Blah Blah

Plough Man Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > He is only exercising his right to free speech. > Y'all don't have to gang up on him every time he > posts on the forum. And he doesn't have to lace every comment he makes with an underbelly of bigotry. It is a public forum, and if you want to play the FoS card, others have FoS to call him out every time he posts his in predictable tone.

If you can't see the derogatory and inflammatory elements in his comments Plough Man then you are as bad as he is.

Wow indeed.....Uncle just sank to a whole new level.

Yes, it is the lack of contrition that is the problem with his comments. Is that a suspending offence? Not sure it is. We shall see how it plays out but there are times where it feels as though Jeremy hasn't quite returned to the backbenches yet in his mind. He seems more willing to give interviews than he did when he was leader too.

Those racks look pretty good Malumbu. I can see lots of businesses installing those.

That may well be explained by people being able to work from home vs those who have to go to work. Being able to avoid public transport etc. Useful link though.

It is not a mindset to not want to put oneself at risk (whether the risk is real or imagined). It is common sense. No-one wants to be a victim of crime (there have been 41 street robberies in Peckham so far this year, 3 of which were in the vicinity of the canal walk). If you won't engage with the reasons why some people choose not to or can't cycle, then you are not going to create the conditions that may persuade them to do so. Anecdotal examples are just that, anecdotal. The fact is that we need all types of transport in London for all the reasons I alluded to above. I do most journeys by bicyle, but not when the weather is bad. Nor when my destination is too far away. And nor when I am going out to an occasion that means dressing smart, or doing something as a family. For all of those reasons, around 40 per cent of the journeys I personally make, can not be made by bicycle. The things that have made my journeys as a cyclist better though, are dedicated cycle lanes, the cycle boxes at the head of junctions, the cycle hire scheme (which really should be extended throughout all of London imo), integrated cycle routes and better cycle parking in well lit areas. I would also add that events like the annual London Freeride (cancelled this year because of covid) are also excellent ways to encourage people to try cycling in a fun way. So maybe more of those. Cycling takes effort, and it isn't always fun. Before people can get to cycling, they need to get on board with exercise. And that I think is another hurdle to increasing the uptake (but one that electric bicycles will mitigate once the price of them comes down).

And just to add that it is not just rain that makes cycling off putting, it is wind, cold, and sweating or getting oil on nice clothes, and nightime, because yes, a lot of people feel vulnerable at nightime. Be realistic malumbu. Cycling while an option for many people (some of whom do not currently cycle), is not an option for all occasions. So let's talk about integrated transport options instead, ones that reduce all the things we should be looking to reduce. Shaming people because they do not cycle is not one of them.

Weather is not an excuse, it is a reality. Safety is perhaps the best incentive to get people cycling but to pretend there is a limitless ceiling to this just isn't reality. London has seen an abundance of improvements for cycling over the past decades, from blue super highways to cycle boxes at the front of junctions. The cycle hire scheme has also been very successful. So we, as cyclists, can hardly say we are not being catered for. So where do I think focus should be? Well there are still many junctions that are still too tricky for a lot of cyclists and especially those who lack confidence or experience, so I think the focus should be on those, along with adding to cycle safe routes. None of that needs to happen by alienating other vehicles though. If we want a future where cycling becomes the choice of commuters, outside of times where motor vehicles or public transport is absolutely necessary, then it has to start with children. Children who are confident cyclists are probably more likely to be adult cyclists. Electric bicycles and motorbikes are coming though. Electric scooters are already here. It is with the arrival of motorised cycling that we might see a significant shift, but with that comes other challenges of course.

Passport to Pimlico comes to mind ;)

The health benefits may well be well known but we have seasons. Even hardened cyclists like myself do not like cycling in wind and rain and sometimes struggle to cycle in strong wind. Expecting a whole bunch of people to ditch their cars or public transport for that is just unreasonable. I challenge anyone to try arriving at work soaked through and see how their day goes. So, given that it is not practical nor reasonable for a lot of people to cycle, good transport management has to be about incentivising reasonable use of any mode of transport. It is never a binary thing, and I would argue that better investment in electric powered alternatives is probably the better way to go on this, if we want to reduce pollution. As for congestion, London is a city of 8 million people with another estimated 3 million people traveling in for work every day before the lockdown. All of our transport networks are limited by capacity (as anyone traveling at peak hours knows), so the problems are not as simple as saying everyone should ditch their cars and get on a bicycle. Infrastructure isn't keeping up.

