petrol prices etc

[gregorach]

All may be valid arguments on their own but try doing it all together and much more besides from a different persons point of view and you will soon realise how ************** hard life is! (my asterix's)
Some people need to wake up and smell the coffee... oh sorry the dandelion coffee because real coffee has to be imported on those nasty poluting, oil guzzling ships that have engines and not sails...

Nobody's saying it's not hard, Al, but that doesn't change anything. There are people in this world dying for the simple lack of clean drinking water - the fact that their lives are hard doesn't make clear springs appear by magic, and the fact that your life is hard (and getting harder) won't bring the price of oil down. Reality does not owe any of us an easy life, especially not on terms of our choosing.

I find it odd that so many seem to be taking the poor availability of public transport as an unalterable fact of life, seemingly set in stone by the Gods, whilst simultaneously seeming to think that the availability of oil, or the long-term viability of car culture, can be influenced by wishful thinking. We certainly can change one of these things - it shouldn't be hard to see which.

We can change how we organise our lives, but, to quote the great engineer - "Ah cannae change the laws o' physics".

[greenorelse]

As for sail....... IN A TOWN ???????????

You have some very strange ideas, Big Al. That one really takes the biscuit!

[MKG]

Oh dear - yes, I'm guilty of using that bloody F word too. Apologies to MMM and everyone else (but I blame Dunc for starting it ).

It's really, really, really to the nth degree, interesting that the subject of horses has come up finally - the power source which kept us going for at least 800 years. It isn't a feasible proposition (or is it?) for all individuals to own horses given today's population, but the idea of horse-drawn public transport - especially in rural areas - is an attractive one.

Would it work?

Mike

EDIT: @ OJ - absolutely no reason for you to avoid this bit of the forum, where you are far from the only one who may have gone slightly OTT about any particular subject. In fact, I think your particular angle would be sadly missed. Carry on sticking your oar in, mate.

[greenorelse]

So, as vehicle fuel prices rise, what are those who spend a lot on it - those who feel they cannot live without a vehicle - going to do about it?

Getting angry and attacking people who highlight the issue has no effect whatsoever on the price of fuel, so please don't waste our time doing that.

Come on, 'get real', 'wake up and smell the coffee', be 'realistic', to quote some of the more affronted posters. What are your plans?

[oldjerry]

So, as vehicle fuel prices rise, what are those who spend a lot on it - those who feel they cannot live without a vehicle - going to do about it?

Getting angry and attacking people who highlight the issue has no effect whatsoever on the price of fuel, so please don't waste our time doing that.

Come on, 'get real', 'wake up and smell the coffee', be 'realistic', to quote some of the more affronted posters. What are your plans?

Well there IS no plan..if there was people probably wouldn't be so angry/frustrated etc. not with YOU,whom,in general I probably hardly disagree at all with, but with the confusion off long term aims/outcomes which may or may not come true(see above,I'd be interested in what you think),and genuine short-term being in the s--t.Maybe we could buy a bike and travel 10 or 15 miles to work,and build a shop within 2 or 3 miles,but not ths week,or month,and the problem is NOW.

[MKG]

So, as vehicle fuel prices rise, what are those who spend a lot on it - those who feel they cannot live without a vehicle - going to do about it?

Getting angry and attacking people who highlight the issue has no effect whatsoever on the price of fuel, so please don't waste our time doing that.

Come on, 'get real', 'wake up and smell the coffee', be 'realistic', to quote some of the more affronted posters. What are your plans?

The only real, coffee-smelling solution to the salvation of the earth, in my humble opinion, would be a programme of voluntary euthanasia followed up by compulsory extermination. The world would undoubtedly be better off without the human species. However, I happen to like the buggers so I may have to dilute my ultimate solution somewhat.

It appears that there are actually two threads running within this one; one is a discussion of viable, if short-term, solutions to our impending fuel problems, and the other is a more personal reaction to the problems already being felt by several of our board members. Confusing the two is inevitably leading to conflict.

Mike

[Big Al]

People used to live with very little transport apart from sail, animals and feet.

Sails in town was a reference to this above. People may have done this in the past but not now and some of use can't go back to this even if we wanted to as it is not feasible. I'd love to walk 1/4 mile again but can't. I'd love to drive an electric nissan leaf car [ £25k+] but can't. The law prohibits me using a horse and cart if I'm on my own.

All may be valid arguments on their own but try doing it all together and much more besides from a different persons point of view and you will soon realise how ************** hard life is! (my asterix's)
Some people need to wake up and smell the coffee... oh sorry the dandelion coffee because real coffee has to be imported on those nasty poluting, oil guzzling ships that have engines and not sails...

