Alan2005

They haven't no. But given recent events they clearly don't need to worry about risk any more.

Miss Clinique

I know, but it is still sending the wrong message isnt it? High streets in the UK look like ghost towns since the credit crunch, it just p's me off when I see things like that in the paper.

R I C H

While more fuel efficient cars are an admirable goal, your other suggestions just aren't feasible for many people.

I mostly lived in rural locations in the UK, partly through choice, and partly through the unaffordable cost of urban property. The closest I ever lived to my job was 25 miles. Shopping always required a car, and public transport wasn't an option or available.

Raising taxes on fuel just puts a disproportionate burden on rural dwellers from my experience.

el_richo

I somewhat agree. I'd like to see vehicle tax increased for city dwellers within the UK to alleviate burden on the people who live rurally where public transport isn't an option, and leave fuel prices alone.

Just a quick thought

Cape Blue

Then you can only do the fuel efficient car bit, the vast majority of the UK who live in cities and towns can also do the rest. You can of course try to ensure that you shop on the way home rather than making an extra trip and that you get enough at any one time to avoid extra trips.

People who live in the sticks get other advantages - you are paying the same road and fuel tax but getting a lot more tarmac miles usage for it, you pay the same post rates but it costs more to deliver in the boonies than in the cities, there are a whole range of services that cost more in the spread-out low population density country than they do in the cities.

Diggler

mmmmm, there is a reason people dont bother voting. Its not rocket science.

Edo

Dont think so. Since we are starting to see 95% mortgages coming back and all those flashy new cars bought on financing coming out to the roads etc etc. The list will soon start to grow again with other 'amenities' being made available on loans to the general public whose incomes just simply cant support the paybacks. It was the free flow of credit that brought us here so I wonder what are the banks and government doing anything different this time that they didnt do before?

scrubbedexpat091

Lots of folks in Alaska still need to hunt to survive if living outside southern Alaska. The place ain't cheap and food exspensive.

Then of course there are plenty of towns not accesible by road at all....

Its different in Alaska especially in small towns/citys.

scrubbedexpat091

Too bad BC can't learn how to have quality snow removal, sometimes they dont even plow at all. (Lower mainland of BC)

But then the politicians do nothing but whine about how much it costs to remove snow, duh its kinda essential.

My winter in Edmonton was the same, they didn't really know how to plow either.

dbd33

That surprises me. Out here in the sticks I know if there's been a heavy snowfall overnight because I hear the plough at 4:00am. They do a very good job on the roads even if they do dump it all in the driveway.

Almost Canadian

Too lazy? Too illiterate? Too easy to sit on their ar$e and blame everybody else for the situation they find themselves in?

I fail to see how not voting helps the situation if one is sick to death with the incumbent.

iaink

In general I agree with you, but it really depends if the alternative is any more inspiring.

Im not inspired at present, I really hope there is not an election.


Maybe we can organise a boycot They could call an election and then find that no one but the candidates casts a vote

Almost Canadian

Are you talking Canada or the UK here?

If it's the UK, I really don't care.

If Canada, there will not be an election. Can anybody really tell me what, other than the stupid EI fiasco, separates Liberals from PCs on issues that people will be concerned enough about to actually vote. If Iggy forces an election, it will be the end of him.

I don't know how accurate this is but it caught my attention earlier this week: http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/th...761/story.html

Oakvillian

Agreed. If the Libs bring down the govt over the second half of the finance bill (the bit with the home reno tax credit in it), Iggy can shout til he's blue in the face that the Libs would reintroduce it when they form the next govt, but nobody would listen. Harper would have a perfect single-issue campaign to fight - "the Liberals want to take away your $10,000 tax rebate."

Never mind that the rebate is the tax on $10k, never mind that the Tories have delayed putting the Bill before parliament just so that they can manouevre themselves into this position, never mind that the Liberals have already said they support the measure: if the government falls over a confidence motion on the budget, Harper will be returned with more MPs, possibly even a majority.

Ignatieff can't be that stupid, can he?

iaink

Canada..was it not obvious. I could not care less about the UK to be honest.

I hope you are right, to me it makes no sense either. I doubt the liberals have the necessary funds to fight an effective election anyway, and with the polls even neither side is likely to win a majority, which would be a poor showing and threaten the political future of both Ignatief and Harper, so I dont understand all the sabre rattling and brinksmanship.

Why would either of them want to be seen as the leader that triggers what appears to be a universally unwanted election? Puts you in the hole right from day one.

I think there is much truth in the article Make the NDP and BQ prop up the conservatives so the liberals can distance themselves from current policy, and then be in a better position to fight an election when the numbers are more in their favour.