Well, I admit it. I'm angry!

I went grocery shopping this morning and was forced
to park next to a monster of a vehicle (RV).
When I had finished my shopping - I tried to back out
of my parking space and had the most frustrating time.
I had to slowly inch my way out - because cars were
zooming past and I could not see through this monstrosity
parked next to me. Here's my complaint - what is the rational
and logic of the licence regulators to allow these
hazards on the roads?

Weren't these vehicles designed for country use? They now
seem to infest our parking lots, our streets, and highways.
They are not transparent and seem to have two speeds,
slow and extra fast. They are a definite hazard on our
roads.

We accept trucks, they are a necessity. However no thanks to
some politicians who ripped up the train tracks, truck numbers
and their lack of maintenance keep growing.

Can regulations on the road be changed in the interests of
safety and remove Rvs or do we all have to elevate our
driver's seats to see through these monstrocities on
our streets?

Your thoughts please?

Dear Foxy,

<<was forced to park next to a monster of a vehicle (RV).>>

Really? Who forced you?

You could instead tell the car-park owner(s) that until they stop allowing those monsters in their car-park, you will not come and shop there.

<<Can regulations on the road be changed in the interests of safety and remove Rvs>>

If I understood correctly, then this happened in a car park, which is private, not on the road. This being the case, the owners can and should restrict who is allowed to park there - but formally it's up to them.

Foxy,

Ban this, ban that.

Ye gods you will have stroke getting angry over minor daily events like congestion in a shopping centre carpark.

Maybe you have a lot on your mind. Sometimes too such difficulties are a signal to start making some concessions for age. You could shop at a less busy time. Alternatively get someone to drop you off and collect you and the shopping from the parcel pick-up. For groceries, online shopping and delivery is a possibility.

If you are up to it, you could always reverse park. That makes leaving much easier for you. Parking sensors should assist you.

There is a sweet young blonde not 5'2" who drives a large delivery truck, a Isuzu 8700kg GVM, to the suburban shopping centre near us. Faced by a lack of a dock or large vehicle bay, she routinely reverses the vehicle between the rows of parked cars to the blind end, trolleys the food cartons in with quick dispatch and is off again for her next delivery. She is efficient and smiling and the shopkeepers say that no-one has ever complained.

Everywhere there are women driving buses, postal trucks and various short-haul vans in dense traffic and parking in awkward spots.

That is normal. Getting upset and flustered over the routine, expected trifles in a shops carpark is not. So do yourself a favour and cool it with some music next time you have to wait. Or be proactive and reverse in so you can depart quickly as truck drivers do.

Good luck.

Foxy, as Yuyutsu says, complain to the centre managers. If enough complain THEY WILL LISTEN because most centers are under extreme pressure these days as most small retailers (the bulk of the tenants) are just hanging in there and nothing more.

BTW, I thought these RV's had been proven less safe.

Foxy,

I share your sentiments and despair over house wives driving a juggernaut to pick up a few groceries.

I have long been a advocate of an additional tax on petrol being used to pay for a large portion of license fees and 3rd party insurance based on the principle of user pays, and that persons driving long distances in big cars need more roads and infrastructure and are a greater risk of injury. I fail to see why an owner of a small car doing 5000km p.a. pays nearly the same licensing and insurance as someone that drives a 4WD 100 000km a year.

Foxy, please don't take a fence, stop at the gate.

In South Korea I understand one shopping center has installed extra large car spaces marked 'Women drivers only' LOL. Seriously you make a good point.
Shadow << house wives... pick up a few groceries>> Is this a reference to women's work? Tone will be proud of you with a comment like that

Foxy, I’ve been in the same situation, but it is not something that overly concerns me.

I agree with SM – these large vehicles should be made a whole lot more expensive to register. We really do need strong incentives to get people to buy small cars, as well of course to make as much use other more environmental-friendly transport as possible.

But the main thing by far out there on the roads is the terrible quality of driving which a very large portion of drivers exhibit…. and the appalling quality of policing of just about anything other than speed and drink-driving. … which just happen to be things that generate a lot of revenue…without effectively tackling the issues!

its an obsession..with THINGS..big
BIG..like groan-up/and size appropriate trick-bits.
..and just geNEricly..all the tricKy-bites..big/BIGGER..UPSIZED

but why link 'BIG' to status?..

