You are the carbon they want to reduce. It's not about drivers, it's not about money, that being a convenient side effect, it's about your liberty, they want you atomised, in the pod, eating the bugs, playing the video games. They don't want you to get married, they don't want you to raise kids, they don't want you to have a foreign holiday, or indeed any holidays at all. They just want you to live, consume and die. You are to these globalhomos of Davos little more than cattle, something kept in a pen and killed when the time is right.
The Ulez was nothing more than an entrepreneurial perversion of policy. The instruments of measure are controversial and predictive modelling is more so enthusiastically optimistic than based on reason. I've written an essay detailing multiple studies that show a barely perceptible impact on London air pollution and how this type of policy has a negative impact in an assortment of ways not related to air pollution on my stack.
Khan gets on well with Hidalgo (mayor of Paris who is even more of an ideolgue than he is) and both are members of C40, the boondongle for mayors around the globe to share best practice in buggering up cities. ULEZ is indeed a revenue filip dressed up as a moral crusade, but is also part of the 'war on the car" in which Khan is following Hidalgo.
During his tenure as mayor and oberleutnant of TFL there has been a proliferation of traffic jams caused by pedestrianisation of streets, cycle lanes, one way systems, traffic light sequencing to hold up traffic on certain routes, lane closures and inappropriate 20mph limits on some roads (e.g Park Lane), and the latest clogging scheme is the pedestrianisation of Oxford Street. (Stopped in 2018 when we voted against but now going ahead under a Labour council, Labour mayor and Labour government) Yet, a city is a living thing. It's arteries need to flow. For over ten years I have watched my city slowly dying. I think that process is about to accelerate.
I have driven in Mexico and India. Densley populated and anarchic - there may be highway code equivalents but the behaviour of everyone suggest no-one ever reads them - yet they work. Traffic flows albeit densley in places.
In Mexico City cops wait by certain traffic lights (in my day anyway) and seeing a likely mark (me) would allege some infringement. One never paid a bribe directly but offered a contribution to police welfare. That done you were on your way. It was about a pound at the then exhange rate. A lot cheaper than the congestion charge in London. Appalled at the corruption - I was young, naive and very English - I now see its benefits: a direct negotiation between citizen and agent in which rates were low enough to keep traffic flowing. I think I now prefer that to the extractive tyranny of the state.
Now he wants to pedestrianise Oxford St, like the pedestrianisation of town centres has worked anywhere else, once bustling market towns are now empty ghost towns full of charity shops and money laundering outfits that sell mobile phone covers and haircuts. Pedestrianisation has never worked anywhere and that's because it's not meant to. The C40 agenda is all about 'de-growth,' itself code for Marxism.
You are the carbon they want to reduce. It's not about drivers, it's not about money, that being a convenient side effect, it's about your liberty, they want you atomised, in the pod, eating the bugs, playing the video games. They don't want you to get married, they don't want you to raise kids, they don't want you to have a foreign holiday, or indeed any holidays at all. They just want you to live, consume and die. You are to these globalhomos of Davos little more than cattle, something kept in a pen and killed when the time is right.
... pay per mile is coming too
Was it ever anything else😡
https://open.substack.com/pub/emancipator1/p/air-pollution-in-england-with-a-focus?r=12mw6c&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
The Ulez was nothing more than an entrepreneurial perversion of policy. The instruments of measure are controversial and predictive modelling is more so enthusiastically optimistic than based on reason. I've written an essay detailing multiple studies that show a barely perceptible impact on London air pollution and how this type of policy has a negative impact in an assortment of ways not related to air pollution on my stack.
Khan gets on well with Hidalgo (mayor of Paris who is even more of an ideolgue than he is) and both are members of C40, the boondongle for mayors around the globe to share best practice in buggering up cities. ULEZ is indeed a revenue filip dressed up as a moral crusade, but is also part of the 'war on the car" in which Khan is following Hidalgo.
During his tenure as mayor and oberleutnant of TFL there has been a proliferation of traffic jams caused by pedestrianisation of streets, cycle lanes, one way systems, traffic light sequencing to hold up traffic on certain routes, lane closures and inappropriate 20mph limits on some roads (e.g Park Lane), and the latest clogging scheme is the pedestrianisation of Oxford Street. (Stopped in 2018 when we voted against but now going ahead under a Labour council, Labour mayor and Labour government) Yet, a city is a living thing. It's arteries need to flow. For over ten years I have watched my city slowly dying. I think that process is about to accelerate.
I have driven in Mexico and India. Densley populated and anarchic - there may be highway code equivalents but the behaviour of everyone suggest no-one ever reads them - yet they work. Traffic flows albeit densley in places.
In Mexico City cops wait by certain traffic lights (in my day anyway) and seeing a likely mark (me) would allege some infringement. One never paid a bribe directly but offered a contribution to police welfare. That done you were on your way. It was about a pound at the then exhange rate. A lot cheaper than the congestion charge in London. Appalled at the corruption - I was young, naive and very English - I now see its benefits: a direct negotiation between citizen and agent in which rates were low enough to keep traffic flowing. I think I now prefer that to the extractive tyranny of the state.
Now he wants to pedestrianise Oxford St, like the pedestrianisation of town centres has worked anywhere else, once bustling market towns are now empty ghost towns full of charity shops and money laundering outfits that sell mobile phone covers and haircuts. Pedestrianisation has never worked anywhere and that's because it's not meant to. The C40 agenda is all about 'de-growth,' itself code for Marxism.
You are so right about "ghost towns full of charity shops and money laundering outfits". Beautifully put.
Eeeeek!