OV9

We’re screwed on speed limits, saw yesterday that the Wales 20 limit has reduced deaths so might as well apply it to the whole country now.

Mito Man wrote: Fri Jan 31, 2025 1:18 pm We’re screwed on speed limits, saw yesterday that the Wales 20 limit has reduced deaths so might as well apply it to the whole country now.

Was that in a way that was statistically significant given annual variation and causally proven to be from reducing speeds from 30 to 20? I would expect the answer to that is no but feel free to link to the article/research!

GG. wrote: Fri Jan 31, 2025 1:27 pm

Mito Man wrote: Fri Jan 31, 2025 1:18 pm We’re screwed on speed limits, saw yesterday that the Wales 20 limit has reduced deaths so might as well apply it to the whole country now.

Was that in a way that was statistically significant given annual variation and causally proven to be from reducing speeds from 30 to 20? I would expect the answer to that is no but feel free to link to the article/research!

I haven't even read it, just saw the headline
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c78w1891z03o

Mito Man wrote: Fri Jan 31, 2025 1:29 pm

GG. wrote: Fri Jan 31, 2025 1:27 pm

Mito Man wrote: Fri Jan 31, 2025 1:18 pm We’re screwed on speed limits, saw yesterday that the Wales 20 limit has reduced deaths so might as well apply it to the whole country now.

Was that in a way that was statistically significant given annual variation and causally proven to be from reducing speeds from 30 to 20? I would expect the answer to that is no but feel free to link to the article/research!

I haven't even read it, just saw the headline
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c78w1891z03o

Government officials have urged caution in attributing the fall in casualties to the 20mph limit.

The Welsh government's chief statistician said in a blog last year that at least three year's worth of collision data would be required for a meaningful comparison to be made.

Casualty figures have also been on a downward trend for sometime - the Welsh government said they have "declined steadily over the last decade".

The Welsh government has commissioned a five year review of the policy, which will report back in 2029.

On a non-emotional analysis, if it save 40 lives a year but costs the economy £1bn, for example, it isn't worth it. The NHS will deem treatment cost effective on the basis of £20,000 per quality life year saved. Even if you assumed all those killed were on average 20 and would have lived to 75, the analysis if the NHS did it would not be in favour of the change if it cost more than £1,100,000 per life saved i.e. if it was medical treatment it would be denied. I assume it will cost the Welsh economy significantly more (they probably spent more than that on the signage) but again happy to be corrected if that's not the case.

Local governments should be required to do that analysis and legally prohibited from making changes like this if it doesn't pass the cost-benefit test.

I accept that 20mph limits result in fewer deaths, yet also hate them with a passion.

In 100 years tims all cars will be self-driving, resulting in a massive drop in road deahts, and people will consider it mental that members of the public were allowed to pilot these engine-propelled steel cages.

GG. wrote: Fri Jan 31, 2025 1:44 pm

Mito Man wrote: Fri Jan 31, 2025 1:29 pm

GG. wrote: Fri Jan 31, 2025 1:27 pm

Was that in a way that was statistically significant given annual variation and causally proven to be from reducing speeds from 30 to 20? I would expect the answer to that is no but feel free to link to the article/research!

I haven't even read it, just saw the headline
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c78w1891z03o

Government officials have urged caution in attributing the fall in casualties to the 20mph limit.

The Welsh government's chief statistician said in a blog last year that at least three year's worth of collision data would be required for a meaningful comparison to be made.

Casualty figures have also been on a downward trend for sometime - the Welsh government said they have "declined steadily over the last decade".

The Welsh government has commissioned a five year review of the policy, which will report back in 2029.

On a non-emotional analysis, if it save 40 lives a year but costs the economy £1bn, for example, it isn't worth it. The NHS will deem treatment cost effective on the basis of £20,000 per quality life year saved. Even if you assumed all those killed were on average 20 and would have lived to 75, the analysis if the NHS did it would not be in favour of the change if it cost more than £1,100,000 per life saved i.e. if it was medical treatment it would be denied. I assume it will cost the Welsh economy significantly more (they probably spent more than that on the signage) but again happy to be corrected if that's not the case.

Local governments should be required to do that analysis and legally prohibited from making changes like this if it doesn't pass the cost-benefit test.

Meaningful comparison, ha.

