171–180 of 269 posts
I wonder if there will be a reversal in pedestrian deaths with the rise in larger cars. I live in a large UK city and it is mad the number of SUVs you see driving around.
Our driving test standards are also high, having spoken with US colleagues, much higher than state-side (although I imagine that varies from state to state). The theory test you must pass before taking your practical also now includes a hazard perception test - you are shown multiple videos and must click when you first perceive a hazard - the earlier you click after the hazard presents the higher your score - but if…
It's one of those places there will only be 2 other cars in sight, but they're driving side by side and 10 under the speed limit. And for some reason, everyone seems to just hold down their brake pedal at all times so you can never tell when they're actually slowing. I presume they're driving an automatic with two feet and keep just enough pressure to trigger the brakelights. And everyone, even the Kia Rios, drives in the opposite lane before turning so they can swing wide like a semi. I could go on and on but I digress.
Anyways, it had been an enigma to me for the last few years since I moved here, until one day I was asked to take a lady to her driving test. Sure, why not.
The entirety of the 5 minute road test was turning out right onto a sparsely populated 2 lane highway, driving anxiously at 35 in a 55 for a mile or so, then turning around and coming back. Passed. Suddenly, everything made more sense to me.
And I'm sure this isn't probably even the easiest test nationally, just one I became familiar with recently.
So yeah, we have absolutely no driving standards.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Getting my driver's license in France required 20 hours of instruction by an accredited driving school. Getting my license in the US (CA and NJ) required... showing up with my own car. And in New Jersey, they even forgot to make me take the actual driving test.
In California it's more than showing up (although I think none of the tests are particularly rigorous). Minors must: - Complete a 30 hour driver's education course and 6 hours of driver's training - Pass a knowledge test with 80% or more questions answered correctly - Apply for and receive an instruction permit - Maintain the permit for 6+ months - Drive with an 25+ year old adult supervising for at least 50 hours (i…
As somebody who has driven in a few places around the World, I would say that overall the standard of driving and safety is remarkably high in the UK given that the road layouts are often quite confusing (we have roads in use today from Roman, Saxon, Norman, Medieval, Tudor and more modern phases of development, so it can get confusing), and the level of signage around some confusing layouts is much lower than, say,…
I've lived in the UK for over 15 years now and I still can't get over people's general allergy for using indicators. And I know the test and training specifically tell you that you must use indicators when changing lanes and turning, but if I had a penny for every time I see someone on the motorway changing lanes without indicating I'd make a very good middle class salary from that alone. But yes, other than this peo…
Sometimes it can be helpful to do so when pulling in too but it's not a legal requirement since undertaking (except in slow moving traffic) is also ilegal.
Our driving test standards are also high, having spoken with US colleagues, much higher than state-side (although I imagine that varies from state to state). The theory test you must pass before taking your practical also now includes a hazard perception test - you are shown multiple videos and must click when you first perceive a hazard - the earlier you click after the hazard presents the higher your score - but if…
Then you get the two wheeled side of the fence. You can do a one day compulsory basic training course and convince a trainer you know what you're doing, then drive on the road with everyone on a 125cc motorcycle (or 50cc at 16 years old), and then repeat the CBT every two years to keep on the road. It's only if you go for the full license that you need to study for theory as a prerequisite, so long as you keep out of…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then you get the two wheeled side of the fence. You can do a one day compulsory basic training course and convince a trainer you know what you're doing, then drive on the road with everyone on a 125cc motorcycle (or 50cc at 16 years old), and then repeat the CBT every two years to keep on the road. It's only if you go for the full license that you need to study for theory as a prerequisite, so long as you keep out of…
You make it sound like motorbike riders are practically unregulated, but in a sense it's the opposite. A few decades ago, 125cc bikes were mostly for learners practising before taking their test. But successive governments have made it harder and harder to get a full license - so loads of riders just stay on learner bikes forever. So the status quo is, in a sense, the result of very strict regulation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Given that it's the A836, it's worth constrasting this with the fact that in 2025 many of the people committing traffic offences on the coastal part of that road just to the north were locals, not "townies" unfamiliar with the area. * https://www.johnogroat-journal.co.uk/news/vast-majority-of-s... And then, of course, there's the part of the A836 further south known as the Balblair Straight. * https://news.stv.tv/hig…
Yeah. I do think 15mi/h or 24km/h is appropriate speed for that road if you want it to be usable by vulnerable road users. I just wondered what hdgvhicv considered appropriate.
That you think 15mph is appropiate tells me you need to hand back your license.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seems a rather tenuous link to the state of the NHS. The UK has a lower tax regime than most equivalent nations. If we wanted a better NHS we could just collect similar tax rates to that of Germany or other western nations. One of the issues is we’re trapped with a media ecosystem that won’t even allow progressive parties to say “we’ll take a bit more in tax and in return you’ll get a functioning health service”, ins…
> The UK has a lower tax regime than most equivalent nations. If we wanted a better NHS we could just collect similar tax rates to that of Germany or other western nations. This is largely untrue today since the Conservatives have significantly increased taxes over the last decade. As it stands I think Germany only taxes around 1-2% more of GDP than us. The primary difference between Germany and the UK in terms of pu…
"UK tax revenue was 33.5% of gross domestic product (GDP ) in 2021 – the most recent year for which there are internationally comparable data. This is slightly below the average for both the G7 (36.3%) and the OECD (34.1%). While UK taxes are higher than in most other English-speaking developed economies (such as Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Ireland and the United States), they are considerably lower than in most other western European countries (average tax revenue amongst the EU14 was 39.9% of GDP ).
Under current government plans, UK tax revenue is forecast to increase to 37.7% of GDP by 2027–28. This would take the UK above both the current OECD and G7 averages. It should be noted, however, that other governments may also increase their levels of taxation by then."
If it's just Germany we're comparing to, then there are still multiple percentage differences. Germany is close to the average of 39.5% of GDP and the UK is 33.5% raising to 37.7%. Nearly 2% difference, which is a lot. It doesn't matter how the tax is raised, it's the total investment that matters. We have been a low tax economy for a long time (compared to similar European nations), that was my entire point: if we want better services then we are unlikely to get them in a low tax economy. Recent changes to the tax levels doesn't change how we got to this position in the first place.
[1] https://ifs.org.uk/taxlab/taxlab-key-questions/how-do-uk-tax...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perversely they're higher partially because of pedestrian safety. More space between the engine and the bonnet and hinges that extend that space when a force is applied to the front of the car to cushion the impact. Euro NCAP has a whole category for pedestrian safety to test exactly these features.
I’m confused. I read (see below) that these very tall fronts are significantly more deadly to pedestrians. Which is true? https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/vehicles-with-higher-more-v... Not to mention how much bigger the blind spot is now: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna52109
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You make it sound like motorbike riders are practically unregulated, but in a sense it's the opposite. A few decades ago, 125cc bikes were mostly for learners practising before taking their test. But successive governments have made it harder and harder to get a full license - so loads of riders just stay on learner bikes forever. So the status quo is, in a sense, the result of very strict regulation.
It's the Deliveroo, Just Eat etc crowd too. CBT and off you go. No incentive for further training.