BUT HEY/THINK BIGGER
its a farm truck..its a dune demolishing yank tank[5 ton of over engineered junk to lug fat slobs and their tubby bubbies to soccar 'practice'..and star award ceremonies held in dark Forrestry reserves /maintaining an impression..of importancE OVER IMPOTANCE..OF THOSE LIVING..life..by bulk

Well folks Thanks for all your comments.

I had no choice about where to park on this particular
morning. It was the only empty space. And it was the only
available time that I had to do the shopping. Plus I was
also shopping for my mum - who's in an aged care facility
and I had to take her stuff to her that afternoon. So
there were reasons as to why I was there at that time.

I am adament that these vehicles do not belong on our
city streets. They may be safe in the country and rural
areas - but in the cities and on the main highways they
are not transparent - and if other drivers cannot see the road
ahead or the environment around them - then the vehicles are
a hazard. Put yourself into a smallo family car with children
and drive around some of the parking lots and on the highways
and roads and find out for yourself.

I suspect all those who are defending these monstrocities -
probably own and drive them!

contd ...

I forgot to add -

Afterall it is an ego thing isn't it!

Size does seem to matter to some. ;-)

cont'd ...

One more suggestion :

To those of you that defend these vehicles -
put yourself on the roads and in parking lots
surrounded by a disproportionate number
of large delivery vans and trucks
and then tell me what you think you feel.
Because trucks and vans are not transparent.
This problem did not exist when these Rvs
were limited in number and operated mainly in
rural areas. However, now they're everywhere.
And the adds on TV of - "I've bought a Jeep!"
don't help matters.

I am with you, i hate the bloody things. One of those parks next to you and you may as well have a brick wall there.
They are not town vehicles, they are status symbols.
The most ignorant type of vehicle ever built. I take the sort of person that drives these monstrosities as the type of person that owns american pit bulls as pets, absolute ignorance.

The auto clubs should campaign to regulate these vehicles.
They are top-heavy. The center of gravity is much higher
than in standard vehicles and they are prone to overturning
in accidents. Also, because of their mass and height they
cause more damage and injury to standard vehicles in the
event of an accident. This was illustrated on the news
recently - when an Rv and a sedan collided.
The people in the sedan
were rushed to hospital. Those in the Rv walked away.

Don't be silly Luddy, the last thing we need is people we are fond of, driving around in these paper thin little cars. When a daughter had a silly little thing, a Matiz, I was always worried she & later the grandkids, would get squashed in the stupid thing. Now she is in the nice big 4WD crew cab ute they use to tow their large ski boat, I am much happier.

It is carrying kids in the back of those toy cars should be made illegal, not driving a solid car.

For years I drove crew cab utes, as towing a 2 horse float with a car was illegal by government stupid order, [still is I think]. I would have been just as happy with a Commodore, but some clown bureaucrat type, [probably an idiot like Carr who had never driven a car], made that illegal. While we have idiots making these regulations, people are forced to use their big tow vehicle as the shopping trolley.

Foxy my sweet, don't ever buy a sports car. With the ridiculously high backs they are putting on cars today, & the fixation with horrible hatches, I can't see past most things in car parks. I agree it is a real worry when backing out. Most people can't even defend themselves by backing in, as you can't get the trolley to the boot if you do.

Seeing past, through or round the things from a low small car is also a problem. About the only thing my daughter likes about her big thing is the visibility, which is a safety factor in itself. It doesn't help me though, when following them.

It may also be unfair to assume the choice is all down to status. If it has a tow bar, it is quite likely it is used for a serious job, even if only in recreation.

I may be forced into one some time soon. It is getting harder to get down into my little cars, & it is much easier climbing into a nice big high ute.

In the US they have the status of truck. Where sedans are made to crumple to absorb impact, Rv's are build the opposite. Certainly not town friendly.
With proper status recognition drivers would be required to be alcohol and drug free.
It used to be said that they are safer to drive than sedan's, probably right but at someone else's expense.

