liamC
Member
Registered: 28th Feb 04
User status: Offline
|
Not that this affects me whatsoever, however, if I was a UK motorist having to pay "green taxes" when the government have just approved a new runway at LHR, I'd be absolutely furius. This just shows what hypocritical greedy bastards they really are. An absolute disgrace.
Additionally, why do tree huggers bother trying to stop these things going ahead and think they're actually going to get anywhere? 3 hippies v Government/State. Get real.
|
Jay
Member
Registered: 26th Sep 04
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by liamC
Additionally, why do tree huggers bother trying to stop these things going ahead and think they're actually going to get anywhere? 3 hippies v Government/State. Get real.
Because if we all shared the same commitment instead of just giving the odd rant about things but doing nothing about it, we'd possibly get somewhere....
|
Kevxx
Member
Registered: 14th May 08
Location: Forfar, Angus
User status: Offline
|
uhoh!
|
Cosmo
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: Im the real one!
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by liamC
Not that this affects me whatsoever, however, if I was a UK motorist having to pay "green taxes" when the government have just approved a new runway at LHR, I'd be absolutely furius. This just shows what hypocritical greedy bastards they really are. An absolute disgrace.
Yes - the Govt. should jusr cancel any future expansion of the country 
An increase in size will mean an increase in planes using it, which all pay a hell of a lot more 'green taxes' than the average motorist.
|
pow
Premium Member
Registered: 11th Sep 06
Location: Hazlemere, Buckinghamshire
User status: Offline
|
Im against it personally, mainly because I live under a Heathrow flight path anyway.
We don't need expansion right now, technology allows for that.
|
Jambo
Member
Registered: 8th Sep 01
Location: Maidenhead, Drives: VXR Arctic
User status: Offline
|
expansion, progression, evoloution, progress.
Sucks for the people who will loose their homes, but im sure they will come out of it better off.
And i was fuming no#1 with the introduction of stupid "green" idiot tax. But more saddened by how many idiots genuinely think it has anymore green relevance than the printing of more green.
|
Daimo B
Member
Registered: 20th Mar 00
User status: Offline
|
Im against it.
Government bangs on about going green, save the planet....
So lets build another runway, allow 250,000+ more planes per year, of which are one of the worst polluters of the planet due to the jet engine exhaust emissions, lets put them right on top of us.
Heathrow does not need another runway. Build up one of the existing airports round the country
Manston has a 2 mile runway in Kent, whats wrong with using that?
Oh, its not smack bang in the city so to help all those poor tourists......
We don't need another runway, we need a new engine design.
Exansion of a country does not happen by allowing another 2 million holidaymakers into the country. Economics, seriously, thats the best they can do?
Government, say one thing, do another.
Vote no to war, lets go anyway....
Soner labour f-ing goes, the better!!!!
|
Cosmo
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: Im the real one!
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by VXR
Exansion of a country does not happen by allowing another 2 million holidaymakers into the country. Economics, seriously, thats the best they can do?
Of course it does. FPMSL.
|
pow
Premium Member
Registered: 11th Sep 06
Location: Hazlemere, Buckinghamshire
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by VXR
Soner labour f-ing goes, the better!!!!
I agree, but, which of the other parties installs confidence in you?
|
Daimo B
Member
Registered: 20th Mar 00
User status: Offline
|
Expanding a country is doing what Japan done and building a whole new peice of land, or like Dubai, creating land. Thats expansion.....
If you mean modernising, then why not modernise all the things we have already?
Heathrow, does not need a new runway. Its bad enough round there anyway, Gatwick is 30 min down teh road, Standsted is a hour the other way, not to mention the smaller airports that no-one bothers to use.. Two huge airports in the same area, why do we need another?
Why not create new links to these airports? Why heavily increase air traffic over london and SE, increasing emissions, going.
High speed trains use far less resources, why can freight not come via this? Saving millions of tonnes of gasses from the aircraft.
Get your wording right, expansion of a country is not building a new runway. 
