Raise the age of driving to 18

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brown, Jon Brow

An improvement in bus services would benefit all.

---

Would it? You've already said you wouldn't use buses again now you drive (belated congratulations, by the way) so do you really want to pay for others to not bother using buses too?

I'm fairly rural here and the locals in one village had petitions and what have you to improve the bus service. A local company supplies the bus, arrives about five or six times a day and how many people use it do you think? Well, when it passes my land it's generally empty :mark:

The school children are on the old service that already existed, so that is used heavily, but all the rest are empty more often than not. The most on it would be three or four adults going to meet their children or grandchildren from school. It's pointless. And the local bus company that runs it had the foresight to sign for a five year contract, so they get paid anyway and it can't be dropped from service :mark:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fiero 5.7

Ok, fair enough. How much are you, personally, willing to contribute to a rural transportation system? How long are you willing to contribute? Bear in mind the system isn't likely to ever pay for itself, much less turn a profit. If it could, a private company would already be doing it.

---

Rural bus transport — indeed, almost all bus transport — was privatised in the UK long ago, in 1986.

In any case, our experiences of privately-run as opposed to publically-run public transport in the UK have shown that there is mostly little advantage to privatisation other than keeping the running of the system off the balance sheet, and that in terms of standards of service in the transport business, the public sector has little or nothing to learn from the private sector. Rather, in the UK, the public sector has much to learn from the well-run public sector transport systems that we all find in other countries when we go to mainland Europe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fiero 5.7

Maybe not, but he can listen to whatever music he wants, drink his coffee, nibble a sandwhich, sing, fart, decide to make an unscheduled stop on the way home, I guess smoke if he wants, not have to listen to 16 cell phone conversations than don't concern him, or pretend to tolerate the bad and boorish behaviour of the ill-mannered that he may find himself sitting next to on the bus.

It's not always about cheaper.

---

Neither is it always about whether a service can turn a profit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark

That's the very reason why rural brach lines were closed in the 1960's. Indeed it was said that it would be cheaper to pay for individual taxi's for each of the people rather than run trains.

---

This was proved to be way off the mark.

In addition, the cuts made by Beeching in the 1960s failed to take into account the social value of the railway network. I say again that running a transport system cannot all come down to whether each bit makes a profit Our trouble in the UK is that successive governments have not taken a sufficiently long-term approach to addressing the needs of the transport network. This was the case before the Second World War, it was the case in the 1960s and it is the case now.

You only have to travel to many mainland European countries to see the difference. In Germany, for example, the rail network is a genuinely viable alternative to road transport, and not just because the distances cross-country are larger than in the UK. It is because there has been planned investment over the years, a longer-term attitude to the development of the network, and no botched privatisation carried out for the wrong reason (in the UK's case, because John Major looked at the competition between train companies of the inter-war years through rose-tinted spectacles and thought he could re-create it — in fact, this was deeply misguided, as the competition was completely unsustainable.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark

The solution to the problem, strangely enough, is private transport, i.e. cars :p

---

Which can then create a whole set of new problems. Again, it's part of looking at transport 'in the round' and coming up with policies that reflect this, rather than treating each bit separately.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hazell B

Would it? You've already said you wouldn't use buses again now you drive (belated congratulations, by the way) so do you really want to pay for others to not bother using buses too?

---

If buses where cheaper and provided a higher quality, more frequent service then I might consider using them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fiero 5.7

Ok, fair enough. How much are you, personally, willing to contribute to a rural transportation system? How long are you willing to contribute? Bear in mind the system isn't likely to ever pay for itself, much less turn a profit. If it could, a private company would already be doing it. Would you rather have buses in the country or better schools and/or medical care? What will your feelings be in 5 years when the numbers show that many city dwellers have moved to the country to get away from the crime, grime, noise, higher city taxes, and congestion of the city and best of all, thanks to the rural bus system you are funding for them. actually commute to their jobs in the city cheaper than they could when they lived in the city?

---

I already said that about buses, subsidies wouldn't last forever. The process that you're talking about has already happened in the UK and quite a long time ago as well. It happened with the popularity of the motorcar. Also I doubt that if they moved to the country, they would not use a slow bus service, rather their merc.

There are a few "park and rides" in my nearest city. It's a pretty cheap bus ride (in comparison) and the parking is free (not common in the UK) but of course you have to drive all the way there anyhow.

Age doesnt drive, skill does. My friend started driving around the city at 13 and has never had any accidents. Thats because he knows how to drive. Some people somehow get the license, but even after many years of driving they arent very good at it. This goes especially for women and that isnt sexism, that is realism.
Driving Tests should be made much harder to pass and people who fail once, shouldnt get the chance to try again for quite a long time. I know some people have tried around 7-8 times before finally passing (this was in summertime, what would happen if it was an icy road?), why should a person like this get a license?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Garry Walker

Age doesnt drive, skill does. My friend started driving around the city at 13 and has never had any accidents. Thats because he knows how to drive. Some people somehow get the license, but even after many years of driving they arent very good at it. This goes especially for women and that isnt sexism, that is realism.
Driving Tests should be made much harder to pass and people who fail once, shouldnt get the chance to try again for quite a long time. I know some people have tried around 7-8 times before finally passing (this was in summertime, what would happen if it was an icy road?), why should a person like this get a license?

---

That the biggest load of crap that I have read in my 18 year career of being a person :mad:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brown, Jon Brow

That the biggest load of crap that I have read in my 18 year career of being a person :mad:

---

Hidden among the rubbish, there's one very good point. The test should be harder, a lot harder in some areas. I know a couple of people who've passed and they're frankly lacking all common sense behind a wheel. Observation and parking ability, they have none :mark:

As for women being generally worse drivers, being man means you never, ever get to say that. It's like somebody saying your baby is ugly or telling you you're fat - it just isn't done. Women are allowed to say women are worse drivers, men are not. Women are worse drivers, mind :p :

Does anyone remember taking the pee out of me a year or two ago when I said pretty soon the biggest killer of late teen to mid twenties girls will be male drivers of the same age range? I believe a certain pretentious forumer said he'd never read such drivel. Looking forward to his U turn as today the authorities that compile the stats said the biggest UK killer for the younger lady is in fact the younger male driver.
Don't say I didn't tell you so ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hazell B

Hidden among the rubbish, there's one very good point. The test should be harder, a lot harder in some areas. I know a couple of people who've passed and they're frankly lacking all common sense behind a wheel.

---

Lack of common sense isn't just lacking from driving though. It is a much larger social problem. With all of the health and safety/nanny state culture we have today people don't have to use common sense because they are protected from any potential danger. So when the time comes for common sense to be applied, they don't have the ability to apply any.

I don't know how to make the driving test harder. I'd vote for having to do all 4 maneuvers on the test. I know people who have passed and they can only do two of them, and those were the two that they got on their test.