Priorities
You know you are living in a First World country when some have such a sense of personal importance and entitlement they rage and blame others for their own impatience and possible driving incompetence in a shopping carpark.

Car rage over a few minutes delay caused by a bit of congestion is hardly a normal reaction.

A Landcruiser TD has no larger footprint than a Falcon and not much different to a Camry. Its fuel economy, which some might see as somehow relevant, is not so different to many medium to large petrol cars.

If it is height compared with the increasingly less common (for good reason because many people seek multiple use) passenger saloons is to be regarded as an issue, a Nissan Micra is higher and could be regarded by the poster of the OP as blocking her sight. God knows what she might say about a Suzuki S-Cross, a Rav 4 or Honda CR-V - some of which are 2-wheel drive (added since '4-wheel drive' offends some).

What about window tinting, does that incur the ire of the OP poster? Ban tints?

This is simply another of those 'Ain't it Awful' threads. Life must be very, very kind and cushy where a slim delay waiting for other carpark users results in anger and railing against the innocent bystander, in this case a parked car. As for "The Hazards of Status", where the hell did that come from? Jealousy?

HTFU Princess and deal with it. Girls can do anything, but when they age they like men need to consider their limitations and make some concessions. Driving instructors often comment on the ignorance of road rules and lack of crucial driving skills of some drivers who got their licence through less onerous testing decades ago. Ever met a middle-aged or older driver who slows down when merging on a freeway? What about those who take ages to park and leave the car parked at an odd angle? Then there are those who cannot use their indicators properly at roundabouts or at all, the list goes on.

Dear Hassie,

Let's pray that driving a 12 seater bus or modified
military tank will not become the new status symbol
any time soon.

In the US there are groups that do drive tanks as a
recreational activity and fortunately they're only allowed
in rural fields. Let's hope this doesn't graduate to roads.
But you know - in America anything's possible.

Originally, I believe the Range Rover in the UK was designed
to be used by farmers. And later the military took it up.
The vehicle became popular overseas as a status symbol
and of course it was copied by motor companies in the US.

We of course tend to follow everything that's American.

Foxy, "We of course tend to follow everything that's American"

BS, check the sales of new vehicles.

I did not pick up a comment of your earlier concerning safety and small cars. However there is a video doing the rounds that compares one of the renowned older 'tank' safety cars, a Volvo 940 Estate (bigger and heavier than most of your hated RVs) and a small four-cylinder (you may have a car that is larger), a tiny Renault Modus. See here,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCecdOBCFjI

BTW, who owns the RangeRover that you are so jealous of? Or is that more of your irrational dislike of things British? Your carpark rage is complex.

<< Don't be silly Luddy, the last thing we need is people we are fond of, driving around in these paper thin little cars. >>

Well Hazza, are little cars really more hazardous than big 4WDs?

As Foxy says: the bigger vehicles have a high centre of gravity and are more prone to rolling in accidents.

The thing that you should be concerned about regarding safety is the standard of driving and law enforcement. Vehicle types constitute a tiny consideration in comparison to these things.

Hey, there is some merit in having a big SUV. If it is not just a status-symbol thing, and has been purchased because it is a safer type of vehicle when involved in less serious accidents, and it is an all-purpose vehicle that gets used to tow the boat and travel on rough roads and 4WD tracks, etc, then all well and good.

For that matter; if the only consideration is a better level of safety, or a better peace of mind about safety even if it isn’t actually safer, then that should constitute a perfectly valid reason for having such a vehicle, even if it never leaves the bitumen.

But I reckon the best thing is an intermediate type of vehicle, such as an Xtrail, which is what I have.

Thank You all for your contributions thus far.
It appears that this issue for one particular poster is a very
very, emotional one. I'm of course referring to otb.
Whose expressed concern about my "frailty" and "old age."
And the "complexity" of my "carpark rage." really stands out
like a beacon. Thank you so much Sir, for caring.
Coming from such a perceptive, sensitive, forum poster such
as yourself -
I feel extremely moved by the concern.
Of course - you've hit the nail on the head.
I, being from a different era,
and used to steam cars, it's understandable that I would
be frightened by these modern contraptions.
I really miss them the "good old days."
However, I understand that they had to go because
steam cars damaged roads and sometimes blew up. They also
made a terrible racket, and dirtied the air with smoke,
as well as frightened the horses, and of course under
the law they couldn't go faster than 6 kilometre per hour.

