Congestion?

Question

As motorbikes and cyles do not cause as much congestion and are less polluting, would it not be beneficial to remove VAT from them, making them a more cost-effective choice? In fact, why can't govn begin subsidising them?

Answer 1

good question . . .

Answer 2

ricardo is correct, a LOT of congestion is caused deliberately by councils. My local council stated publicly that they cause congestion too lower overall speed. As if speed is be all & end all of accidents. Why is the Highway Code not taught at schools?

Answer 3

I have a better idea why don't those car hating councils recognize that motorists contribute billions of pounds to local and national government and start by removing those ridiculous speed bumps which slow traffic down, stop changing the timing of traffic lights,  much of the congestion is deliberately created finally bicycles do not belong on the road

Answer 4

In theory, what you suggest is a good idea. Unfortunately what your theory doesn't take into account is that motor cycles and scooters are probably just about the most dangerous form of road transport that exists.

Most motor cyclists are amongst the younger element of the population, and quite naturally they are predominantly not the safest drivers, being more concerned (if not obsessed), with travelling at speed, and trying to impress their friends, or just being noticed by bystanders.

Young people are also somewhat oblivious to the level and nature of risk they are taking when driving motor cycles, simply because that is generally a part of being young and having the feeling that life is all about taking risks.

I don't know what the actual statistics are, but I'm quite sure that the number of motorcyclists injured or killed in any given period, proportionately exceeds by far the number of car drivers and passengers injured or killed in the same period.

This is not to say that motorcyclists were necessarily more to blame, but simply that they are more vulnerable and are more likely to suffer seriously in the event of any accident.

In consequence, I would suggest that encouraging greater motorcycle ownership through the type of method you suggest, is as a natural consequence going to expose an even greater number of young people to the concomitant dangers.

This is not just an anti youth rant, I was a young motorcyclist myself in the past and know how much fun motorcycling can be.

As to the matter of causes of traffic congestion, most of what we are told by Central and Local Government is total codswallop! It is of course quite true that there are now more vehicles on the road, but there are now many extra miles of road that have been built also, and if the current number of road miles in existence, were being put to the use that was intended when they were built, a vast amount of the extra cars would have simply been absorbed into the road system.

If you take a look at almost any town, city, or even surburban area nowadays, you will find that the so called 'traffic planners' have been at work, and have devised extortionately expensive 'traffic calming' measures which have effectively reduced the actual amount of useable road space by an immense but incalculable amount. I would take a rough guess that the reduction must by now amount to at least 30%.

Take a look at your own area and take a note of how many local streets are now a part of some traffic scheme which has turned them into part of an impregnable one way system, or have become traffic free zones etc. Then take a look at many of the main thoroughfares through your area, and quite often these can be major A roads and bus routes. They will now have numerous pedestrian crossings, with and without control lights, countless central reservations often narrowing the road down from potentially 4 lanes to at best 2. There will also be various types of chicanes sometimes affecting both sides of the road simultaneously, and sometimes giving priority to traffic going in one direction only, thereby bringing the opposite traffic flow to a standstill.

Thjere are also those bus stop platforms that have been extended across at least one lane, inevitably forcing the bus to block up the flow of traffic behind it every time it stops.

Pavements have been widened even in places where there are hardly any pedestrians, and speed humps can now even be found on main traffic routes, which must be a confounded nuisance to emergency vehicles and buses who are also forced to slow down to a ludicrously slow speed in order to negotiate them safely.

Why has all this nonsense prevailed? It is solely to give our MP's and Councilors (and Mayors), the justification for their existance, and an excuse for their empire building.

Far too much nonsense is also talked about the need to reduce vehicle speed in the interests of pedestrian safety. For the most part, this is total rubbish. Very few pedestrians are injured by vehicles mounting the pavements. They are injured because they walk in the road in front of moving traffic.

The way to reduce the accident figures involving pedestrians, must therefore quite obviously be to prevent pedestrians from walking in front of cars and motorcycles.

Check out your local roads within a square mile or so of where you live. See if you can estimate how many road miles your area has lost to traffic.