All the side roads around me have been closed off to non residents because they used data from the Covid lockdown to show how air quality improved and that closing the rat runs had no appreciable impact on increasing traffic in other main roads. In reality the main road is now a permanent gridlock however you'd still expect air quality to improve year on year as newer cars get more efficient. Especially when you then compare that data to a period when taxis and buses were all diesel and now they're EV.
But yeah, if the government want to push something they'll do it regardless of the what the real world data shows.

IanF wrote: Fri Jan 31, 2025 11:13 am Yeah, I don’t expect to ever use that runway before I retire in 20 years!

Expect to be diverted more than a few times while they build it though

Gavster wrote: Fri Jan 31, 2025 2:04 pm I accept that 20mph limits result in fewer deaths, yet also hate them with a passion.

In 100 years tims all cars will be self-driving, resulting in a massive drop in road deahts, and people will consider it mental that members of the public were allowed to pilot these engine-propelled steel cages.

This just makes me think of a Demolition Man type of future

English farmland could be cut by 9% to ... gpv0qx9wxo

Bloody hell, this net zero bollocks is going to pile drive us into the ground. Can see food getting really quite expensive and then everyone will start wondering how did happen

It’s funny that climate change is going to get the blame for food being more expensive when people have been saying for years it needs to be more expensive for farming to be viable.

Supermarket price wars have done more damage to the farming industry than any modern taxation.

ZedLeg wrote: Fri Jan 31, 2025 5:18 pm It’s funny that climate change is going to get the blame for food being more expensive when people have been saying for years it needs to be more expensive for farming to be viable.

Supermarket price wars have done more damage to the farming industry than any modern taxation.

This.

Gavster wrote: Fri Jan 31, 2025 2:04 pm I accept that 20mph limits result in fewer deaths, yet also hate them with a passion.

In 100 years tims all cars will be self-driving, resulting in a massive drop in road deahts, and people will consider it mental that members of the public were allowed to pilot these engine-propelled steel cages.

I sometimes think it’s mental that everyone spends thousands of pounds on massive boxes full of toxic waste to sit and leech into the ground everywhere they go from now on tbh.

Being a car nerd gives me cognitive dissonance

Mental health is vastly improved with a fun drive, a nice warm fire and a big bit of steak.

Life doesn’t need to be efficient and mindful, it should be enjoyable, fulfilling and enjoyed with friends.

Dave!

Investing in growth!

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1we943zez9o

Oh wait...

That almost wipes out her shitty 5 year trade deal with China

I saw that, can honestly say I’m not suprised. Interesting that they actively point the finger at labour as the reason for not investing.

I’m not sure how they think charging businesses a shit load more on national insurance is going to increase investment, if anything it’ll drive companies away and push prices up along the supply chain and ultimately into retailers. It may not be a tax on working people as they put it, but ultimately it’ll transfer into people having less free money

Not to mention the job losses and businesses closing up shop that it’ll cause. A friend of a friend who has a cleaning company mentioned he has to somehow find an extra £10k from April. That doesn’t come from thin air, it’s either huge price rices or redundancies. Either is a massive risk as he either needs to downsize or risk missing out on contracts, both putting him at risk of failure.

When you transfer that into other business it will mean one thing- get ready for massive inflation in April/May and a nice slip into recession. Make it a bad enough slip and there will be a change in labour leadership, and ultimately calls for a general election

People haven’t forgot the failings of the Conservative Party, and the only way hardline labour voters in the north will change from labour will be to reform. Then It’s just a matter of time before we start the bye bye Nigel thread

I'm still keeping one eye on the job market trying to find something, and I have to say it's pretty dire out there. No doubt making employment more expensive means companies invest less - that's economics 101. Reeves is an idiot. Imagine correctly acknowledging that our way out of this mess is to grow the economy whilst simultaneously making it unattractive for companies to invest and grow their most important asset.

I suspect she'll be gone by Christmas. At least, I hope so.

Simon wrote: Fri Jan 31, 2025 9:38 pm I'm still keeping one eye on the job market trying to find something, and I have to say it's pretty dire out there. No doubt making employment more expensive means companies invest less - that's economics 101. Reeves is an idiot. Imagine correctly acknowledging that our way out of this mess is to grow the economy whilst simultaneously making it unattractive for companies to invest and grow their most important asset.

I suspect she'll be gone by Christmas. At least, I hope so.

Fuck me I hope she's gone well before then! March would be nice. Give us some Spring hope.

How can you justify bailing out a company who put themselves into debt paying out dividends?

If they remove the dividends the company will be buggered as many many people will sell.

It’s how the dividends got that high in the first place I find co fusing, Thames water has been an in-efficient mess for decades.

Dave!