Nobody's saying it's not hard, Al, but that doesn't change anything. There are people in this world dying for the simple lack of clean drinking water - the fact that their lives are hard doesn't make clear springs appear by magic, and the fact that your life is hard (and getting harder) won't bring the price of oil down. Reality does not owe any of us an easy life, especially not on terms of our choosing.

I find it odd that so many seem to be taking the poor availability of public transport as an unalterable fact of life, seemingly set in stone by the Gods, whilst simultaneously seeming to think that the availability of oil, or the long-term viability of car culture, can be influenced by wishful thinking. We certainly can change one of these things - it shouldn't be hard to see which.

We can change how we organise our lives, but, to quote the great engineer - "Ah cannae change the laws o' physics".

Oh the poor darlings dieing of thirst. If they had bought into the consumer revolution then they would be able to buy the oil to power deep water wells..... Oh I forgot, many of them, live in oil rich countries who's dictators sell the oil to the western world or buy arms to oppress their people.

I'm not bothered if the price of oil comes down. My concern is the very imediate effect it is having on me and many like me and I don't have a choice to negate that effect short of over throwing the government to reduce the taxation.

Nor do I want or assume that I am owed an easy life whatever that is. Your comment is, at best disparaging and hateful. I do not choose to be a spacka on benefits and would much more like to contribute to society and plan for a more sustainable future but without better health I can't hold down any job at the moment let alone a decent job to get more money to be in a position to choose what to do such as walk, ride a bike or buy a smaller more earth friendly form of transport.

I don't think that wishful thinking can change anything but cars will survive, they may change shape, engine type, even run on auto rails but there are to many companies and people involved to see the demise of personal transport such as a car.

You really are living in a world of your own if you think we as a population can change the Public
Transport Situation (PTS). We are a car dependant culture in the western world whether we like it or not. In the 50's the majority of people used busses or bikes to get to work, shop, see friends etc. Now people use cars and so the busses stop running because they are a privatised company who have ot make a profit for their shareholders and not run by the local councils as they used to be.

To get a "usable" PTS busses will have to run from 5.30 am to 12 midnight as a very minimum on a 10 minute service time. They will have to be cheaper than cars and also people will have to stop being snobs and think using busses is a lower class thing. Roads will have to be re engineered to make it darn difficult to drive a car on compared with busses.

I don't know which one of your points we can change. Maybe you would like to enlighten us all on how you would or rather we all can change the right point.


As for doing something about the situation greenorelse, I don't know what i can do. I've wrote a lot on here about my personal circumstances maybe YOU can tell me what I need to do!!

[greenorelse]

I don't see gregorach as posting 'hateful' comments, Big Al. Indeed, I see his comments as very rational, fair and realistic, at worst blunt.

Anyway, you are answering some of the questions yourself, Big Al. Maybe not 'overthrowing' the government (though I'd approve: it would be a great lesson for them) but people will have to force the government into action. I can't see that happening, too many people, too much inertia, too much money.

And what do people do? They go an elect even more right-wing governments, both in the UK and Ireland....

Resources have to be re-directed but you know as well as all of us, that's not going to happen till those resources get very scarce, even if then.

Our countries are broke, more and more money is being syphoned into the pockets of the very rich and we're heading into multiple global brick walls. We're facing very interesting times.

I suggest that people (if they're able to see past the barrage of American propaganda) to look at how Cuba manages/has managed. We could learn from them how it is possible to manage and survive in a resource-scarce world. It is not a perfect society by any means but if we could only take the positive, lasting aspects from their experiences we will definitely cope. Their health service is a lesson for the rest of the world.

Less than full-bodied people lived across the world before personal fossil fuelled transport (remember, it's only been around for about a hundred years and only affordable to the masses for less than half of that) and they will do so again. Life is going to get harder but (hopefully) no harder than that currently 'enjoyed' in the majority world.

[gregorach]

I don't see gregorach as posting 'hateful' comments, Big Al. Indeed, I see his comments as very rational, fair and realistic, at worst blunt.

Thank you. Bluntness is something I have trouble with right enough... Never been much of a diplomat. But I think I'm going to try to back out of this thread now - my contributions don't seem to be being received in the spirit they were intended, which is doubtlessly due to poor communication on my part.

[greenorelse]

my contributions don't seem to be being received in the spirit they were intended, which is doubtlessly due to poor communication on my part.

Somehow, I think not...

[Susie]

I don't think Gregorach is being hateful (besides, he always looks so friendly in his avatar. Avatars can't lie? Can they?). I think one of the problems however is that it's coming across a little bit (unintentionally) as if the onus is on the people who are most affected by the problem to change. So while it's entirely true that we shouldn't take the lack of public transport as a given and should campaign etc, that's kind of putting one more responsibility onto someone who's probably got enough going on already, as well as having to deal with all the issues associated with the original problem. I know it doesn't change the facts of things running out, but, you know.

