RE Be citizens: pollute more!

The developments of forums and the site. Humor and conviviality between the members of the forum - Tout est anything - Presentation of new registered members Relaxation, free time, leisure, sports, vacations, passions ... What do you do with your free time? Forum exchanges on our passions, activities, leisure ... creative or recreational! Publish your ads. Classifieds, cyber-actions and petitions, interesting sites, calendar, events, fairs, exhibitions, local initiatives, association activities .... No purely commercial advertising please.
Philflam
I learn econologic
I learn econologic
posts: 18
Registration: 09/03/04, 11:56




by Philflam » 30/08/04, 22:03

"We had already passed the trap measures promoting the purchase of less greedy vehicles (news from 23/07), and now we are still being forced to consume and pollute more!"

Can someone enlighten me on this? : Rolleyes:
0 x
Christine
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 1144
Registration: 09/08/04, 22:53
Location: In Belgium, once
x 1




by Christine » 31/08/04, 11:22

Hello!

"We had already passed the measures favoring the purchase of less greedy vehicles


In June, all the media loudly announced that vehicles with high consumption would be taxed on the purchase and that the money from this tax would be redistributed in the form of rebate to those who would choose to buy a vehicle consuming little . This measure had the double advantage of dissuading (a little) those who choose "unnecessary" pollution (like the 4-4 in the city) and of giving a "boost" to those who can afford to pay "only" a small car.
But in July, the project was put aside because it led to a drop in fuel consumption and therefore a drop in state revenues.


now we are still being forced to consume and pollute more! "


The reduction in speed due to road prevention campaigns, the price of fuels, etc. led to a 1% drop in fuel consumption. Good news from the point of view of polluting emissions but disaster for the coffers of the State which are left with a fall in income and a hole of 1 billion Euros which have not returned.

How to fill this shortfall? The government believes it has found the answer: to increase fuel consumption.
How to bring back the consumption, which has bad press, without becoming unpopular? answer: make sure people don't notice it and make up a bogus trick.

And that's how, by forcing motorists to drive on lights, they are forced to consume more fuel.
What is perverse in this story is that:
1) The safety of other users is sacrificed on the altar of money and electoral popularity
2) We pass a varnish of good feelings (so-called security, etc.) on motivations not pretty-pretty. (And we take people for idiots.)
3) We still make the choice of oil instead of trying to get out of this spiral that we constantly denounce on econology.

I hope I have not been too long, but it seems important to me because it is representative of our society that walks on its head.
0 x
Christine
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 1144
Registration: 09/08/04, 22:53
Location: In Belgium, once
x 1




by Christine » 31/08/04, 11:31

Oops, I see that you are in Belgium, Philflam. You are not directly affected by these Franco-French measures. But maybe there are also aberrations in Belgium?
0 x
Philflam
I learn econologic
I learn econologic
posts: 18
Registration: 09/03/04, 11:56




by Philflam » 11/09/04, 08:05

Thank you very much Christine I see more clearly now. If this vision fits well with reality, it is purely villainous and revolting.

There must be aberrations of the kind in Belgium, but I am not aware of it, the Belgians being (to my knowledge) a little sleepy compared to the French and less subject to the popular uprising ... But I will take an example which seems critical to me: our highways are always free, people who do not have cars pay for the maintenance of well-battered roads by heavy vehicles ... In short, I think we can speak of an aberration ... but we do not hear (to my knowledge) any political party talking about a paid highway project. No doubt for fear of the virulent reaction of the road transport sector.

Yet
- this would significantly reduce traffic and encourage people to limit their trips and to carpool.
- that would encourage people to take the train, I am thinking in particular of commuters
- this would improve public transport by allocating part of the revenue
- citizens who do not have a car would no longer be penalized ...
- this would make the roads safer thanks to better maintenance ... safer roads = (?) less traffic jams
- and hopefully it would decrease the number of trucks on the roads, so even greater safety! In any case it would make the transport of goods by rail / water more competitive, even if everything is to think!
- it would create jobs: maintenance of roads and toll stations (even if in my opinion, it is a delusion to think that this kind of jobs improves the quality of life: rolleyes:)






PS: I want to clarify that I do have a car ..... :D
0 x
Bibiphoque
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 749
Registration: 31/03/04, 07:37
Location: Brussels




by Bibiphoque » 13/09/04, 09:16

:P ;)
Hello,
The toll highway in Belgium is simply impractical in the sense that given the number of entrances and exits, the infrastructure would be enormous and its cost would make the operation unprofitable. The only way would be to use a sticker, as in Switzerland, but then again, border infrastructure would be needed to sell these stickers! However, this would create jobs ....
A + B)
0 x
This is not because we always said that it is impossible that we should not try :)

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Go back to "The bistro: site life, leisure and relaxation, humor and conviviality and Classifieds"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : A.D. 44 and 226 guests