So once again. I do appreciate your comments and your concern -
and take them in all seriousness. :-)

Dear Ludwig,

I don't have a problem with any Rvs that are purchased
with the intention of being used on rough roads or towing
boats or used for recreational purposes. What I object to
is their use solely for city driving. If the road regulations
provided a separate lane for these vehicles (preferably the
slow lane) and parking areas designated specific zones for
these vehicles - then there would not be a problem.
And everybody would be happy.

Foxy, what about the safety factor or the perceived safety factor or the peace-of-mind factor?

What about the notion that you only need to be involved in one accident in your life or the life of your kids, where a big vehicle meant they came out of it a whole lot better than they would have in a small car?

Even if an RV never leaves the sealed road, never tows a boat trailer and is used only to go shopping and take the kids to school and sport, and is a whole lot more expensive than a small car for a family that can perhaps barely afford it, the safety factor would still render it a good purchase, would it not?

Dear Ludwig,

No. Not at the expense of everybody else.
Besides I'm considering buying a bus.

But Foxy, it is not at the expense of everyone else.

And surely the safety of one’s self and one’s family is of the highest priority.

Foxy,

If you are coming to see the funny side to some cranky old girl and her shopping centre carpark rage, that is good. There are a lot of frustrations in getting old if you let them get to you. Particularly if you are carer.

Most women are going to be old for a very long time. So, becoming philosophical about life is a good thing and an option. It can be worthy work for life's Third and Final Trimester. New glasses are an option. You can invent a new you.

Gail Sheehy might appeal to you. Not my cup of tea but some women find her helpful if a little long in explanation.

Here you go to brighten you day,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGEe_zpddNI

Or this one if you are determined to grouch,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCfEgQ93r6M

Went to the shopping center today, the car park was chockers. The only 'parking spot' I could find was between the Hindenburg and The Spruce Goose. You wouldn't want to know it, when I returned some inconsiderate A hole, had parked the Queen Mary in front of me, and another equally inconsiderate AH has parked a bloody Super Tanker behind me. Do you know how long it took me to extricate my 400 tonne mining truck from that tight park! Next time the 'Cheese and Kisses' wants a pint of milk, I think I'll walk, after all its only, 100 yards from home! Then again maybe I'll catch the bus or a train, maybe a ferry, a bit far to WALK!

Yes Luddy, I think they are safer. You only have to see what happens to small cars, when a larger car runs up the back of them, to know you wouldn't put your kids in one.

4WDs are not all that top heavy either. They have lots of weight down low, with all those heavy transmission components down there.

My son has gone a bit crazy with his 3.0 Liter turbo diesel Ford Ranger. Originally he used it to get to out of the way places, but now he is going off road 4WD driving for it's own sake.

With lift kits raising the body, big diameter wheel, huge tyres, & heavy duty suspension, his thing now has a higher center of gravity, & must be compromised to some extent for normal road use. Still I'd rather he was testing himself at 2 miles per hour on a rough bush track, than hooning around the place at a hundred MPH in a V8 Holden.

I do wish someone would pinch his off road motorbike though, those things are really dangerous.

Classify them as trucks and make people have a truck licence and log books, This would be no problem for someone with a legitimate excuse to have one but would be a pain for the average motorist, Get the damned things off the streets and into the hands of people who use them properly.

Part of the problem is government driven cost of ownership. If you need or want a 4WD for some usage (towing, camping etc) and keep a smaller vehicle for around town usage you pay full rego on each vehicle. You can get insurance based on km's travelled (I don't) but no allowance for usage on vehicles. Its an all or nothing scenario.

