. No one seriously thinks that a speeding car shouldn’t have its ownership checked do they? We can argue over what is the right speed limit for a road (hint: blanketing a country in 20 mph is probably mad) but that doesn’t “restrict people’s movement”. I think people need to stop and really think through what’s being proposed. This is what’s being proposed. Having to apply for a permit to travel. “Oxford is testing the proposals, with the city divided into six “15-minute neighbourhoods”. Under the scheme's rules, drivers must acquire a residents’ permit that allows 100 days of free travel per year through six traffic filters during operating hours.” " Which is clearly an abuse of power and a restriction of freedom. And it's become very obvious that you can't trust those in power not to take more and encroach more- give them an inch and before long they take the mile. If they were serious about reducing car use they would sort out the public transport- the cost alone is a joke. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This is likely to be another example of a reasonable concept being over-zealously and unreasonably applied by the little Hitlers who run our councils. However, the general population are so lazy that, however good an idea is, some form of enforcement is necessary as people won’t get off their backsides and walk to places unless forced to. Controlling people’s movement can only be described as over reach at best. This is a concept straight out of the stasi handbook. I no longer wish to live in this country if this is the level of state control on the public. I don’t get the fear. No body is controlling anybodies movement. You can still move around those locations. All that’s happening is that you can’t always use your car. Where does this BS about needing “passports” come from? It’s emotive crap. That article focuses on Oxford. I like my car but I wouldn’t want to drive it through Central Oxford. It’s a bloody nightmare at the best of times and the car fumes are often horrendous. If the locals want to vote for someone who proposes to make the whole of Oxford a pedestrian zone then what’s wrong with that? If the locals don’t want that then they can vote them out and replace them with someone who wants to turn it into a race track. The DVLA is already used to send tickets to people for speeding etc. No one seriously thinks that a speeding car shouldn’t have its ownership checked do they? We can argue over what is the right speed limit for a road (hint: blanketing a country in 20 mph is probably mad) but that doesn’t “restrict people’s movement”. I think people need to stop and really think through what’s being proposed. This is what’s being proposed. Having to apply for a permit to travel. “Oxford is testing the proposals, with the city divided into six “15-minute neighbourhoods”. Under the scheme's rules, drivers must acquire a residents’ permit that allows 100 days of free travel per year through six traffic filters during operating hours.” " Lots of places need permits. Taxis need a permit to access the bus lane. They can access it and you can’t. You are not seriously suggesting the fact you can’t drive in a bus lane is a Stalinist take over are you? You need a residents permit to park in my street. No permit no parking your car. You can still walk down it and it is great for locals to be able to park when the races are on at Cheltenham. The local councils are just restricting who can drive cars in local areas. Locals can drive, people who aren’t local have to walk or take the bus. No one needs to show a passport. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This is likely to be another example of a reasonable concept being over-zealously and unreasonably applied by the little Hitlers who run our councils. However, the general population are so lazy that, however good an idea is, some form of enforcement is necessary as people won’t get off their backsides and walk to places unless forced to. Controlling people’s movement can only be described as over reach at best. This is a concept straight out of the stasi handbook. I no longer wish to live in this country if this is the level of state control on the public. I don’t get the fear. No body is controlling anybodies movement. You can still move around those locations. All that’s happening is that you can’t always use your car. Where does this BS about needing “passports” come from? It’s emotive crap. That article focuses on Oxford. I like my car but I wouldn’t want to drive it through Central Oxford. It’s a bloody nightmare at the best of times and the car fumes are often horrendous. If the locals want to vote for someone who proposes to make the whole of Oxford a pedestrian zone then what’s wrong with that? If the locals don’t want that then they can vote them out and replace them with someone who wants to turn it into a race track. The DVLA is already used to send tickets to people for speeding etc. No one seriously thinks that a speeding car shouldn’t have its ownership checked do they? We can argue over what is the right speed limit for a road (hint: blanketing a country in 20 mph is probably mad) but that doesn’t “restrict people’s movement”. I think people need to stop and really think through what’s being proposed. This is what’s being proposed. Having to apply for a permit to travel. “Oxford is testing the proposals, with the city divided into six “15-minute neighbourhoods”. Under the scheme's rules, drivers must acquire a residents’ permit that allows 100 days of free travel per year through six traffic filters during operating hours.” Lots of places need permits. Taxis need a permit to access the bus lane. They can access it and you can’t. You are not seriously suggesting the fact you can’t drive in a bus lane is a Stalinist take over are you? You need a residents permit to park in my street. No permit no parking your car. You can still walk down it and it is great for locals to be able to park when the races are on at Cheltenham. The local councils are just restricting who can drive cars in local areas. Locals can drive, people who aren’t local have to walk or take the bus. No one needs to show a passport. " Banning people from travelling to see family, friends or to run basic errands is clearly not the behaviour of a free democratic country. At best it's laziness in not providing sensible, viable alternatives (such as reliable, affordable public transport). | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"When is the time to change the narrative from "It's not happening" to "It's happening but here is why it's good"?" Yep. You called it  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Lots of places need permits. Taxis need a permit to access the bus lane. They can access it and you can’t. You are not seriously suggesting the fact you can’t drive in a bus lane is a Stalinist take over are you? You need a residents permit to park in my street. No permit no parking your car. You can still walk down it and it is great for locals to be able to park when the races are on at Cheltenham. The local councils are just restricting who can drive cars in local areas. Locals can drive, people who aren’t local have to walk or take the bus. No one needs to show a passport. Banning people from travelling to see family, friends or to run basic errands is clearly not the behaviour of a free democratic country. At best it's laziness in not providing sensible, viable alternatives (such as reliable, affordable public transport)." I don’t understand who is being banned? If you want to go see great aunt Gladys in Oxford then you can still go and see great aunt Gladys in Oxford. No one is going to stop you. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This is likely to be another example of a reasonable concept being over-zealously and unreasonably applied by the little Hitlers who run our councils. However, the general population are so lazy that, however good an idea is, some form of enforcement is necessary as people won’t get off their backsides and walk to places unless forced to. Controlling people’s movement can only be described as over reach at best. This is a concept straight out of the stasi handbook. I no longer wish to live in this country if this is the level of state control on the public. I don’t get the fear. No body is controlling anybodies movement. You can still move around those locations. All that’s happening is that you can’t always use your car. Where does this BS about needing “passports” come from? It’s emotive crap. That article focuses on Oxford. I like my car but I wouldn’t want to drive it through Central Oxford. It’s a bloody nightmare at the best of times and the car fumes are often horrendous. If the locals want to vote for someone who proposes to make the whole of Oxford a pedestrian zone then what’s wrong with that? If the locals don’t want that then they can vote them out and replace them with someone who wants to turn it into a race track. The DVLA is already used to send tickets to people for speeding etc. No one seriously thinks that a speeding car shouldn’t have its ownership checked do they? We can argue over what is the right speed limit for a road (hint: blanketing a country in 20 mph is probably mad) but that doesn’t “restrict people’s movement”. I think people need to stop and really think through what’s being proposed. This is what’s being proposed. Having to apply for a permit to travel. “Oxford is testing the proposals, with the city divided into six “15-minute neighbourhoods”. Under the scheme's rules, drivers must acquire a residents’ permit that allows 100 days of free travel per year through six traffic filters during operating hours.” Lots of places need permits. Taxis need a permit to access the bus lane. They can access it and you can’t. You are not seriously suggesting the fact you can’t drive in a bus lane is a Stalinist take over are you? Bus lanes aren’t the point. You need a residents permit to park in my street. No permit no parking your car. You can still walk down it and it is great for locals to be able to park when the races are on at Cheltenham. Parking is not the point. The local councils are just restricting who can drive cars in local areas. Locals can drive, people who aren’t local have to walk or take the bus. No one needs to show a passport. " Yes, you will need to show a passport or “papers” in the form of a permit. Otherwise you’ll be fined. Your travel is restricted. That is most definitely Stalinist and a huge government over reach. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Lots of places need permits. Taxis need a permit to access the bus lane. They can access it and you can’t. You are not seriously suggesting the fact you can’t drive in a bus lane is a Stalinist take over are you? You need a residents permit to park in my street. No permit no parking your car. You can still walk down it and it is great for locals to be able to park when the races are on at Cheltenham. The local councils are just restricting who can drive cars in local areas. Locals can drive, people who aren’t local have to walk or take the bus. No one needs to show a passport. Banning people from travelling to see family, friends or to run basic errands is clearly not the behaviour of a free democratic country. At best it's laziness in not providing sensible, viable alternatives (such as reliable, affordable public transport). I don’t understand who is being banned? If you want to go see great aunt Gladys in Oxford then you can still go and see great aunt Gladys in Oxford. No one is going to stop you. " As long as you have a permit, otherwise you’ll be fined. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"When is the time to change the narrative from "It's not happening" to "It's happening but here is why it's good"? Yep. You called it "Exactly my point. People who show concern at government policy are shut down by being called wackos and the tin foil hat brigade. When in fact, they were right on the money. Just like the sheep in the Orwell novel, animal farm who were trained to bleat by the elite to silence any awkward questions or points raised at meetings. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Lots of places need permits. Taxis need a permit to access the bus lane. They can access it and you can’t. You are not seriously suggesting the fact you can’t drive in a bus lane is a Stalinist take over are you? You need a residents permit to park in my street. No permit no parking your car. You can still walk down it and it is great for locals to be able to park when the races are on at Cheltenham. The local councils are just restricting who can drive cars in local areas. Locals can drive, people who aren’t local have to walk or take the bus. No one needs to show a passport. Banning people from travelling to see family, friends or to run basic errands is clearly not the behaviour of a free democratic country. At best it's laziness in not providing sensible, viable alternatives (such as reliable, affordable public transport). I don’t understand who is being banned? If you want to go see great aunt Gladys in Oxford then you can still go and see great aunt Gladys in Oxford. No one is going to stop you. As long as you have a permit, otherwise you’ll be fined. " Let me get this straight - you think that only people with a permit are even allowed in those areas? You do realise it is a CAR permit? You won’t be allowed to DRIVE your car in the area if you don’t have a permit. No one is suggesting that you physically wouldn’t be able to enter them. You do understand the difference? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Keeping traffic out of cities and give people free transportation is stalinist control. Fuck me I've heard it all now 😂🤣😂" Forcing you to rely on a government controlled system is indeed Stalinist control. What happens when these public sector workers inevitably go on strike? People should just stay home? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"When is the time to change the narrative from "It's not happening" to "It's happening but here is why it's good"? Yep. You called it "Didn't expect it to change this quickly though | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"When is the time to change the narrative from "It's not happening" to "It's happening but here is why it's good"? Yep. You called it
Exactly my point. People who show concern at government policy are shut down by being called wackos and the tin foil hat brigade. When in fact, they were right on the money.
Just like the sheep in the Orwell novel, animal farm who were trained to bleat by the elite to silence any awkward questions or points raised at meetings. "Remember like Covid it was all for your own good.🤣🤣 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Keeping traffic out of cities and give people free transportation is stalinist control. Fuck me I've heard it all now 😂🤣😂 Forcing you to rely on a government controlled system is indeed Stalinist control. What happens when these public sector workers inevitably go on strike? People should just stay home?" All those years I had to have a license to drive a car and I didn't realize Stalin made it compulsive I believe I was issued with a birth cert so "they" would know I exist I even have to have a serial number in my fucking car too .... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Lots of places need permits. Taxis need a permit to access the bus lane. They can access it and you can’t. You are not seriously suggesting the fact you can’t drive in a bus lane is a Stalinist take over are you? You need a residents permit to park in my street. No permit no parking your car. You can still walk down it and it is great for locals to be able to park when the races are on at Cheltenham. The local councils are just restricting who can drive cars in local areas. Locals can drive, people who aren’t local have to walk or take the bus. No one needs to show a passport. Banning people from travelling to see family, friends or to run basic errands is clearly not the behaviour of a free democratic country. At best it's laziness in not providing sensible, viable alternatives (such as reliable, affordable public transport). I don’t understand who is being banned? If you want to go see great aunt Gladys in Oxford then you can still go and see great aunt Gladys in Oxford. No one is going to stop you. As long as you have a permit, otherwise you’ll be fined. Let me get this straight - you think that only people with a permit are even allowed in those areas? You do realise it is a CAR permit? You won’t be allowed to DRIVE your car in the area if you don’t have a permit. No one is suggesting that you physically wouldn’t be able to enter them. You do understand the difference?" Who the hell are local politicians, half of whom have just cancelled elections, to tell people where they can drive on PUBLIC roads which we pay for even though most of them look like Beiruit on a bad day. With all respect, fuck that shit ! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Keeping traffic out of cities and give people free transportation is stalinist control. Fuck me I've heard it all now 😂🤣😂 Forcing you to rely on a government controlled system is indeed Stalinist control. What happens when these public sector workers inevitably go on strike? People should just stay home? All those years I had to have a license to drive a car and I didn't realize Stalin made it compulsive I believe I was issued with a birth cert so "they" would know I exist I even have to have a serial number in my fucking car too ...." That comparison makes no sense. Today if you ask people to vote, how many people do you think would vote against requiring a driver's license? How many people in Oxford do you think would vote in favour of the restrictions which are being imposed? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Keeping traffic out of cities and give people free transportation is stalinist control. Fuck me I've heard it all now 😂🤣😂 Forcing you to rely on a government controlled system is indeed Stalinist control. What happens when these public sector workers inevitably go on strike? People should just stay home? All those years I had to have a license to drive a car and I didn't realize Stalin made it compulsive I believe I was issued with a birth cert so "they" would know I exist I even have to have a serial number in my fucking car too .... That comparison makes no sense. Today if you ask people to vote, how many people do you think would vote against requiring a driver's license? How many people in Oxford do you think would vote in favour of the restrictions which are being imposed?" I think you need to understand the local situation. Those restrictions would make no sense in Cheltenham so I wouldn’t vote for them here. However central Oxford is a different place. The streets aren’t really made for lots of cars so I would probably vote to restrict access to local residents cars if I lived in the area. Another example: if you take somewhere like Bourton on the Water which is just down the road then I would most certainly vote to restrict non resident cars if I lived there. It is overrun with tourists in the summer and basically becoming unliveable there. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Keeping traffic out of cities and give people free transportation is stalinist control. Fuck me I've heard it all now 😂🤣😂 Forcing you to rely on a government controlled system is indeed Stalinist control. What happens when these public sector workers inevitably go on strike? People should just stay home? All those years I had to have a license to drive a car and I didn't realize Stalin made it compulsive I believe I was issued with a birth cert so "they" would know I exist I even have to have a serial number in my fucking car too .... That comparison makes no sense. Today if you ask people to vote, how many people do you think would vote against requiring a driver's license? How many people in Oxford do you think would vote in favour of the restrictions which are being imposed? I think you need to understand the local situation. Those restrictions would make no sense in Cheltenham so I wouldn’t vote for them here. However central Oxford is a different place. The streets aren’t really made for lots of cars so I would probably vote to restrict access to local residents cars if I lived in the area. Another example: if you take somewhere like Bourton on the Water which is just down the road then I would most certainly vote to restrict non resident cars if I lived there. It is overrun with tourists in the summer and basically becoming unliveable there." 1) Do you think that these restrictions will be limited to the high traffic areas like you mentioned and wouldn't be expanded to other places? 2) Why do you think people choose these roads in spite of so much traffic? Just for fun? 3) If the government wants to restrict people from using certain roads, shouldn't they also reduce road tax for all the cars accordingly? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Keeping traffic out of cities and give people free transportation is stalinist control. Fuck me I've heard it all now 😂🤣😂 Forcing you to rely on a government controlled system is indeed Stalinist control. What happens when these public sector workers inevitably go on strike? People should just stay home? All those years I had to have a license to drive a car and I didn't realize Stalin made it compulsive I believe I was issued with a birth cert so "they" would know I exist I even have to have a serial number in my fucking car too .... That comparison makes no sense. Today if you ask people to vote, how many people do you think would vote against requiring a driver's license? How many people in Oxford do you think would vote in favour of the restrictions which are being imposed? I think you need to understand the local situation. Those restrictions would make no sense in Cheltenham so I wouldn’t vote for them here. However central Oxford is a different place. The streets aren’t really made for lots of cars so I would probably vote to restrict access to local residents cars if I lived in the area. Another example: if you take somewhere like Bourton on the Water which is just down the road then I would most certainly vote to restrict non resident cars if I lived there. It is overrun with tourists in the summer and basically becoming unliveable there. 1) Do you think that these restrictions will be limited to the high traffic areas like you mentioned and wouldn't be expanded to other places? 2) Why do you think people choose these roads in spite of so much traffic? Just for fun? 3) If the government wants to restrict people from using certain roads, shouldn't they also reduce road tax for all the cars accordingly?" 1 no 2 because it's so expensive to use public transport 3 lol | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's so obviously just another cash cow." Free public transport is a cash cow how 🙄 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Lots of places need permits. Taxis need a permit to access the bus lane. They can access it and you can’t. You are not seriously suggesting the fact you can’t drive in a bus lane is a Stalinist take over are you? You need a residents permit to park in my street. No permit no parking your car. You can still walk down it and it is great for locals to be able to park when the races are on at Cheltenham. The local councils are just restricting who can drive cars in local areas. Locals can drive, people who aren’t local have to walk or take the bus. No one needs to show a passport. Banning people from travelling to see family, friends or to run basic errands is clearly not the behaviour of a free democratic country. At best it's laziness in not providing sensible, viable alternatives (such as reliable, affordable public transport). I don’t understand who is being banned? If you want to go see great aunt Gladys in Oxford then you can still go and see great aunt Gladys in Oxford. No one is going to stop you. As long as you have a permit, otherwise you’ll be fined. Let me get this straight - you think that only people with a permit are even allowed in those areas? You do realise it is a CAR permit? You won’t be allowed to DRIVE your car in the area if you don’t have a permit. No one is suggesting that you physically wouldn’t be able to enter them. You do understand the difference?" Please dont patronise. The permit allows 100 days in any 300. That’s a restriction of movement by car. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Keeping traffic out of cities and give people free transportation is stalinist control. Fuck me I've heard it all now 😂🤣😂 Forcing you to rely on a government controlled system is indeed Stalinist control. What happens when these public sector workers inevitably go on strike? People should just stay home? All those years I had to have a license to drive a car and I didn't realize Stalin made it compulsive I believe I was issued with a birth cert so "they" would know I exist I even have to have a serial number in my fucking car too .... That comparison makes no sense. Today if you ask people to vote, how many people do you think would vote against requiring a driver's license? How many people in Oxford do you think would vote in favour of the restrictions which are being imposed? I think you need to understand the local situation. Those restrictions would make no sense in Cheltenham so I wouldn’t vote for them here. However central Oxford is a different place. The streets aren’t really made for lots of cars so I would probably vote to restrict access to local residents cars if I lived in the area. Another example: if you take somewhere like Bourton on the Water which is just down the road then I would most certainly vote to restrict non resident cars if I lived there. It is overrun with tourists in the summer and basically becoming unliveable there." So people buy houses in tourist hotspots and then moan about tourists using public roads and want to ban tourists. Next, when no tourists come, they’ll be loaning that all the shops, restaurants and other businesses close down because tourists don’t come anymore. Then all the empty buildings end up as HMO’s and tourists wouldn’t come if you paid them and all the other residents sell up and move elsewhere. Be careful what you wish for. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Lots of places need permits. Taxis need a permit to access the bus lane. They can access it and you can’t. You are not seriously suggesting the fact you can’t drive in a bus lane is a Stalinist take over are you? You need a residents permit to park in my street. No permit no parking your car. You can still walk down it and it is great for locals to be able to park when the races are on at Cheltenham. The local councils are just restricting who can drive cars in local areas. Locals can drive, people who aren’t local have to walk or take the bus. No one needs to show a passport. Banning people from travelling to see family, friends or to run basic errands is clearly not the behaviour of a free democratic country. At best it's laziness in not providing sensible, viable alternatives (such as reliable, affordable public transport). I don’t understand who is being banned? If you want to go see great aunt Gladys in Oxford then you can still go and see great aunt Gladys in Oxford. No one is going to stop you. As long as you have a permit, otherwise you’ll be fined. Let me get this straight - you think that only people with a permit are even allowed in those areas? You do realise it is a CAR permit? You won’t be allowed to DRIVE your car in the area if you don’t have a permit. No one is suggesting that you physically wouldn’t be able to enter them. You do understand the difference? Please dont patronise. The permit allows 100 days in any 300. That’s a restriction of movement by car. " I am not patronising. You repeatedly implied that this was a fundamental restriction on movement. It simply is not. I go back to my original point. I genuinely don’t understand why this is such a touch stone for people. I get that cars are totemic for so many people. I love my car too. I detest public transport. It’s slow, unreliable and expensive. I have no doubt this will turn into a cash cow. But I don’t understand how not being able to drive a car somewhere is somehow seen as the end of civilization. The vitriol and anger of many (stazi, Stalinist, etc) seems excessive. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why is everyone calling it Stalinist. Was Uncle Joe the only one to control his subjects. " It’s a good point, no he wasn’t. It’s just a figure of speech used to compare our current (and previous) government to Stalin's politics. It didn’t end well for them. It seems to rile some here though for some reason. Maybe they like his politics. The regular sound of bleating “2 legs good, four wheels bad” these days is drowning out common sense. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Lots of places need permits. Taxis need a permit to access the bus lane. They can access it and you can’t. You are not seriously suggesting the fact you can’t drive in a bus lane is a Stalinist take over are you? You need a residents permit to park in my street. No permit no parking your car. You can still walk down it and it is great for locals to be able to park when the races are on at Cheltenham. The local councils are just restricting who can drive cars in local areas. Locals can drive, people who aren’t local have to walk or take the bus. No one needs to show a passport. Banning people from travelling to see family, friends or to run basic errands is clearly not the behaviour of a free democratic country. At best it's laziness in not providing sensible, viable alternatives (such as reliable, affordable public transport). I don’t understand who is being banned? If you want to go see great aunt Gladys in Oxford then you can still go and see great aunt Gladys in Oxford. No one is going to stop you. As long as you have a permit, otherwise you’ll be fined. Let me get this straight - you think that only people with a permit are even allowed in those areas? You do realise it is a CAR permit? You won’t be allowed to DRIVE your car in the area if you don’t have a permit. No one is suggesting that you physically wouldn’t be able to enter them. You do understand the difference? Please dont patronise. The permit allows 100 days in any 300. That’s a restriction of movement by car. I am not patronising. You repeatedly implied that this was a fundamental restriction on movement. It simply is not. I go back to my original point. I genuinely don’t understand why this is such a touch stone for people. I get that cars are totemic for so many people. I love my car too. I detest public transport. It’s slow, unreliable and expensive. I have no doubt this will turn into a cash cow. But I don’t understand how not being able to drive a car somewhere is somehow seen as the end of civilization. The vitriol and anger of many (stazi, Stalinist, etc) seems excessive. " If you can’t understand how a restriction is restrictive, even though you’ve highlighted all the consequences perfectly in your response, I can only assume you are being deliberately obtuse. It’s not the end of civilisation, no one says it is, those are your words. My words were that its government over reach. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Lots of places need permits. Taxis need a permit to access the bus lane. They can access it and you can’t. You are not seriously suggesting the fact you can’t drive in a bus lane is a Stalinist take over are you? You need a residents permit to park in my street. No permit no parking your car. You can still walk down it and it is great for locals to be able to park when the races are on at Cheltenham. The local councils are just restricting who can drive cars in local areas. Locals can drive, people who aren’t local have to walk or take the bus. No one needs to show a passport. Banning people from travelling to see family, friends or to run basic errands is clearly not the behaviour of a free democratic country. At best it's laziness in not providing sensible, viable alternatives (such as reliable, affordable public transport). I don’t understand who is being banned? If you want to go see great aunt Gladys in Oxford then you can still go and see great aunt Gladys in Oxford. No one is going to stop you. As long as you have a permit, otherwise you’ll be fined. Let me get this straight - you think that only people with a permit are even allowed in those areas? You do realise it is a CAR permit? You won’t be allowed to DRIVE your car in the area if you don’t have a permit. No one is suggesting that you physically wouldn’t be able to enter them. You do understand the difference? Please dont patronise. The permit allows 100 days in any 300. That’s a restriction of movement by car. I am not patronising. You repeatedly implied that this was a fundamental restriction on movement. It simply is not. I go back to my original point. I genuinely don’t understand why this is such a touch stone for people. I get that cars are totemic for so many people. I love my car too. I detest public transport. It’s slow, unreliable and expensive. I have no doubt this will turn into a cash cow. But I don’t understand how not being able to drive a car somewhere is somehow seen as the end of civilization. The vitriol and anger of many (stazi, Stalinist, etc) seems excessive. If you can’t understand how a restriction is restrictive, even though you’ve highlighted all the consequences perfectly in your response, I can only assume you are being deliberately obtuse. It’s not the end of civilisation, no one says it is, those are your words. My words were that its government over reach. " The world is full of restrictions. I don’t see why this particular one engenders such passions. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Lots of places need permits. Taxis need a permit to access the bus lane. They can access it and you can’t. You are not seriously suggesting the fact you can’t drive in a bus lane is a Stalinist take over are you? You need a residents permit to park in my street. No permit no parking your car. You can still walk down it and it is great for locals to be able to park when the races are on at Cheltenham. The local councils are just restricting who can drive cars in local areas. Locals can drive, people who aren’t local have to walk or take the bus. No one needs to show a passport. Banning people from travelling to see family, friends or to run basic errands is clearly not the behaviour of a free democratic country. At best it's laziness in not providing sensible, viable alternatives (such as reliable, affordable public transport). I don’t understand who is being banned? If you want to go see great aunt Gladys in Oxford then you can still go and see great aunt Gladys in Oxford. No one is going to stop you. As long as you have a permit, otherwise you’ll be fined. Let me get this straight - you think that only people with a permit are even allowed in those areas? You do realise it is a CAR permit? You won’t be allowed to DRIVE your car in the area if you don’t have a permit. No one is suggesting that you physically wouldn’t be able to enter them. You do understand the difference? Please dont patronise. The permit allows 100 days in any 300. That’s a restriction of movement by car. I am not patronising. You repeatedly implied that this was a fundamental restriction on movement. It simply is not. I go back to my original point. I genuinely don’t understand why this is such a touch stone for people. I get that cars are totemic for so many people. I love my car too. I detest public transport. It’s slow, unreliable and expensive. I have no doubt this will turn into a cash cow. But I don’t understand how not being able to drive a car somewhere is somehow seen as the end of civilization. The vitriol and anger of many (stazi, Stalinist, etc) seems excessive. If you can’t understand how a restriction is restrictive, even though you’ve highlighted all the consequences perfectly in your response, I can only assume you are being deliberately obtuse. It’s not the end of civilisation, no one says it is, those are your words. My words were that its government over reach. " Do you not think that "Stalinist", "work of the Stazi", comparing people to the sheep in Animal Farm, just a little hyperbolic? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Is it the idea that you shouldn’t have all your amenities in your local vicinity that people object to or is it the restriction on car use? If the car permit idea was dropped and more areas were pedestrianised which naturally restricted the benefit of using cars versus walking short distances then would that make this concept seem less over reachy?" You mean like the town centres that already exist that are like ghost towns? Or the thriving out of town shopping malls that you can drive into restriction free? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Lots of places need permits. Taxis need a permit to access the bus lane. They can access it and you can’t. You are not seriously suggesting the fact you can’t drive in a bus lane is a Stalinist take over are you? You need a residents permit to park in my street. No permit no parking your car. You can still walk down it and it is great for locals to be able to park when the races are on at Cheltenham. The local councils are just restricting who can drive cars in local areas. Locals can drive, people who aren’t local have to walk or take the bus. No one needs to show a passport. Banning people from travelling to see family, friends or to run basic errands is clearly not the behaviour of a free democratic country. At best it's laziness in not providing sensible, viable alternatives (such as reliable, affordable public transport). I don’t understand who is being banned? If you want to go see great aunt Gladys in Oxford then you can still go and see great aunt Gladys in Oxford. No one is going to stop you. As long as you have a permit, otherwise you’ll be fined. Let me get this straight - you think that only people with a permit are even allowed in those areas? You do realise it is a CAR permit? You won’t be allowed to DRIVE your car in the area if you don’t have a permit. No one is suggesting that you physically wouldn’t be able to enter them. You do understand the difference? Please dont patronise. The permit allows 100 days in any 300. That’s a restriction of movement by car. I am not patronising. You repeatedly implied that this was a fundamental restriction on movement. It simply is not. I go back to my original point. I genuinely don’t understand why this is such a touch stone for people. I get that cars are totemic for so many people. I love my car too. I detest public transport. It’s slow, unreliable and expensive. I have no doubt this will turn into a cash cow. But I don’t understand how not being able to drive a car somewhere is somehow seen as the end of civilization. The vitriol and anger of many (stazi, Stalinist, etc) seems excessive. If you can’t understand how a restriction is restrictive, even though you’ve highlighted all the consequences perfectly in your response, I can only assume you are being deliberately obtuse. It’s not the end of civilisation, no one says it is, those are your words. My words were that its government over reach. Do you not think that "Stalinist", "work of the Stazi", comparing people to the sheep in Animal Farm, just a little hyperbolic?" Perhaps. The sheep a metaphoric, but I guess you know that. Now I know you may not be guilty of this, but I started the thread to highlight the fact that when people on these forums said that fifteen minute cities were coming, they were labelled as wackos, tin foil hat brigade, antivaxxers and all sorts of nonsense. Well, here we are, a couple of years down the line and 15 min cities are here in 2026. Exactly as the “wackos” predicted. I don’t see many on this forum who were quick to label them wackos agree, I just see them deflecting. