Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Are the disabled trying to run the country??



goldstone

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 5, 2003
7,177
Re: Re: Re: Re: Are the disabled trying to run the country??

London Calling said:
So who f*** wit will pay for that?

Why should I pay for a "disabled" taxi costing what in London £10, £20 or more for a 80p bus journey.

Buses need to be designed for all. That's what we got in London. THE BIGGEST BUS FLEET IN THE World. If we can do it. Its about time you yorkels on the south coast sorting your own transport out.


Because "disabled" taxis would be a hell of a lot cheaper than making alterations to all the station platforms and all the trains. Fairly obvious I would have thought.

And in London what we actually have is a crap bus fleet. The reason: the Routemasters had to be taken out of service because they could not carry the disabled. Open platform buses; conductors; no delays at bus stops; very efficient. What we have instead is those gastly bendy buses that snarl up traffic.
 




bhaexpress

New member
Jul 7, 2003
27,627
Kent
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Are the disabled trying to run the country??

goldstone said:
Because "disabled" taxis would be a hell of a lot cheaper than making alterations to all the station platforms and all the trains. Fairly obvious I would have thought.

And in London what we actually have is a crap bus fleet. The reason: the Routemasters had to be taken out of service because they could not carry the disabled. Open platform buses; conductors; no delays at bus stops; very efficient. What we have instead is those gastly bendy buses that snarl up traffic.

The Bendy buses may be withdrawn but be that as it may I hope for your sake you never wind up in a wheel chair. As somebody who's pushed more than one relative around in one I can tell you that its not just Public Transport that's no joke.
 


Tom Hark Preston Park

Will Post For Cash
Jul 6, 2003
72,330
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Are the disabled trying to run the country??

goldstone said:
Because "disabled" taxis would be a hell of a lot cheaper than making alterations to all the station platforms and all the trains. Fairly obvious I would have thought.

And in London what we actually have is a crap bus fleet. The reason: the Routemasters had to be taken out of service because they could not carry the disabled. Open platform buses; conductors; no delays at bus stops; very efficient. What we have instead is those gastly bendy buses that snarl up traffic.

Ever stop and think that even YOU, Master Of The Universe, could, heaven forbid it should ever happen, have a stroke or a car accident and are forced to join what you patently regard as some kind of 'just the disabled' underclass?

You wanna take a good look at yourself mate.
 
Last edited:


looney

Banned
Jul 7, 2003
15,652
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Are the disabled trying to run the country??

Tom Hark said:
Ever stop and think that even YOU, Master Of The Universe, could, heaven forbid it should ever happen, have a stroke or a car accident and are forced to join what you patently regard as some kind of 'just the disabled' underclass?

You wanna take a good look at yourself mate.

He is entitled to his opinion, and it is a serious and controversial argument wether busses should be upgraded or taxis provided.


After all the objective is that the person can get from A to B. How much "Social exclusion" plays a part is a political stance. After all the disabled person may prefer a taxi and/or get there "social inclusion" from friends and family.
 


bhaexpress

New member
Jul 7, 2003
27,627
Kent
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Are the disabled trying to run the country??

looney said:
He is entitled to his opinion, and it is a serious and controversial argument wether busses should be upgraded or taxis provided.


After all the objective is that the person can get from A to B. How much "Social exclusion" plays a part is a political stance. After all the disabled person may prefer a taxi and/or get there "social inclusion" from friends and family.

After all the disabled person may also be ona pittance of a DHSS Benefit and can no more afford a taxi than they could walk.
 
Last edited:






goldstone

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 5, 2003
7,177
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Are the disabled trying to run the country??

looney said:
He is entitled to his opinion, and it is a serious and controversial argument wether busses should be upgraded or taxis provided.


After all the objective is that the person can get from A to B. How much "Social exclusion" plays a part is a political stance. After all the disabled person may prefer a taxi and/or get there "social inclusion" from friends and family.


Thank you.

Is everyone so effing concerned about being PC in these times that we are not permitted to debate these issues?

Sure the disabled need to get around. I'd like to know what percentage of the population use wheelchairs and then whether there can really be a case made for spending as much as we do to make the country wheelchair-friendly when there are other options, e.g. taxis subsidised by the government (read taxpayer), instead of having to scrap perfectly good trains and buses or spend thousands convert them.

And what about people who suffer from incontinence? Where are their rights? There should be public toilets every few blocks in every town and city and in every village. Instead of which they're all being closed by local councils. How can that be justified?
 


Tom Hark Preston Park

Will Post For Cash
Jul 6, 2003
72,330
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Are the disabled trying to run the country??

looney said:
He is entitled to his opinion, and it is a serious and controversial argument wether busses should be upgraded or taxis provided.


Sure thing. He's also entitled to give his own response without any 'assistance' from a low IQ right wing muppet such as yourself. Muppet.
 




looney

Banned
Jul 7, 2003
15,652
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Are the disabled trying to run the country??

Tom Hark said:
Sure thing. He's also entitled to give his own response without any 'assistance' from a low IQ right wing muppet such as yourself. Muppet.


My IQ is well into Mensa level you muppet, whats the matter dont you like having your treasured political ideas challenged?
 


looney

Banned
Jul 7, 2003
15,652
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Are the disabled trying to run the country??

bhaexpress said:
After all the disabled person may also be ona pittance of a DHSS Benefit and can no more afford a taxi than they could walk.

Hardly likley as not only does the disability allowance pay more than your dole rate chester, they quite often have support from the council and funding for essential journeys.
 






looney

Banned
Jul 7, 2003
15,652
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Are the disabled trying to run the country??

The Great Cornholio said:
:lolol: :lolol: :lolol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Nice spelling in your signature, Einstein. :dunce:

Its a copy and past quote by someone else, eejit.:dunce: :dunce: :dunce: :salute:
 








looney

Banned
Jul 7, 2003
15,652
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Are the disabled trying to run the country??

Tom Hark said:
It's PASTE, retard :lolol:

Theres no apostrophe in its and sentences end with a full stop dumbass.:lolol: :lolol:
 


Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Are the disabled trying to run th

looney said:
Theres no apostrophe in its and sentences end with a full stop dumbass.:lolol: :lolol:

Shortened version of it is - hence an apostrophe - DUMBASS!

It's is a contraction for it is or it has.

Its is a possessive pronoun meaning, more or less, of it or belonging to it.

And there is absolutely, positively, no such word as its'.
 


looney

Banned
Jul 7, 2003
15,652
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Are the disabled trying to run the countr

The Great Cornholio said:
Do you really want me to do a quick search and list your HUNDREDS of spelling mistakes? Not typing mistakes. Spelling and grammatical mistakes?

Mensa, MY ARSE! :dunce:

Do a search on Dyslexia.
 








looney

Banned
Jul 7, 2003
15,652
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Are the disabled trying to run th

The Great Cornholio said:
Shortened version of it is - hence an apostrophe - DUMBASS!

It's is a contraction for it is or it has.

Its is a possessive pronoun meaning, more or less, of it or belonging to it.

And there is absolutely, positively, no such word as its'.

Are you trying to tell me "It is paste" is proper English?

Its is a possessive pronoun meaning, more or less, of it or belonging to it.

True, now how does that apply to what you said?
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here