R0bert

its well known/how heavey vehicle=more road wear
plus the environmental damage the hoons do in paddocks national parks and the out back[tyou see them on tv being idiots/they should pay the cost/lets fasce it..their tyres cost twice as much[ANS ARE TWIUCe the size twice the width/but also over size/WAStefull..its like yank tanks dont mean safe tank..[if your careless or fearfull/thats a lot of danger right there/it can run over marathons of people/and imagining frail granny wanting her safty

if ya cany beat em join em..you will look great in your brandnew jeep
not that i like to think of you as a granny/but sometimes..just to help me sleep.

but do the numbers..the extra weight=extra damages to produce and for its designed use/diesal fuel should be 4 dollars the litre..AND TYRES TWO GRAND A PIECE...AND IF SPEEDING OR ANY ROAD OFFENCE IS DOUBLE FOR 4 WHEELS SIZE[ALMOST WROTE DRIVE BUT GUIDS WENT NUTS]apparently lawyers could run a 6 lane freeway through the difference/two wheel drive the size of a fourwqheel drive=its about the size not the drive[i think thats called unexpected consequence.]

I understand Foxies frustration, but the problem is when backing out
the dopey drivers speeding through the parking area and not taking into
account that cars may have to back out blind.
The other problem I have with the FWDs is the height of their doors.
When openned their corners dent the cars next to them as even protective
strips are placed to suit similar sized cars.

When walking through the car park a driver came along fast and yelled
do you want to be hit, my response to him was;
"Why are you surprised to see people walking in a car park ?"
expletive deleted as he sped off !

Bazz,

You might be onto something with your comment on careless drivers in car parks.

Regrettably the only remedy is speed bumps, some of which are sharp enough to affect wheel alignment at low speed, or harm the underside of modern passenger saloons.

As far as parking goes, there is more of a case for complaint about drivers who cannot park evenly within the bays than there is against 'RV' vehicles.

While on that, one might observe that it is usually small cars that are (rudely) badly parked. Maybe less competent drivers choose small cars because they have difficulty controlling a car on the road and when parking.

Dear Bazz and others,

Here's a link that may be of interest on the subject:

http://www.drive.com.au/motor-news/should-4wds-be-banned-from-city-roads-20111201-1o7jl.html

LOL, Foxy and her 'Ban this, ban that'.

Next an 'Ain't it Awful' whinge against Volvo drivers or male drivers wearing hats? Make that 'white' men to accord with the prevailing political correctness.

Easily upset people in a First World country with nothing real to complain about. Jealousy and the growing national pastime of minding other people's business for them.

Let me make one thing quite clear.
I am asking for regulating (not banning or
demonising) a particular type of vehicle.

I have expressed my concerns regarding Rvs on this
discussion and I am interested in reading further the
opinions of posters. What I will politely request
is - lets deal with facts and reasoned arguments,
without hysterics. And lets keep personal attacks
out of it.

Maybe the answer is to have 'small car' and 'large vehicle' parking spots in carparks (and maybe even in shopping streets - with the 'large' parks located furthest from the centre's entrance.

I have considerable trouble when I have the horse float or trailer on the back, so some 'long' trailer-parking spots would also be a help.
Still, I manage - but then I shop in a country town of 3,000.

Limit SUV's? (Or SRV's.) Not likely. But the insurance and registration charges would likely be considerably higher than for, say, a Fiat Bambi? (The tyres and servicing aren't cheap either.) (Or the everyday running costs.)

More;
The suggestion to reverse park in does not work as the bays are all
angle parking so you are 50% facing the wrong way when you come out.
Re Westfields car parks, the bumper at the end of the bay to stop
people crashing through are too high, they cost me $400 damage to my car.
A complaint to Westfields got nowhere.
Just a smart a%^& remark that I should buy a higher car.

I just cannot resist my complaint about the Great Australian Ripoff
on electric cars. The Nissan Leaf sells here for $51,500 yet the same
car in the US now sells for less than US$25,000 !
They wonder why they cannot sell them here !
Over 100,000 have been sold in the US.
That is of course only small numbers against US figures but the pecentage is rising.

In Norway it is challenging VW and Volvo on the sales numbers and
it is expected to be number one soon.

Hi there FOXY...

I hope you're well ? I too share your concern over the increasing number of SUV's seen about our city streets, and taking a substantially larger portion of available parking space. Still, we all live in a society of 'freedom of choice', and it's my understanding, owners of these larger M/V's pay a higher level of registration costs, purely for the luxury of driving one of these SUV's.