And also realistically, someone campaigning to get better public transport in an individual area (although obviously, go you & cheers to anyone who's doing it) is liable to have to spend a fortune leafleting, ages talking to everyone, hours losing the will to live in horrendous council meetings, and then end up with two more buses a day which they then lose in the next round of cuts. Not that it isn't worth doing because then there's eventually a cumulative effect/ change in society etc but, huge amounts of work for no quick outcome. And in the meantime they still need the car because kids still need to be picked up/ they still need to do the shopping/ get to work etc. But now they get to feel bad about it as well ;-).

I'll just go and see if I've got room for a horse - I think we're probably ok, I can get one in the back garden if he doesn't want to run about much (I'm joking. Look, smiley face ).

[gregorach]

I think one of the problems however is that it's coming across a little bit (unintentionally) as if the onus is on the people who are most affected by the problem to change. So while it's entirely true that we shouldn't take the lack of public transport as a given and should campaign etc, that's kind of putting one more responsibility onto someone who's probably got enough going on already, as well as having to deal with all the issues associated with the original problem. I know it doesn't change the facts of things running out, but, you know.

And also realistically, someone campaigning to get better public transport in an individual area (although obviously, go you & cheers to anyone who's doing it) is liable to have to spend a fortune leafleting, ages talking to everyone, hours losing the will to live in horrendous council meetings, and then end up with two more buses a day which they then lose in the next round of cuts. Not that it isn't worth doing because then there's eventually a cumulative effect/ change in society etc but, huge amounts of work for no quick outcome. And in the meantime they still need the car because kids still need to be picked up/ they still need to do the shopping/ get to work etc. But now they get to feel bad about it as well ;-).

Very good points Susie, thanks for making them. Like I say, I'm not much of a diplomat...

I've been thinking over it a little more, and I think part of the reason I get wound up about this sort of thing is that the real reason I've always been car-free is that for most of my life I simply couldn't afford one, and I just got used to it. I've done the 5-hour commute by awkwardly-timed rural bus to get to a rubbish low-paid job I hated. I've always had to organise my life in such a way that I could manage without a car, so I simply take that mindset for granted. It's only comparatively recently that I've been in a position that I could afford one, so I guess I get a bit prickly when people complain about the cost of keeping something I could never afford in the first place. There's probably an element of jealousy, maybe even resentment... Another flaw on my part.

I've been guilty of not considering how disconcerting and upsetting it must be to have something you're used to having and relying on taken away, and I can only apologise for that. Sorry everybody!

[Big Al]

........ so I guess I get a bit prickly when people complain about the cost of keeping something I could never afford in the first place. There's probably an element of jealousy, maybe even resentment... Another flaw on my part.

Does that include my wife.........

[yvette]

I have just read through this whole thread from the beginning - much food for thought.
Many people have mentioned the loss of the infrastructure that used to maintain rural communities. My greatgrandad was a shepherd, and lived in a tiny village. When I thought about his life, I realised how many of the things that used to make his life possible have now changed. Firstly, he lived in a tied cottage. While there are undoubtedly problems with this kind of arrangement, it did mean that he could and did live close to his work and could walk there and back, and usually get home for lunch. His work contract included, as well as the house, an area of 'potato ground' where he could grow veg. For my greatgrandma, there was a post office in the village, and a weekly grocery delivery so she didn't have to worry about getting heavy shopping home. There were hourly buses from the main road about a mile away but there were two buses a week through the village, timed to coincide with market days in local towns, with a bus conductress to help you on and off with your stuff. The mobile library came once a week. The village had a postbox and a phone box. The church and tiny church hall provided some social contact, and the vicar (who ran several tiny parishes) often popped in. The doctor would call if needed. My greatgran was always poor financially but she was able to stay in the village well into her 80s (after she was widowed - this was a condition of the tied cottage). Life was never easy, but it was possible for her.
Now almost all of these support systems gone.

[Millymollymandy]

Guys I just got a bit bored going through asterisking out the F words - there should be a swear word filter for that word but it appears to be not working, or maybe it's just been set up for the 4 letter word, not the one with 'ed' on the the end!

So can you please not use it as there are people of all ages reading this forum. Thank you.

Admin

Ah, sorry, that would be me... I tend to assume that if people care about such things they make sure their filters work, so if it's not filtered, it's OK. I shall restrain myself in future.

We do care and many variations of 2 four letter swear words are already in our word filter, only not the variant with 'ed' on the end. I have now changed it so any version of this word will be filtered.

In the 6 years or so of being a part of this forum I've never needed to edit this word out because the folk that use Ish just don't tend to use such strong swear words - on this site.