On 11/05/2019 21:22, JNugent wrote:
On 11/05/2019 10:26, Graeme Wall wrote:
On 11/05/2019 09:57, JNugent wrote:
On 10/05/2019 10:37, Graeme Wall wrote:

On 10/05/2019 09:25, Recliner wrote:

Air pollution: Snuff out scented candles and avoid Tube — how to
clean your
air

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/air-pollution-snuff-out-scented-candles-and-avoid-tube-how-to-clean-your-air-gps5l9s8r?shareToken=43853b15aafb2b53bcc5cd879b454 691

Usual problem with these sort of tests, they are only measuring one
type of pollutant. Tends to lead to simplistic "cures" that only
address part of the problem.Â* It was the same concentration on one
pollutant and ignoring the others that gave us the Diesel Disaster.

To what are you referring when you use the phrase "diesel disaster"?

The obvious disaster is the losses incurred by those who followed
government advice and incentives by buying diesel cars rather than
petrol and are now being penalised for it?

It must be that.

That is a symptom, not the problem.Â* The problem is by wanting a quick
political fix for CO2 emissions they ignored the fact that diesels are
responsible for much greater general pollution even if the
manufacturers hadn't been cheating on the tests.

Taking you at your word, that may be a problem.

But where is the "disaster"?

[By that, I mean other than the financial disaster which has befallen
anyone stuck with a running term of car finance and now having to find
an extra £62.50 a week - or more - simply to be where they were before
Khan stabbed them in the back. Obviously.]

The health problems it is causing.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

JNugent wrote:

To what are you referring when you use the phrase "diesel disaster"?

The obvious disaster is the losses incurred by those who followed
government advice and incentives by buying diesel cars rather than
petrol and are now being penalised for it?

It must be that.

Exactly. Because government sponsored social engineering always works out so
well.

On 11/05/2019 14:03, Arthur Conan Doyle wrote:

JNugent wrote:

To what are you referring when you use the phrase "diesel disaster"?

The obvious disaster is the losses incurred by those who followed
government advice and incentives by buying diesel cars rather than
petrol and are now being penalised for it?

It must be that.

Exactly. Because government sponsored social engineering always works out so
well.

Does that mean that the government* is always right, even when it holds
serial contrary views?

Or does it mean that the victims were silly for believing Brown and co?

[* "Government" here meaning the regime under Blair and Brown who
rejigged the car taxation system so as to incentivise the purchase of
diesel cars and latterly, Khan in London, who effectively has swingeing
taxation powers over people who are not allowed to vote for or
(especially) against him.]

JNugent wrote:
On 11/05/2019 14:03, Arthur Conan Doyle wrote:

JNugent wrote:

To what are you referring when you use the phrase "diesel disaster"?

The obvious disaster is the losses incurred by those who followed
government advice and incentives by buying diesel cars rather than
petrol and are now being penalised for it?

It must be that.

Exactly. Because government sponsored social engineering always works out so
well.

Does that mean that the government* is always right, even when it holds
serial contrary views?

Whoosh!



Or does it mean that the victims were silly for believing Brown and co?

[* "Government" here meaning the regime under Blair and Brown who
rejigged the car taxation system so as to incentivise the purchase of
diesel cars and latterly, Khan in London, who effectively has swingeing
taxation powers over people who are not allowed to vote for or
(especially) against him.]