I fully understand that you don't particularly want these vehicles 'banned' per se ? Rather you wish them to be further 'regulated' in some way, OK ? Say that were to come to fruition ? In what manner would you suggest the authorities might further manage or govern this particular category of M/V ?

Perhaps it could be by the vehicle's overall 'dimensions' or it's avoirdupois or it's mass for example ? After all many of those who complain often cite their larger size as a factor that they find most annoying ? Or would you think it feasible that a special endorsement, together with an appropriate fee be placed on the licence of anyone seeking to drive such vehicle ? Granted, whatever measures the government took, would probably still prove unpopular, with both sides I'd expect.

FOXY, I'd be very keen to hear your suggestions on this matter ?

Thank You so much for your well reasoned comments.

Dear O Sung Wu,

My health is a work in progress.
Thank You for asking.

As for what suggestions do I have to offer -
Well -

I did (on page 4) of this discussion in my comment
to Ludwig, suggest that if the road regulations provided
a separate lane for these vehicles (preferably the slow
lane) and parking areas had designated specific zones for
these vehicles - that may solve some of the major
problems that these vehicles cause.

Not sure what else can be done. I am hoping that people
come up with more.

cont'd ...

Dear O Sung Wu,

Just a few more thoughts.

If people could give more attention when selecting
their next ride purchase - in trying to find the
perfect match between driving ability, fuel consumption,
price, and what the vehicle is actually going to be used for
this may help. Also, understanding the differences between
the various Rvs (4 WDs) and other vehicles - may help make their
choices easier.

Hi there FOXY...

I'm sorry I didn't see what you wrote in an earlier thread on page four. Apropos you recommendations - a dedicated lane for SUV's might work where access to a dual lane hwy was available. Obviously with most single lane roads it would prove impossible of course. Parallel street parking wouldn't help much either, other then restricted bays similar to 'loading zones' may assist in some way ? Like reserved for 'long wide vehicles only' type of thing.

However, large shopping complexes might just work where a whole section could be set aside exclusively for SUV's and similar ?

The more I think about it FOXY, the more I think we all have to simply accept that they're here to stay, and there's very little we can do about, other than perhaps to practice a little more tolerance and forbearance towards each other. Even though in matters of, all things traffic, our patience is tested daily to it's absolute limits.

Hi Foxy, I have a 2WD ix35 Hyundai, so I guess I am one of those dreaded drivers with a high vehicle!
I had no choice with this car as it is for work as well.
I must say I do like it though.

Being one of those who got annoyed with big vehicles parking next to me in car parks, I find it amusing that I now am one of them.
I love the reversing camera and the inbuilt navigation system.....and I love being able to park anywhere. Maybe larger parking areas for bigger cars would be a good idea.

If you can't beat them, join them. : )

Dear O Sung Wu,

Thank you for your great comments (as always).
And, I agree with you. These vehicles are undoubtedly
here to stay.

Dear Suse,

I'm so glad that you've found your perfect ride.
And, I fully understand, it being work related.
I'm due to get a new car as well for work.
But I have to wait and see what's on offer.
I'll let you know.

<< Yes Luddy, I think they [RVs] are safer. >>

Probably right, Hazza.

But as I said earlier; the type of vehicle is a pretty minor consideration compared to the poor driving skills of a very large portion of the population, and the god-awful terrible policing regime when it comes to road safety.

THESE are the things that everyone who is concerned about their safety and that of their family on the road should be addressing!

If we could just rein in those people who have no qualms about driving or riding a motorbike or bicycle in a risky manner, as though speed limits and safety margins are only things for ‘other people’ to worry about, and those inexperienced or otherwise inattentive drivers who just don’t understand what the risks are and what safety margins they can implement or increase when driving…. then we’d all be much better off.

