Council tree felling...

[Guest makapaka]

Given your second question, you seem to accept that the council do actually want to make life difficult for car drivers. You're just doing your typical technique of attempting to reframe and deflect. But you were the one who asked why I think that labour SCC hate cars...

As to where exactly, well, getting from one side of the city to the other gets more and more difficult. Roads are closed or made bus only, or have a lane dedicated to buses, turnings are closed to cars, speed limits are reduced, more traffic lights, which run out of sequence are added. You know all this though, you just find it difficult to admit because criticising labour causes you some kind of cognitive dissonance.

 

Re:planning, they fought Ikea for years and delayed the Sheffield store by about a decade.

 

 

 

They also tried to force Next into an inner city location and nearly drove them away entirely.

 

I’m not reframing and directing anything. I just asked a question.

 

I don’t see anything different in Sheffield that you don’t see in any other big city re traffic management. What specific areas do you have difficulties with which are purely due to this supposed council strategy?

 

You will find plenty of threads bemoaning the retail offering in the town centre - is it bad that attempts were made to improve it? We still have a next and ikea by the way.

 

I’m not suggesting there’s been no bad decisions but the idea that it’s consistent is not true - you’re willing to vote Lib Dem despite their failure to back forgemasters.

 

I know you want to paint me a certain way to get your point of view across....

[Cyclone 10]

A question that happens to distract from the assertion and/or attempt to reframe it so that being anti-car isn't a bad thing.

 

Forgemasters - are you deliberately confusing local and national politics again?

 

I don't "want" to paint you anyway, you've painted yourself. You bend over backwards to justify or excuse the behaviour of the labour council, and have stated that despite it's flagrant disregard for the voters wishes, despite it's years of mismanagement, despite it's anti business and anti car stance, you'll still vote for them. You are the example that would vote for an ass with a red rosette stuck on it.

Edited April 2, 2018 by Cyclone

[Guest makapaka]

A question that happens to distract from the assertion and/or attempt to reframe it so that being anti-car isn't a bad thing.

 

Forgemasters - are you deliberately confusing local and national politics again?

 

I don't "want" to paint you anyway, you've painted yourself. You bend over backwards to justify or excuse the behaviour of the labour council, and have stated that despite it's flagrant disregard for the voters wishes, despite it's years of mismanagement, despite it's anti business and anti car stance, you'll still vote for them. You are the example that would vote for an ass with a red rosette stuck on it.

 

You can’t say local government is anti car without explaining why that’s a bad thing.

 

I’m not confusing local and national politics - you’re talking about party politics - if you think they aren’t connected at local and national level then that’s very naive.

 

You describe me as someone who would vote for a donkey in a red rosette - if that’s not trying to paint someone a certain way I don’t know what is.

[Cyclone 10]

I certainly can, and I did. If you're going to pretend that it's not a bad thing then no amount of rational argument will alter that pretence.

I describe you as I see you. I don't have to paint you in anyway, you've painted yourself red already.

[Guest makapaka]

I certainly can, and I did. If you're going to pretend that it's not a bad thing then no amount of rational argument will alter that pretence.

I describe you as I see you. I don't have to paint you in anyway, you've painted yourself red already.

 

Can you explain to me why reducing the use of cars is a bad thing then please - you’ve yet to do so.

 

What is the rational argument for encouraging the use of cars?

[Cyclone 10]

Firstly, actively being anti-car is not merely the absence of encouraging car use, so a false dichotomy.

Secondly, no, we all know the answer, so I'm not going to play.

I am glad that you've accepted labour as being anti car though.

[Guest makapaka]

Firstly, actively being anti-car is not merely the absence of encouraging car use, so a false dichotomy.

Secondly, no, we all know the answer, so I'm not going to play.

I am glad that you've accepted labour as being anti car though.

 

Well I haven’t - perhaps I worded that poorly.

 

If you’re saying they are anti car - unless your saying it’s just a malicious act to annoy people - you must accept that they are doing it for a reason.

 

Now - if people are less encouraged to use their cars as a consequence of this policy - can you explain why that is a bad thing.

[Cyclone 10]

You clearly have, hence why you now wish to make being anti-car a good thing.

[Guest makapaka]

You clearly have, hence why you now wish to make being anti-car a good thing.

 

Yes - I would have as few cars on the road as possible.

 

Now - why do you think it’s a bad thing?

[Cyclone 10]

I expect that 'fewer cars' doesn't start with your own does it... That's champagne socialism isn't it?

[Guest makapaka]

I expect that 'fewer cars' doesn't start with your own does it... That's champagne socialism isn't it?

 

Yes it does include my own.

 

So - Why do you think it’s a bad thing?

[Cyclone 10]

When will you be selling it then?

 

I've already told you I'm not playing that game. Work it out for yourself why being anti-car is a bad thing.