That is so funny. But also not surprising. Trump is a narcissistic populist after all :D

Personally I think the design of masks is pretty poor Pugwash. A lot of people have different shaped and size ears, and faces too. As far as I can see, the masks on sale are a one size fits all design and I wonder if this has an impact on the levels of compliance too. Btw, I don't think anyone here is judging you for using a visor over a mask. It is quite clear that you fall into the exemption category and that you still try to do something to mitigate is to be praised. In fact, I think a lot of people with genuine exemption are using visors instead.

diable rouge Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > A Dutch journalist got into his Twitter account by > guessing the password was MAGA2020... :) Really? lol

It was an interesting debate if only for that reason, Trump being unable to bully his way through, shouting down any attempt from his rival to counter punch. Trump was unable to let go though until he had said everything he felt he needed to say, which for the most part was the mud slinging. The other difference is that this time round, Trump is not the incumbent, so trying to argue that Biden did nothing in the past as though Trump has done everything he promised he would do, is hollow. As for those who voted for Trump, a good number of them won't be doing so this time (including lifelong Republicans). That is why he is so behind in the polling in some key states. We shall see.

And that is the problem. A good number of those not wearing masks have no exemption from doing so. I would wager also that they outnumber those who do. That is the cause of resentment.

Visors are designed to protect eyes, not nose and mouth. The reason we are asked to wear masks is so that if we cough or sneeze, and are carrying the virus, the viral load we send out into the air is reduced. Visors are designed to protect the eyes, if you are coughed at and are more effective than glasses. That is why medical staff wear both visors and masks.

There is a great documentary series on channel five catch up here.... https://www.my5.tv/america-s-great-divide-from-obama-to-trump It is a reminder of how Trump was helped into power by many dynamics that he does not have the benefit of this time round, and the dangerous game played by Fox News and Brietbart, who pretty much set America on itself to get him there. It is also interesting to note that Trump is going about his rallies with exactly the same combative narrative he used against Hilary. Very little on policy, but plenty on the mud slinging and acerbic tone. I suspect that what many people want now is actual policy and a vision for America's future. They won't get that from Trump. One note of caution though. While Trump is behind in the polling, Biden is doing very little actual traveling and campaigning. Last time round, Hilary lost in places she should have won, but didn't go to on the campaign trail. Once again, Trump is doing the travelling, doing the rallies. In America, that matters. If Biden stands back too much, it might cost the Democrats again.

I think you illustrate perfectly how politics is often defined by the wrong decision being made, usually by people who are blinded by their own limitations and/or ambition. Hindsight is a wonderful thing of course, but outcomes are more often than not, predictable too.

The attacks on Sadiq will ramp up as the Mayoral Election approaches. The squabble on Tfl may well be used for political gain by the Tory candidate, even though transport in London has always been subsidised and you don't have to be the brightest button in the box to understand the loss of revenue from the pandemic reducing use. It strikes me as though Boris is deliberately trying to force Sadiq to raise local taxes in order to have something to attack him on. But there is also a sense of history repeating, with a central Tory government coming to loggerheads with elected Labour regional leaders over money. Is this the GLA and Liverpool council all over again? Thatcher's solution was to abolish regional government. We really are going to see fireworks I think when government begins the process of paying off the debt. Councils and the public sector have already been stripped back to the bone on central funding during Austerity Round 1. There is no room for further savings there.

And there in a nutshell is the problem with unenforced or unenforceable measures. The app is pretty much useless for this reason. Some people can't use it at all (lacking a modern enough phone to do so) and others refuse to use it. We are ridiculously adverse to enforcement.

This on Southwark Cyclists..... 'The closure of Peckham Rye to cars should extend all the way from Peckham Rye up through Rye Lane so that it's possible to get from Peckham High Street to Peckham Rye Park via Rye Lane without encountering cars.' .....is precisely the problem with single issue lobby groups.

So the council are using the London Streetspace Scheme as the excuse for this, even though there is no problem for pedestrians with social distancing on this stretch and nor it is cycle unfriendly.

Well said Peckhamrose. I would also add that forcing cars to go out of their way, burns more fuel, causes more pollution and nothing is more polluting than cars idling in traffic clogged up as increasing numbers are forced onto fewer roads. The southbound cycle lane works perfectly well. It is not an accident hotspot. Cycling Northbound has never been an issue either. Southwark might do better to address some of the disintegrating road surfaces instead, which are becoming a bigger hazard for cyclists and motorcyclists alike. Having run out of roads to put speed humps on, closing roads to general traffic seems to be their next fad.

Signed.