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Is it the idea that you shouldn’t have all your amenities in your local vicinity that people object to or is it the restriction on car use? If the car permit idea was dropped and more areas were pedestrianised which naturally restricted the benefit of using cars versus walking short distances then would that make this concept seem less over reachy? You mean like the town centres that already exist that are like ghost towns? Or the thriving out of town shopping malls that you can drive into restriction free? " Still don’t see the issue. Shop locally and the town centres will thrive. Walk or cycle there and your health improves. I have just been to the optician. Walked a mile and a half each way. 20 minutes each way maximum. Slightly more expensive than Specsavers but much less hassle. I was the only person walking in the horizontal rain but everyone else seems a bit soft these days. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Is it the idea that you shouldn’t have all your amenities in your local vicinity that people object to or is it the restriction on car use? If the car permit idea was dropped and more areas were pedestrianised which naturally restricted the benefit of using cars versus walking short distances then would that make this concept seem less over reachy? You mean like the town centres that already exist that are like ghost towns? Or the thriving out of town shopping malls that you can drive into restriction free? Still don’t see the issue. Shop locally and the town centres will thrive. Walk or cycle there and your health improves. I have just been to the optician. Walked a mile and a half each way. 20 minutes each way maximum. Slightly more expensive than Specsavers but much less hassle. I was the only person walking in the horizontal rain but everyone else seems a bit soft these days." Yes, society needs more walking in the horizontal rain for the good of people and town centres. Meanwhile, back in the real world I’ll give that a miss. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Is it the idea that you shouldn’t have all your amenities in your local vicinity that people object to or is it the restriction on car use? If the car permit idea was dropped and more areas were pedestrianised which naturally restricted the benefit of using cars versus walking short distances then would that make this concept seem less over reachy? You mean like the town centres that already exist that are like ghost towns? Or the thriving out of town shopping malls that you can drive into restriction free? " My understanding of the 15 minute concept is that it includes everything you need locally. As far as I am aware out of town shopping centres don’t include schools, hospitals, houses, old people’s homes and only have a limited number of shops. Plus they are not local by definition - they are _out_ of town. My original question still stands: is it the concept people dont like or is it related to car restrictions? I would say that Cheltenham probably fulfils the characteristics of a 15 minute environment. _Everything_ I need for daily life is walkable. It’s a great place to live. Why would I want to get in a car and schlep miles away to sit in a traffic jams to go to an out of town shopping centre? If more places were like here then that seems like a good thing to me. Hence why I don’t understand the animosity. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Is it the idea that you shouldn’t have all your amenities in your local vicinity that people object to or is it the restriction on car use? If the car permit idea was dropped and more areas were pedestrianised which naturally restricted the benefit of using cars versus walking short distances then would that make this concept seem less over reachy? You mean like the town centres that already exist that are like ghost towns? Or the thriving out of town shopping malls that you can drive into restriction free? Still don’t see the issue. Shop locally and the town centres will thrive. Walk or cycle there and your health improves. I have just been to the optician. Walked a mile and a half each way. 20 minutes each way maximum. Slightly more expensive than Specsavers but much less hassle. I was the only person walking in the horizontal rain but everyone else seems a bit soft these days. Yes, society needs more walking in the horizontal rain for the good of people and town centres. Meanwhile, back in the real world I’ll give that a miss. " So you would really have started your car for a mile and a half journey? Then fought through traffic and probably not got a parking space in the 5 bays near the optician? Ruining the car engine and hardly any quicker while adding to the congestion problem and having to walk in the rain anyway from the parking. Seems mad to me. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Is it the idea that you shouldn’t have all your amenities in your local vicinity that people object to or is it the restriction on car use? If the car permit idea was dropped and more areas were pedestrianised which naturally restricted the benefit of using cars versus walking short distances then would that make this concept seem less over reachy? You mean like the town centres that already exist that are like ghost towns? Or the thriving out of town shopping malls that you can drive into restriction free? Still don’t see the issue. Shop locally and the town centres will thrive. Walk or cycle there and your health improves. I have just been to the optician. Walked a mile and a half each way. 20 minutes each way maximum. Slightly more expensive than Specsavers but much less hassle. I was the only person walking in the horizontal rain but everyone else seems a bit soft these days. Yes, society needs more walking in the horizontal rain for the good of people and town centres. Meanwhile, back in the real world I’ll give that a miss. So you would really have started your car for a mile and a half journey? Then fought through traffic and probably not got a parking space in the 5 bays near the optician? Ruining the car engine and hardly any quicker while adding to the congestion problem and having to walk in the rain anyway from the parking. Seems mad to me." Absolutely yes, I would not have set out walking in the horrendous weather you described. That seems mad to me, but hey ho, we are all different. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So, all those who called people conspiracy nuts and told them to put their tin foil hats on when they referred to 15 min cities, the Birmingham mail and the mirror have interesting articles you might want to read through and digest. " Here’s what Oxford Council have to say about it. I think the Brum Mail is spinning it quite hard! https://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/transport-and-travel/connecting-oxfordshire/oxford-traffic-filters | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Is it the idea that you shouldn’t have all your amenities in your local vicinity that people object to or is it the restriction on car use? If the car permit idea was dropped and more areas were pedestrianised which naturally restricted the benefit of using cars versus walking short distances then would that make this concept seem less over reachy? You mean like the town centres that already exist that are like ghost towns? Or the thriving out of town shopping malls that you can drive into restriction free? My understanding of the 15 minute concept is that it includes everything you need locally. As far as I am aware out of town shopping centres don’t include schools, hospitals, houses, old people’s homes and only have a limited number of shops. Plus they are not local by definition - they are _out_ of town. My original question still stands: is it the concept people dont like or is it related to car restrictions? I would say that Cheltenham probably fulfils the characteristics of a 15 minute environment. _Everything_ I need for daily life is walkable. It’s a great place to live. Why would I want to get in a car and schlep miles away to sit in a traffic jams to go to an out of town shopping centre? If more places were like here then that seems like a good thing to me. Hence why I don’t understand the animosity." I currently live in an area that would be classed as a 15 minute city and I love the convenience and being able to access what I need without having to rely on a vehicle. So yes, I support the concept of providing amenities closer to housing developments to minimise car dependency. My objection is that there are times one must leave their own area to visit friends/family or to access something that isn't available in their own area. People shouldn't be penalised or criminalised for this necessity which is what Oxfordshire councils proposals amount to. The concept of a 15 minute city is provide individuals with the choice to use amenities closer to them not to forcibly restrict their freedom of movement. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Is it the idea that you shouldn’t have all your amenities in your local vicinity that people object to or is it the restriction on car use? If the car permit idea was dropped and more areas were pedestrianised which naturally restricted the benefit of using cars versus walking short distances then would that make this concept seem less over reachy? You mean like the town centres that already exist that are like ghost towns? Or the thriving out of town shopping malls that you can drive into restriction free? My understanding of the 15 minute concept is that it includes everything you need locally. As far as I am aware out of town shopping centres don’t include schools, hospitals, houses, old people’s homes and only have a limited number of shops. Plus they are not local by definition - they are _out_ of town. My original question still stands: is it the concept people dont like or is it related to car restrictions? I would say that Cheltenham probably fulfils the characteristics of a 15 minute environment. _Everything_ I need for daily life is walkable. It’s a great place to live. Why would I want to get in a car and schlep miles away to sit in a traffic jams to go to an out of town shopping centre? If more places were like here then that seems like a good thing to me. Hence why I don’t understand the animosity. I currently live in an area that would be classed as a 15 minute city and I love the convenience and being able to access what I need without having to rely on a vehicle. So yes, I support the concept of providing amenities closer to housing developments to minimise car dependency. My objection is that there are times one must leave their own area to visit friends/family or to access something that isn't available in their own area. People shouldn't be penalised or criminalised for this necessity which is what Oxfordshire councils proposals amount to. The concept of a 15 minute city is provide individuals with the choice to use amenities closer to them not to forcibly restrict their freedom of movement." The irony is that I probably couldn’t drive to your house from my house without paying a permit today. My car falls foul of the ULEZ. You are currently living in one of these penalty zones that you object to. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Is it the idea that you shouldn’t have all your amenities in your local vicinity that people object to or is it the restriction on car use? If the car permit idea was dropped and more areas were pedestrianised which naturally restricted the benefit of using cars versus walking short distances then would that make this concept seem less over reachy? You mean like the town centres that already exist that are like ghost towns? Or the thriving out of town shopping malls that you can drive into restriction free? My understanding of the 15 minute concept is that it includes everything you need locally. As far as I am aware out of town shopping centres don’t include schools, hospitals, houses, old people’s homes and only have a limited number of shops. Plus they are not local by definition - they are _out_ of town. My original question still stands: is it the concept people dont like or is it related to car restrictions? I would say that Cheltenham probably fulfils the characteristics of a 15 minute environment. _Everything_ I need for daily life is walkable. It’s a great place to live. Why would I want to get in a car and schlep miles away to sit in a traffic jams to go to an out of town shopping centre? If more places were like here then that seems like a good thing to me. Hence why I don’t understand the animosity. I currently live in an area that would be classed as a 15 minute city and I love the convenience and being able to access what I need without having to rely on a vehicle. So yes, I support the concept of providing amenities closer to housing developments to minimise car dependency. My objection is that there are times one must leave their own area to visit friends/family or to access something that isn't available in their own area. People shouldn't be penalised or criminalised for this necessity which is what Oxfordshire councils proposals amount to. The concept of a 15 minute city is provide individuals with the choice to use amenities closer to them not to forcibly restrict their freedom of movement." The concept of a 15 minute city is just three words by wackos to fight the system Cities by definition will have all the amenities you need, London has always had a wonderful public transport system and what sane person would drive their car into it ? Offering free transportation is great and yet the wackos protest lol Of course there are the lazy cunts that park in the drop off/pick up spaces in Tesco because the official parking spaces are twenty paces farther away. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I liked the concept of the Mega Blocks in Mega City One from Judge Dredd / 2000AD. Everything you needed was in the block. 50,000 people or more in a single block. They had parks, entertainment, hospitals, even holiday parks. You could in theory be born, live and die, without needed to leave your block. Truly the 15-min city on steroids." And that would be the worst way to live one's life. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The world is full of restrictions. I don’t see why this particular one engenders such passions." It's a slippery slope. Just because there are some restrictions already in the world, it doesn't justify more restrictions. Before long, more and more cities will so the same. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And that would be the worst way to live one's life." Granted, it's not for everyone, agreed. So long as the choice exists for citizens to choose the lifestyle they desire. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Is it the idea that you shouldn’t have all your amenities in your local vicinity that people object to or is it the restriction on car use? If the car permit idea was dropped and more areas were pedestrianised which naturally restricted the benefit of using cars versus walking short distances then would that make this concept seem less over reachy? You mean like the town centres that already exist that are like ghost towns? Or the thriving out of town shopping malls that you can drive into restriction free? Still don’t see the issue. Shop locally and the town centres will thrive. Walk or cycle there and your health improves. I have just been to the optician. Walked a mile and a half each way. 20 minutes each way maximum. Slightly more expensive than Specsavers but much less hassle. I was the only person walking in the horizontal rain but everyone else seems a bit soft these days. Yes, society needs more walking in the horizontal rain for the good of people and town centres. Meanwhile, back in the real world I’ll give that a miss. " Horizontal rain brings back memories of me walking to school. Problem was that where I used to live it wasn't rain that was horizontal. It was hail stones.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Is it the idea that you shouldn’t have all your amenities in your local vicinity that people object to or is it the restriction on car use? If the car permit idea was dropped and more areas were pedestrianised which naturally restricted the benefit of using cars versus walking short distances then would that make this concept seem less over reachy? You mean like the town centres that already exist that are like ghost towns? Or the thriving out of town shopping malls that you can drive into restriction free? My understanding of the 15 minute concept is that it includes everything you need locally. As far as I am aware out of town shopping centres don’t include schools, hospitals, houses, old people’s homes and only have a limited number of shops. Plus they are not local by definition - they are _out_ of town. My original question still stands: is it the concept people dont like or is it related to car restrictions? I would say that Cheltenham probably fulfils the characteristics of a 15 minute environment. _Everything_ I need for daily life is walkable. It’s a great place to live. Why would I want to get in a car and schlep miles away to sit in a traffic jams to go to an out of town shopping centre? If more places were like here then that seems like a good thing to me. Hence why I don’t understand the animosity. I currently live in an area that would be classed as a 15 minute city and I love the convenience and being able to access what I need without having to rely on a vehicle. So yes, I support the concept of providing amenities closer to housing developments to minimise car dependency. My objection is that there are times one must leave their own area to visit friends/family or to access something that isn't available in their own area. People shouldn't be penalised or criminalised for this necessity which is what Oxfordshire councils proposals amount to. The concept of a 15 minute city is provide individuals with the choice to use amenities closer to them not to forcibly restrict their freedom of movement. The irony is that I probably couldn’t drive to your house from my house without paying a permit today. My car falls foul of the ULEZ. You are currently living in one of these penalty zones that you object to." And I opposed ULEZ too for the reasons that it indiscriminatly penalises people on lower incomes who cannot afford a compliant vehicle but actually NEED one. ULEZ is nothing to do with air quality - it's a stealth tax to plug the hole in TFL funding and could potentially pave the way for pay-by-mile driving. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Is it the idea that you shouldn’t have all your amenities in your local vicinity that people object to or is it the restriction on car use? If the car permit idea was dropped and more areas were pedestrianised which naturally restricted the benefit of using cars versus walking short distances then would that make this concept seem less over reachy? You mean like the town centres that already exist that are like ghost towns? Or the thriving out of town shopping malls that you can drive into restriction free? My understanding of the 15 minute concept is that it includes everything you need locally. As far as I am aware out of town shopping centres don’t include schools, hospitals, houses, old people’s homes and only have a limited number of shops. Plus they are not local by definition - they are _out_ of town. My original question still stands: is it the concept people dont like or is it related to car restrictions? I would say that Cheltenham probably fulfils the characteristics of a 15 minute environment. _Everything_ I need for daily life is walkable. It’s a great place to live. Why would I want to get in a car and schlep miles away to sit in a traffic jams to go to an out of town shopping centre? If more places were like here then that seems like a good thing to me. Hence why I don’t understand the animosity. I currently live in an area that would be classed as a 15 minute city and I love the convenience and being able to access what I need without having to rely on a vehicle. So yes, I support the concept of providing amenities closer to housing developments to minimise car dependency. My objection is that there are times one must leave their own area to visit friends/family or to access something that isn't available in their own area. People shouldn't be penalised or criminalised for this necessity which is what Oxfordshire councils proposals amount to. The concept of a 15 minute city is provide individuals with the choice to use amenities closer to them not to forcibly restrict their freedom of movement. The irony is that I probably couldn’t drive to your house from my house without paying a permit today. My car falls foul of the ULEZ. You are currently living in one of these penalty zones that you object to. And I opposed ULEZ too for the reasons that it indiscriminatly penalises people on lower incomes who cannot afford a compliant vehicle but actually NEED one. ULEZ is nothing to do with air quality - it's a stealth tax to plug the hole in TFL funding and could potentially pave the way for pay-by-mile driving." There is no potential to pay per mile. It’s already been announced. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This is likely to be another example of a reasonable concept being over-zealously and unreasonably applied by the little Hitlers who run our councils. However, the general population are so lazy that, however good an idea is, some form of enforcement is necessary as people won’t get off their backsides and walk to places unless forced to. Controlling people’s movement can only be described as over reach at best. This is a concept straight out of the stasi handbook. I no longer wish to live in this country if this is the level of state control on the public. " I work overseas, have done for years and absolutely love my career but I also love coming home, its the colour when coming into land and the smell when driving home from airport and the fabulous condition of our motorways. For all its faults, this is a great country to live. Out of curiosity, where would you live. For me, its here and a holiday home for winter sun. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"15 minute cities are in theory an answer to reducing congestion / pollution, providing services and amenities locally that encourages community bonds and socialising. The focus seems to be on shopping, this would play a part under the banner of services and amenities, but it is not the only part of the puzzle.. Doctors, dentists, vets, opticians would also be in that list. As I understand, many local communities are not being served by amenities that are useful and needed locally, so for me this is a no brainer, because 15 minute cities are not a defined space you can't move out of. " No one is arguing that amenities being close to where you live is a bad idea though. The fact is, they are not. Or at least not at the moment. The whole concept is nothing more than controlling people. It’s cars now, what next. In today’s papers, facial recognition is being rolled out country wide after the successful trials last year. Constant monitoring of the poulation is oppressive and in my opinion far too over reaching. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This is likely to be another example of a reasonable concept being over-zealously and unreasonably applied by the little Hitlers who run our councils. However, the general population are so lazy that, however good an idea is, some form of enforcement is necessary as people won’t get off their backsides and walk to places unless forced to. Controlling people’s movement can only be described as over reach at best. This is a concept straight out of the stasi handbook. I no longer wish to live in this country if this is the level of state control on the public. I work overseas, have done for years and absolutely love my career but I also love coming home, its the colour when coming into land and the smell when driving home from airport and the fabulous condition of our motorways. For all its faults, this is a great country to live. Out of curiosity, where would you live. For me, its here and a holiday home for winter sun. "That’s the million dollar question isn’t it. “Where at old you live?” The truth is I don’t know, but I’m certainly looking into it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This is likely to be another example of a reasonable concept being over-zealously and unreasonably applied by the little Hitlers who run our councils. However, the general population are so lazy that, however good an idea is, some form of enforcement is necessary as people won’t get off their backsides and walk to places unless forced to. Controlling people’s movement can only be described as over reach at best. This is a concept straight out of the stasi handbook. I no longer wish to live in this country if this is the level of state control on the public. I work overseas, have done for years and absolutely love my career but I also love coming home, its the colour when coming into land and the smell when driving home from airport and the fabulous condition of our motorways. For all its faults, this is a great country to live. Out of curiosity, where would you live. For me, its here and a holiday home for winter sun.
That’s the million dollar question isn’t it. “Where at old you live?”
The truth is I don’t know, but I’m certainly looking into it. "The old saying "be careful what you wish for, as it may come true" springs to mind. For me, the overwhelming factor for this country is healthcare. I'm lucky that my employer covers all my and my family healthcare needs, without it, I wouldn't work overseas. Even if you attended A&E, had to wait 3 days on the floor, no food, no drinks, you are still getting a fabulous deal. Myself and some colleagues paid for a ladies son to get medical attention last year, I can only guess how she must have felt knowing her lovely lad needed surgery but she didn't have the cash, must be a bloody nightmare, how lucky are we to have the NHS and all because of a chance of geography where we where born. We are all very, very lucky but most of us will never realise this until some things are taken from us. Hope you enjoy your new life abroad. I'll buy you a drink if we cross paths in the airport. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This is likely to be another example of a reasonable concept being over-zealously and unreasonably applied by the little Hitlers who run our councils. However, the general population are so lazy that, however good an idea is, some form of enforcement is necessary as people won’t get off their backsides and walk to places unless forced to. Controlling people’s movement can only be described as over reach at best. This is a concept straight out of the stasi handbook. I no longer wish to live in this country if this is the level of state control on the public. I work overseas, have done for years and absolutely love my career but I also love coming home, its the colour when coming into land and the smell when driving home from airport and the fabulous condition of our motorways. For all its faults, this is a great country to live. Out of curiosity, where would you live. For me, its here and a holiday home for winter sun.
That’s the million dollar question isn’t it. “Where at old you live?”
The truth is I don’t know, but I’m certainly looking into it.
The old saying "be careful what you wish for, as it may come true" springs to mind.
For me, the overwhelming factor for this country is healthcare.
I'm lucky that my employer covers all my and my family healthcare needs, without it, I wouldn't work overseas.
Even if you attended A&E, had to wait 3 days on the floor, no food, no drinks, you are still getting a fabulous deal.
