• starlinguk@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Some might, some won’t. It’d be stupid in Berlin because of the Bezirken (which have people of all incomes), but in Amsterdam (where only rich people live in the centre) it’d be fine.

  • bigkix@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    So, those $16 surely go to offsetting CO2 emissions of that car?

    • Tvkan@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      Maybe. But the fee mostly reduces the amount of trips done by car in the first place, causing less CO2 to be emitted in the first place, whoch is even better.

      • bigkix@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        17
        ·
        1 year ago

        I really hope that less emitted CO2 in that ultra-low zone saves the world! 🤞

        • Tvkan@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          I agree with your sarcasm, these programs should definitely be expanded to more and larger areas.

    • tal@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I would guess that this deals with NO2 or particulate matter, not carbon dioxide. The first two have local effects.

    • HeartyBeast@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      For context, virtually all petrol cars built after 2006 comply with the new rules. There was a scrappage scheme that paid you to get rid of your polluting vehicle.

      In Haringey- one of the outer London boroughs affected by the ULEZ expansion 60% of families don’t have cars.

      It’s not the poor who are driving around the borough

    • Wirrvogel@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Make it “x” percent of your income then, so rich people have to pay an amount that hurts them and poor people have to pay an amount that hurts them, so everyone is hurt and thinks about using public transport and then make public transport on top cheaper for the poor.

      • CookieJarObserver@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Problem is, poor people already don’t live in the city and need cars because they come from outside the city where public transport is a joke, but in theory yours is a lot better.

        • starlinguk@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          The poor people live in London. The rich people live outside London (although the filthy rich ones live in Mayfair and the like).

    • GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Given that money from congestion taxes most often go to fund public transportation, which poorer people use to a larger extent, this is not a law against the poor.

    • Conowelle@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Poor people can afford $40000 vehicles, but they can’t afford a $1500 e bike?

      • CookieJarObserver@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        Can a E-Bike carry your three children to school? Your groceries for 5 people? Does it protect you from rain and shitty weather?

        And 4k for a car… Idk i could get a working car for 1k…

        • federalreverse-old@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          So why do feel there is a need to carry kids to school by car? In inner-city London, no less.

          Also, you can get a working car for 1k€$ but that’s obviously not the full cost. You need to pay for parking, maintenance, insurance, taxes and, finally, gas.

        • Conowelle@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago
          1. Yes it can carry three children if you get a cargo e bike, those cost slightly more, but still cheaper than a car by far.
          2. Yes that cargo e bike can carry a full sized refrigerator it can carry groceries
          3. Are you afraid the rain is gonna melt you? I bike to work in the rain and I’m still alive and well, I just wear a poncho to keep dry.
          4. Ya you can get a car for 1k but what about the recurring costs of insurance, gas, repairs, etc…
    • abraham_linksys@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      London has one of the best transit systems in the world. A car is not necessary.

      If you want to take up a shitload of extra space and pollute everywhere you go with fumes and noise then you get to pay extra. It’s a choice, not a necessity.

        • abraham_linksys@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          My friends we’re not talking about America here. There is infrastructure and a social culture beyond “why should government help it’s own people fuck you get a car”. There are lots of ways to get around by bus or train or bike and they’re all way cheaper which is good for poor folks.

          In America you’d be right, we make our poor and everyone else pay 10x what they’d spend on transit to pay for a car, car insurance, gas, parking, toll roads and repairs. Then defund every other form of transit, build our cities for cars instead of people and call it Freedom.

          • CookieJarObserver@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Im not talking about muricaland either at least in Germany it is like that as well, and i expect it not to be much different in UK, outside the citys the public transport is a joke.

            • abraham_linksys@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              If you live outside the city, you don’t pay taxes in the city.

              If you don’t pay taxes in the city, it means local taxpayers are paying for YOUR car to wear down roads, add to traffic congestion, make lots of noise and take up space wherever you park it.

              This is why there are toll roads, parking fees, fuel taxes and other additional charges (in this case for noise and pollution) in cities.

              So if poor people living outside the city REALLY can’t use public transit to get to the city (which I doubt tbh I’ve been all over Europe for work including suburbs and rural areas entirely by train and bus) then they just have to fucking pay for the extra space, pollution and damage they cause with their cars.

              Cars don’t deserve special treatment so they can fuck up cities even more than they already do. Just look at American cities, they’re all roads and parking lots thanks to cars 😭

            • starlinguk@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I’m in the countryside outside Berlin. The buses are okay. Even places in the middle of nowhere have buses.

      • CookieJarObserver@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is idiotic. Im not talking about piss poor homeless people inside London, im talking about those that cant afford to live in London and therefore live outside where there is virtually no public transport or it would take 3 times longer than with the car.

    • XTornado@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I agree that is not great but in some places for example in Barcelona have a similar thing, they have exceptions for the low income people or some other situations.

      • rynzcycle@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Or the tube, or trains, or the clipper, or the DLR, or the overground…

        There is absolutely no need for a vehicle (aside from work gear/deliveries) for most people (I can think of a few cases, but largely its quite accessible) inside the ULEZ.

        Public transport is easier, cheaper, and faster, and would be even more so if there weren’t as many cars.

    • NotAPenguin@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      21
      ·
      1 year ago

      I imagine poor people will appreciate better air quality and less noisy cars around too.
      London has pretty good public transport, people shouldn’t be driving.