And this includes morons who drive too fast and carelessly in carparks!

o sung wu & Foxy,
I drive a Hummer H2 (mainly on the weekends) it is a tax dodge vehicle that is 10% tax deductible and all my expenses (gas and service etc) are business deductions. When the lease runs out I will pay out the residual and sell it for a good profit because of its low mileage and condition.
Foxy you would seek to limit my freedom of choice and my investment program because you have a fear or phobia when it comes to large RV and their like.
My simple answer is stay off the road( your freedom of choice) or buy one yourself and compete for the space.
Incidentally my wife drives a BMW Series 5 4x4 so do you want to put her off the road as well just because she is exercising her freedom of choice.
Or could it be a little bit of jealousy or envy coming out.

o sung wu,
My old mentor, Roger, seems to have blown it this time.

Luddy most of the car park accidents around here are cars from each side of a laneway backing into each other. One of my neighbors got the corner of a Hilux table top ute right in the center of the boot of her new Mazda 3. I don't know if she will ever get over it.

She thought it was the other drivers fault, but the law said it was down to each equally. These bumps are more common than a moving car hitting one backing out.

That is why I like my convertibles. I can no longer turn my head right round to look out the back of a hardtop vehicle, so have to depend on monitoring all three mirrors. You can only really see in one at a time, giving a fair chance another car could start to back out unseen, just as you did.

In a convertible, top down, you get a wide enough spread of vision to cover any other cars that may be dangerous to you.

This getting old & stiff is a bit of a pain, but no where near as bad as the alternative. Not waking up one morning would be a less desirable alternative.

Hi there CHRISGAFF1000...

The 'dodger' if convicted will do the 'lot' I expect, and at seventy three he'll only be released to the Coroner. I dunno mate, I'm a bit ambivalent about the bloke, his early reputation was beyond reproach until he started associating with the likes of Ned Smith and his mate Abo Henry et al. Interestingly, if I'd passed him in the corridors of the old CIB, he'd always say g'day ?

A Hummer Chris ! May I ask how many gallons do you get to the mile ? Sorry I'm being a bit facetious with the remark, as well as just a tad amount of jealousy if truth be known ? I like everything about them. There's no doubt about the Yanks, they can design and build some fantastic military vehicles, and some brilliant 'civilianised' versions of those same vehicles too ? Yours would be a large, V8, or is it a V12 ? To be honest, I've no knowledge at all of the mechanics of the vehicle, in fact I've only seen a TV presentation of the military version being put through it's acceptance trials, I think it was ?

The vehicle's capabilities appeared almost limitless, in terms of traversing all manner of rough country including protracted deep water crossings, and negotiating impossibly steep angled inclines ? Notwithstanding the immense width of the vehicle, I was quite surprised how narrow the accommodation was, for both driver and front passenger access seemed ? Both were separated by this massive engine/transmission well or access. Still, the seats looked as if they were capable of holding you securely, and relatively comfortably also ?

In conclusion, you would've paid a quid or two for it I'd imagine, even though it's subject to a leasing arrangement ? Further, I bet you'd have infinitely more fun in the Hummer, than your good wife in her BMW 4x4 ? Be careful not to upset FOXY please Chris, though she does have a very good point in terms of been almost 'suffocated' by these most aggressive SUV's drivers !

The problems of reversing out of a carpark,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfMhNqAJhO4

Reminds me that I rescued a car that had become wedged on a wide driveway that went down in a bit of a semi-circle from the street to the lower ground carpark of some expensive new holiday apartments. Unbelievably the driver had managed to put front and back corners against the concave wall. The frustrated twenties-something daughter said that her mum (driver) had somehow become so fixated on avoiding the said wall that she had been drawn to it and a number of wiggles later it was firmly wedged. The daughter had been forced to climb out of the driver's side.

It was quite a lovely driveway too. Nice and easy, not steep and made for cars coming from opposite directions to pass without bother. No other car was around at the time, she did it all herself. The daughter volunteered that her mum didn't feel comfortable with anyone else driving but herself. Figure that one!

Many drivers never received professional instruction and past driver testing could have been a bit lax. Some 'mature' drivers just 'do not get it' though. The years haven't improved them much at all. Whereas over lunch at the motorboat club you can see many women and men of all ages handling large trailers very competently indeed. Then there is the occasional driver who obviously just 'doesn't get it', will likely not accept advice and at some stage may be invited by someone responsible at the club to go somewhere else.