Oh, not to mention the City airport, thats another one.
Biggin Hill.
So many airports available with BIG runways. Heathrow does not need another one. Just go to the area to see why.
[Edited on 15-01-2009 by VXR]
|
Daimo B
Member
Registered: 20th Mar 00
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by pow
quote:
Originally posted by VXR
Soner labour f-ing goes, the better!!!!
I agree, but, which of the other parties installs confidence in you?
None, this isthe problem. None of them offer a good future I think. We need some more parties involved.
Damien for prime minister. 
|
pow
Premium Member
Registered: 11th Sep 06
Location: Hazlemere, Buckinghamshire
User status: Offline
|
We're sooo fucked 
|
nik
Member
Registered: 19th Jun 00
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by VXR
Im against it.
Government bangs on about going green, save the planet....
So lets build another runway, allow 250,000+ more planes per year, of which are one of the worst polluters of the planet due to the jet engine exhaust emissions, lets put them right on top of us.
Heathrow does not need another runway. Build up one of the existing airports round the country
Manston has a 2 mile runway in Kent, whats wrong with using that?
Oh, its not smack bang in the city so to help all those poor tourists......
We don't need another runway, we need a new engine design.
Exansion of a country does not happen by allowing another 2 million holidaymakers into the country. Economics, seriously, thats the best they can do?
Government, say one thing, do another.
Vote no to war, lets go anyway....
Soner labour f-ing goes, the better!!!!
Totally agree with that. Labour make my bloody boil. The only bonus I can see of the extra runway, is the ability for more ENGLISH tax payers to get on a plane and not come back to this dustbin of a country.
[Edited on 15-01-2009 by nik]
|
Cosmo
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: Im the real one!
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by VXR
Expanding a country is doing what Japan done and building a whole new peice of land, or like Dubai, creating land. Thats expansion.....
Thats physical expansion, not economic expansion.
By allowing more tourists into the country (you mentioned the 2m figure) it will bring in more money as they spend on hotels, attractions, souvenirs, food, etc. etc. It will also create jobs in the economy to cater for this increase in demand created by the extra tourists, therefore lowering the amount of unemployed and collecting benefits.
All that aids in the expansion of this economy.
quote:
If you mean modernising, then why not modernise all the things we have already?
Heathrow, does not need an airport. Its bad enough round there anyway, Gatwick is 30 min down teh road, Standsted is a hour the other way, not to mention the smaller airports that no-one bothers to use..
Why not create new links to these airports? Why heavily increase air traffic over london and SE, increasing emissions, going.
Get your wording right, expansion of a country is not building a new runway.
No, my wording was perfectly right thanks, as I meant expansion and not moderisation.
And, although Im not 100% clued up on exactly what they are building, I think you'll find increased transport infrastructure is part of the expansion of Heathrow.
|
Daimo B
Member
Registered: 20th Mar 00
User status: Offline
|
PArty for the pikeys and chavs.
Help the minority, ignore the majority.
I should be a chav, free house, £60+ per week for free, damn why am I working 
|
Daimo B
Member
Registered: 20th Mar 00
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Cosmo
Thats physical expansion, not economic expansion.
By allowing more tourists into the country (you mentioned the 2m figure) it will bring in more money as they spend on hotels, attractions, souvenirs, food, etc. etc. It will also create jobs in the economy to cater for this increase in demand created by the extra tourists, therefore lowering the amount of unemployed and collecting benefits.
All that aids in the expansion of this economy.
quote:
If you mean modernising, then why not modernise all the things we have already?
Heathrow, does not need an airport. Its bad enough round there anyway, Gatwick is 30 min down teh road, Standsted is a hour the other way, not to mention the smaller airports that no-one bothers to use..
Why not create new links to these airports? Why heavily increase air traffic over london and SE, increasing emissions, going.
Get your wording right, expansion of a country is not building a new runway.
No, my wording was perfectly right thanks, as I meant expansion and not moderisation.
