Add your comments
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br> tags.
Please note that gratuitous links to your site are viewed as spam and may result in removed comments.
Officially Official: 2009 Ford Focus RS
I want my FPV: Super sedans hit the desert in new TV spot
Happy Independence Day from Autoblog
British Motor Show Preview: Opel Insignia to debut in hatch and sedan forms
Rumormill: Ford reviving Mustang SVO with 300 hp Ecoboost four
Track Test: 2008 Roush 427R Trak Pak Mustang
In the Autoblog Garage: 2008 Porsche Cayman S
First Drive: 2009 Chevrolet Traverse
In the Autoblog Garage: 2008 Mazda MX-5 Miata Retractable Hard Top
In The Autoblog Garage: BMW 128i Convertible
Reader Comments for
Subscribe to this threadRound Three: Mayor of London rejects Porsche, we're going to court
(Page 1 of 1)
Chris @ Mar 11th 2008 12:49PM
Political grandstanding by the mayor. People like him should be removed at first opportunity. Congestion pricing doesn't do squat except to take money from those who can least afford it and to raise taxes on everyone indirectly.
amdforever @ Mar 11th 2008 12:53PM
I do not mind donating money to a joint effort in removing the mayor.
If someone takes the lead in organizing this, I will donate a nice amount of $$.
Dazza @ Mar 11th 2008 1:43PM
London has never seen the kind of commercial growth since WW2 as it has under Ken Livingstone over the past eight years. Canary Wharf, for example has been the fastest-growing commercial district in the world. Had this have been right-wing Tory rule, we would have had massively higher fuel accelerator taxes instead with no credible attempts made on cutting the billions that traffic congestion costs the UK economy. Furthermore, we wouldn't have seen London's skyline or infrastructure brought bang up to date either.
Ken's substantial input into the successful Olympic bid also means that London can enjoy many economic knock-on effects from that one event too.
Thankfully there's a system in place which penalises those who choose to buy cars which emit the most emissions. If you can afford such cars - and I say this as a hardcore car enthusiast - then you should pay for the pollution you contribute. That way we can all enjoy our cars for a great deal longer than under an inept, short-sighted and selfish "free for all" system.
steve @ Mar 11th 2008 2:15PM
ummm...people driving porches cant afford it ?
ms.boofii @ Mar 11th 2008 5:02PM
O.k So I am soo one of those tree hugger gay lovin faerie believin weirdo new age hippie freaks that loves automobiles. I simply believe Porsche is in the right- I mean come on lets be at least a little practical in our move toward a greener healthier Earth. Yes I do believe the hp wars are kinda ridiculous but thats just where we are right now? and for some folks, some I know have a 90 grand 911 4s is a daily driver. So why does this mayor believe that overnight things are just supposed to change. How about a yearly fee of say 500 pounds? And every year make it slightly higher to give people time to adjust.
Big Rocket @ Mar 11th 2008 9:33PM
Dazza, a few items for your consideration:
1) Most Olympic host cities *lose* money by hosting the Olympic games. The only notable exception is the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics.
"The real lesson to be learned from the L.A. experience was that the Games can be staged with minimal use of... tax dollars if they use existing facilities... Of course, most cities don't have the athletic facilities or the tourist infrastructure to hold an event the size of the Olympics. Moreover, most city leaders would prefer to use the Olympics as a justification to build a new stadium... But, as Atlanta and Salt Lake City have shown, building new facilities usually means investing tax dollars. And using tax money to build venues for elite athletics raises questions about whether those same tax dollars might not be better spent on crime prevention, street repairs, or other things that directly benefit city residents."
Link:
http://media.www.dailyutahchronicle.com/media/storage/paper244/news/2002/01/07/OlympicOpinions/Debunking.Olympic.Myths.About.Economic.Prosperity-161658.shtml
2) Just because Ken Livingstone was the mayor of London when the city was experiencing an economic revival, it doesn't mean the mayor did anything to achieve the economic revival. As I had written before: Correlation does not imply causation. If you wish to bolster your support of Ken Livingstone, please feel free to give examples (web links would be appreciated) in which the mayor or his cabinet introduced legislation, economic initiatives, and/or policy changes that positively impacted London's economy.
3) Just in case you get tired of listening to Americans criticizing Ken Livingstone, here is what a fellow Londoner has to say about her mayor. As you can see, not every Londoner is as enthusiastic about Livingstone as you are.
Link:
http://adloyada.typepad.com/adloyada/2006/04/the_ultimate_no.html