It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by magicmushroom
Countries like Germany, France etc. have great transport systems, trains that run on time, that are clean and safe and are relatively cheap to travel on. So why cannot we do it in the UK,
Originally posted by magicmushroom
I hear what your saying Sminkey but again it comes down to extracting as much money as possible from the people.
There's no point either blaming accidents on all road users, many people that are killed and injured is of their own fault and not the fault of road users.
The fact of the matter is that each goverment has failed to use the money it has collected to build the system we need
As I said its not about pollution or congestion its about taxing us more and it wont improve anything.
Take the recent hike in tax on air travel its got nothing to do with pollution its simply more people are travelling by air so the goverment know's its easy money. If they really believed that increassing taxes would change peoples habits then there would be no tax increases would there.
Where do you think they will get tax from if people did stop drinking, smoking and driving. The goverment knows people will not stop hence the tax hikes.
were going back to victorian times when the rich could afford everthing and the poor nothing.
The UK has a growing elderly population most of whom are on state pensions
Incomes of pensioners less than 5 years over state pension age were 43 per cent higher than those where the head of the household was over 75 in 2003/04.
• Average gross incomes in 2003/04 were £244 a week for single male pensioners, and £197 a week for single female pensioners. The lower non-state pension income of women accounted for much of the difference.
• Around 62 per cent of pensioner households received occupational pension income in 2003/04 and around 11 per cent received personal pension income.
• Across all pensioner households, the average level of gross income from occupational and personal pensions rose in real terms from £23 per week (at 2003/04 prices) in 1979 to £88 per week in 2003/04.
with idea's such as these many will become prisoners in their own homes is that what you call progress for a rich modern country, no its a backward step.
And why do car users not need to go into a city, its just another form of transport, did not canals, railways go into cities.
I pay to use the roads so why should I be prevented from using them.
Tell you what Sminkey next time you go to the supermarket would you hand over part of your shopping after you had paid for it or you were told you had to pay to enter the store would you think thats ok?
I bet the goverment has a think tank on what they can put a tax on, like lets tax fat people, or lets tax people with pets, lets tax people who ride bikes, I'm sure they will have along list of how they can tax us more. Only those with money or those who will profit from these idea's think they are good.
This is an attack of the rich against the poor, for a wealthy person these taxes mean nothing they never have, they know all the scams to get the money back but for the masses it will mean sacrifing something else in order to pay.
Originally posted by magicmushroom
Sminkey , you believe all that global warming crap do you
its all the fault of those terrible motorists.
I cannot believe any inteligent person would swallow that crap.
D. James Baker, administrator of the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and undersecretary for oceans and atmosphere at the Department of Commerce under the Clinton administration, has said about human contributions to global warming (Washington Post , 11/12/97) that "there's no better scientific consensus on this on any issue I know—except maybe Newton's second law of dynamics."
Your anti car I take it
I know plenty of pensioners who are not rich
instead of quoting bogus goverment figures.
You gonna give up your computer, its made from plastic that pollutes, no your just like so many others who dont practice what they preach.
You want others to change their ways but are not prepared to do it yourself.
Originally posted by magicmushroom
Err Sminkey did you not call me ignorant
There is still no scientific proof of the real cause to global warming
Just rememebr who those scientists work for, there not there for our benefit, who pays them to do this work?
If mans activities were so damaging you would expect goverments to introduce stiffer measures but they are not are they.
Every new house built in the UK could have solar panels fitted but they dont, were building bigger and bigger engined cars that we dont need
You want less cars, well fines lets replace them with hundreds of thousands of fossil fuel burning buses, trains, trams. and taxis
thats your answer is it
If you take something away you have to replace it with an alternative, that alternative dose not exist.
And while the poor people will be on the buses the rich will still be in their cars and planes wont they, or do you have a thing about rich people as well as car users.
You see we can all do our little bit but we do not control the goverment or the money men.
Originally posted by magicmushroom
Sminkey your obviously confused re global warming well let me enlighten you.
This was the IPCC saying 'We told you so'
By Charles Clover, Environment Editor, in Paris
Last Updated: 2:42pm GMT 02/02/2007
Man 'responsible for global warming'
Seventeen years and a zillion computer hours after the world's climate scientists first ran the big calculation, they came up with the same estimate of the warming the planet will see by the end of the century if we go on pouring out greenhouse gases: 5.5°F (3°C).
If a single numeral can be accusatory, this one was. If there are any of our political leaders still snoozing at the back of this science lesson, they stand duly rebuked for not paying attention. In the past 17 years that mankind has squabbled and allowed its greenhouse gas emissions to go on rising the blanket of greenhouse gases that keeps the Earth warmer than space has increased by 7 per cent.
But when you calculate that radiative forcing potential of that seven per cent - its capacity to force the climate to warm - the increase since the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's first report in 1990 is 30 per cent.
That, Rajendra Pachauri, the chairman of the IPCC, pointed out yesterday gives an idea of the urgency of doing something now, before climate change gets beyond our control - and a sense that many opportunities have already been squandered.
The predicament we face if emissions go on rising along the "high" scenario envisaged by IPCC was put colourfully by one of its authors, Kevin Trenberth, of the National Centre for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado yesterday.
No doubt we will go on hearing grumbles from flat-earthers and paid-up sceptics among economists and in the oil industry,
but science is no longer on their side.
Originally posted by magicmushroom
What I want is for people to be told the truth the real truth not the lies and deception that has come out of the mouth of one of the most corrurpt organisations on this planet the United Nations.
And the plot is against all of us not just me, who's patronising now hey Sminkey.
Are you one of the thought police, an unelected unpaid mouth piece of those who tell you how to think, what to do and how to live, who's job it is to convince others of the grand plan.
as for not answering your questions I see you have made not real comments to my re our planet.
do you support the idea that we need to reduce the worlds population by foul means or fair to deal with global warming.
Are you willing to go that far for your masters.
You see again I have a realistic view I know our planet has endured mass exstinctions, that previous civilisations have been wiped out and this process will continue only the arrogant and the ignorant think they can stop it.
But it dose not matter to me we are only mere guests on this planet and when its had enough of us it will shake us of its back
but hey dont have nightmares about it, the worse than can happen is that we will die, so whats the big deal.
Originally posted by magicmushroom
Hey sminkey, no tax is going to stop me doing anything and it wont stop anyone else.
Its funny how you like to quote scientists when it suits you but you ignore what is the accepted view of the prehistory of our planet.
You seem pro the system so I assume you work on the inside.
Death is inevitable is it not or do you and your masters have a secret plan that your keeping stum on.
Life is bizzare, sureal and tragic is it not
Originally posted by magicmushroom
Sminkey what do you mean the prehistorical record does not show what I'm trying to claim.
What like the earth has never changed
You see whilst I'm am torn on this subject
Can we rely on the theories a few thousands individuals who have a conflict of interest.
But we cannot turn the clock back and cannot disinvent things we cannot go back to living in caves.
And its interesting is it not that if we are to believe the global warming theory and how concerned goverments are I have not heard of any governents willing to give up WMD's if there so concerned for our future.
So will it be you cannot have a car or smoke but you can fight and die in their wars, we can use all the products of war to pollute the earth, as we continue to do so.
Do you understand why people are suspicious and mistrustful of goverments and those in their pay as to their real intentions and motives.