And, although Im not 100% clued up on exactly what they are building, I think you'll find increased transport infrastructure is part of the expansion of Heathrow.
HEathrow has a huge transport structure already in place (you ever been to HR??????). 15 minutes to city centre on the train, or maybe the tube, or prehapes the bus routes, or maybe the coaches, or taxis (£50 in rush hour to city centre Costs me that from Gatwick to home!!!!). What exactly transport wise needs adding??????
As i've said, whats wrong with using other airports that are big enough for even that bloody twin deck airbus thing. Manston is only a short trip to Eurostar link, or the other links from teh SE into the city, and this is just 1 airport, what about all the others in the area (im guessing you know how many airports we've actually got down here, its double numbers!!!).
They just want people to be able to step into the city centre, when its not needed, we have major airports here already. 3 international airports, and 1 european, more than most other cities in the world already. (as said, thats not inc all the others around).
Getting people into the country to make us more money does not mean building 1 more huge runway where its not needed. Its vastly busy on teh road struture surrounding the airport. Its just not needed at Heathrow.
Even Gatwick has better resources for another runway.
[Edited on 15-01-2009 by VXR]
|
Cavey
Member
Registered: 11th Nov 02
Location: Derby
User status: Offline
|
Only real qualm i have with any of this is that it should really go to another site in the UK instead of building on the already biggest airport in the UK
(If i live in the South East i'd probably be happy tho)
|
sand-eel
Member
Registered: 15th Mar 07
Location: carluke/braidwood--IRNBRULAND
User status: Offline
|
heathrow did need another runway, thats why they built one.
|
pow
Premium Member
Registered: 11th Sep 06
Location: Hazlemere, Buckinghamshire
User status: Offline
|
TBH I don't think anyone who doesn't live near it can make MUCH comment.
It's gunna make your travelling lives living hell
|
stubbsy05
Member
Registered: 23rd Oct 02
User status: Offline
|
Who cares about Green issues and carbon footprints! Not me
|
Daimo B
Member
Registered: 20th Mar 00
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alex.S
Who cares about Green issues and carbon footprints! Not me
Nice, good too hear your interested in the world your leaving your children and grandchildren.
Typical UK tosser attitude. As long as im alright, I don't care about anyone else.
What about nature, life, the world, killing off lots of animal species just because it suits our way of life.
AS the Matrix film, said, we are a plague of the earth. Climate change happens naturally, its parts of the planets cycle, but ignoring the paper and press stories, it is effecting the planet.
Go look outside in the summer, then think back 10-15 years what it used to be like. Seperate seasons, not one long merged one.
|
Jambo
Member
Registered: 8th Sep 01
Location: Maidenhead, Drives: VXR Arctic
User status: Offline
|
heathrow is the busiest airport in the world if im not mistaken...
Another busy one would be Chicago which has 8 runways.
In intrest of safety alone i would say its worth it.
The economic impact will be good, create new jobs and then after its open the obvious tourism, increased business travel etc.
|
Cosmo
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: Im the real one!
User status: Offline
|
but Jambo, what about the newts it may kill?
|
myke
Member
Registered: 7th Feb 01
Location: High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire
User status: Offline
|
I saw a little about this on the news at lunchtime.
They're proposing that there will be a limit of 200,000 flights from it a year. Over half of which will be allocated first to the air lines with the most efficient planes.
This will take 10 years minimum to be passed, planned, built and commissioned if all of the plans go through first time without any hitch's or hold ups. (and come on this is England, there will be delays.
They will also put in a high speed rail link. I didn't catch exactly where this was to, but i suspect Dover or the tube station they just upgraded for eurostar.
On a personal note, i'm not bothered about it too much provided they widen the M25 clockwise carriageway around that area so I'm not stuck in traffic for 40 mins waiting to get home on a Friday afternoon.
|
Ojc
Member
Registered: 14th Nov 00
Location: Reading: Drives : Clio 197
User status: Offline
|
I miss Concord at 19.14 every evening
|