Myself and some colleagues paid for a ladies son to get medical attention last year, I can only guess how she must have felt knowing her lovely lad needed surgery but she didn't have the cash, must be a bloody nightmare, how lucky are we to have the NHS and all because of a chance of geography where we where born.
We are all very, very lucky but most of us will never realise this until some things are taken from us.
Hope you enjoy your new life abroad.
I'll buy you a drink if we cross paths in the airport. "That’s very kind of you. There are plenty of European countries that have an NHS equivalent. I’m already European so relocating isn’t a problem. The NHS isn’t a reason to stay here. That being said, there’s nothing to stop these other countries following the UK’s lead in oppression! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"15 minute cities are in theory an answer to reducing congestion / pollution, providing services and amenities locally that encourages community bonds and socialising. The focus seems to be on shopping, this would play a part under the banner of services and amenities, but it is not the only part of the puzzle.. Doctors, dentists, vets, opticians would also be in that list. As I understand, many local communities are not being served by amenities that are useful and needed locally, so for me this is a no brainer, because 15 minute cities are not a defined space you can't move out of. No one is arguing that amenities being close to where you live is a bad idea though. The fact is, they are not. Or at least not at the moment. The whole concept is nothing more than controlling people. It’s cars now, what next. In today’s papers, facial recognition is being rolled out country wide after the successful trials last year. Constant monitoring of the poulation is oppressive and in my opinion far too over reaching. " I'm not sure how surveillance and ULEZ plays into 15 minute cities? Those things exists with or without 15 minute cities. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"15 minute cities are in theory an answer to reducing congestion / pollution, providing services and amenities locally that encourages community bonds and socialising. The focus seems to be on shopping, this would play a part under the banner of services and amenities, but it is not the only part of the puzzle.. Doctors, dentists, vets, opticians would also be in that list. As I understand, many local communities are not being served by amenities that are useful and needed locally, so for me this is a no brainer, because 15 minute cities are not a defined space you can't move out of. No one is arguing that amenities being close to where you live is a bad idea though. The fact is, they are not. Or at least not at the moment. The whole concept is nothing more than controlling people. It’s cars now, what next. In today’s papers, facial recognition is being rolled out country wide after the successful trials last year. Constant monitoring of the poulation is oppressive and in my opinion far too over reaching. I'm not sure how surveillance and ULEZ plays into 15 minute cities? Those things exists with or without 15 minute cities. " They’re all pieces of the jigsaw of government over reach. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"15 minute cities are in theory an answer to reducing congestion / pollution, providing services and amenities locally that encourages community bonds and socialising. The focus seems to be on shopping, this would play a part under the banner of services and amenities, but it is not the only part of the puzzle.. Doctors, dentists, vets, opticians would also be in that list. As I understand, many local communities are not being served by amenities that are useful and needed locally, so for me this is a no brainer, because 15 minute cities are not a defined space you can't move out of. No one is arguing that amenities being close to where you live is a bad idea though. The fact is, they are not. Or at least not at the moment. The whole concept is nothing more than controlling people. It’s cars now, what next. In today’s papers, facial recognition is being rolled out country wide after the successful trials last year. Constant monitoring of the poulation is oppressive and in my opinion far too over reaching. I'm not sure how surveillance and ULEZ plays into 15 minute cities? Those things exists with or without 15 minute cities. They’re all pieces of the jigsaw of government over reach. " there is no national government overreach on 15 minute cities, local councils can try and influence areas under their control but they already do this today. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'd expect at least a short precis of what someone thinks is valuable enough for me to disrupt my day, to leave Fab. Or else it's presumably not important or valuable. " You spend all day on FAB !!!! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Love the idea of them , places like NEOM in Saudi. Of course you can leave ! The idea is to make daily life convenient, save the planets resources and give people more free time... where you might travel . I always assume conspiracy theorists on stuff like this are just really badly informed, don't research other than Facebook or just brutally thick." Or just have a different opinion or are better informed than yourself ? 🤷 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Love the idea of them , places like NEOM in Saudi. Of course you can leave ! The idea is to make daily life convenient, save the planets resources and give people more free time... where you might travel . I always assume conspiracy theorists on stuff like this are just really badly informed, don't research other than Facebook or just brutally thick." Hmmmmm | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Love the idea of them , places like NEOM in Saudi. Of course you can leave ! The idea is to make daily life convenient, save the planets resources and give people more free time... where you might travel . I always assume conspiracy theorists on stuff like this are just really badly informed, don't research other than Facebook or just brutally thick. Or just have a different opinion or are better informed than yourself ? 🤷" No because they all point to some mysterious entity in government trying to control them when in reality the government have very little power. If you have information about the government trying to control us then please post it | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Love the idea of them , places like NEOM in Saudi. Of course you can leave ! The idea is to make daily life convenient, save the planets resources and give people more free time... where you might travel . I always assume conspiracy theorists on stuff like this are just really badly informed, don't research other than Facebook or just brutally thick." 👍 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Love the idea of them , places like NEOM in Saudi. Of course you can leave ! The idea is to make daily life convenient, save the planets resources and give people more free time... where you might travel . I always assume conspiracy theorists on stuff like this are just really badly informed, don't research other than Facebook or just brutally thick. Or just have a different opinion or are better informed than yourself ? 🤷 No because they all point to some mysterious entity in government trying to control them when in reality the government have very little power. If you have information about the government trying to control us then please post it " You're the one calling people thick so I'm sure you'll work it out for yourself!  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Always enjoy reading the ill-informed Outrage Brigade send themselves into a tizzy" Its not easy competing with the superior intellects on here but we try ! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Love the idea of them , places like NEOM in Saudi. Of course you can leave ! The idea is to make daily life convenient, save the planets resources and give people more free time... where you might travel . I always assume conspiracy theorists on stuff like this are just really badly informed, don't research other than Facebook or just brutally thick. Or just have a different opinion or are better informed than yourself ? 🤷 No because they all point to some mysterious entity in government trying to control them when in reality the government have very little power. If you have information about the government trying to control us then please post it You're the one calling people thick so I'm sure you'll work it out for yourself! "Yeah, there is none ..... you talk about sheep but what about the bloody cockerels ? Always misinterpreting noise as danger and feeling important for alerting everyone. Nobody wants to control you, not Elton Must or Keith Stammer is the slightest bit interested in watching or controlling you. The closest form of 'control' is way more subtle - the intelligentsia in senior positions at places like the BBC, the Guardian, and the big UK universities trying to control and redesign your culture and language to their post-communist agenda | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Love the idea of them , places like NEOM in Saudi. Of course you can leave ! The idea is to make daily life convenient, save the planets resources and give people more free time... where you might travel . I always assume conspiracy theorists on stuff like this are just really badly informed, don't research other than Facebook or just brutally thick." Neom, for those who haven't heard of it, has been an absolute disaster of planning and construction, costing trillions over many decades and now a monument to State hubris. If this is a model for 15 minute cities we're in more trouble than we thought!! https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/saudi-arabia-neom-the-line-mohammed-bin-salman-b2908541.html | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If this is a model for 15 minute cities we're in more trouble than we thought!!" If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If this is a model for 15 minute cities we're in more trouble than we thought!! If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle "As they say, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