Those who seem to think that age plays a part in one's
driving/parking ability? I suppose one is referring
to senility here. And of course there are concerns in the
community about elderly drivers who have and cause
accidents. Just as there are concerns about young drivers
doing the same thing. The recent adds regarding P Platers
target parents and young drivers. These are all issues
that need further discussion.

To paraphrase the American comedian George Burns:

"When I was in my twenties I was called a rugged individualist.
When I was in my thirties, I was considered eccentric.
Here I am doing and saying the same things I did then and
I'm being labelled senile."

However, regarding Rvs and 4WDS - I have expressed my concerns.
My car of choice - sometime in the future would be a BMW -
which my husband wants to buy for me. However, I'm quite
happy currently with my 2000 - Holden Statesman.

Foxy, "However, I'm quite happy currently with my 2000 - Holden Statesman"

LOL. There is your parking problem: a monstrous dinosaur lump of metal with a poor turning circle and awful driver view behind. A single use saloon that doesn't even do that job well and is the reason people buy multipurpose Japanese RVs.

Yet you blame 'RVs'. How does that work?

There is an eye-patch you need to get rid of and it carries a GMH brand.

Carparks have been shrinking for years to accommodate the swell in population from over-enthusiastic immigration policies. Y'know, Rudd's 'Big Australia' and all that and public and private infrastructure just cannot keep up with the Aussie Third World 1.8 pop increase annually.

A small German or medium Japanese car could lessen your parking woes immediately. Leastways if anyone has difficulty parking them they should give that licence back.

You have lost the plot beachball. It is when these rv's park beside you, you need someone to guide you out of your car park and back onto the street, without getting run over.
Mixed parking causes lots of problems and safety issues.
They should be banned from angle parking,
I am mostly in favor of rv's should not be allowed in town areas.
Their town usage is not what they were designed for.

579,

Maybe if you first pass the practical driving test and get a drivers licence.

Get a few of your broomsticks, tape them to used grocery cartons and practice parking in a vacant shopping centre carpark. Do look out for those planter boxes and kerbing though.

o sung wu,
It a '12 and I get about 5km to the litre but other people are paying the costs so I don't really care.
I use it mainly for PI work and I would have a clue about taking it bush.
'Roger' is stuffed and served I'm afraid.
I used to get him out on weekend leave from Berrima when I was running the Southern Highlands patrol.
Even though he shot my mate through the kitchen window in Chatswood I still liked the guy. He had that endearing persona that sucked you in 'said the spider to the fly' sort of thing.

otb,

Have you read anything I've written?
You obviously don't seem to understand the problem
I am referring to.

It's the big Rvs (as in huge) that I'm complaining
about - blocking lines of sight. I don't have a
problem parking or driving as you seem to have in
reading.

cont'd ...

otb,

BTW - thanks for your offer of Japanese cars.
But my preference is for either British or European.
Cars that appeal to me are -Jaguars, Citroens, Rovers,
Audis, Bentleys, and Mercedes-Benz (My mum owned and drove a classic) - Japanese is not something
that would ever occur to me to buy.
I may be able to persuade my husband instead of a BMW -
to buy me a classic Mercedes -Benz Sports. (SL500 - 2003)
in a brilliant silver with full grey leather of course.
I love the classic Mercedes - not the current ones.

Cheers.

@Foxy, Sunday, 1 June 2014 11:29:22 AM, "Afterall it is an ego thing isn't it! Size does seem to matter to some. ;-)"

Your usual shot at men and their private parts.

You try to work the 'status' angle too.

But you yourself drive a massive Holden Statesman, the General's behemoth status symbol. What statement were you trying to make there? Does it have the 5.7 litre V8 engine as well, with its claimed supercar acceleration? That is a heck of a lot of US metal to be hauling one @rse to the shopping mall. Does it even fit in some bays? Can it get around the corners?

You don't see anything even mildly hypocritical (and humorous) in the owner of a Holden Statesman spitting her dummy about RVs and demanding laws to restrict them?

otb,

You've obviously never driven a Statesman.
Mine is a six cylinder, and it does corner beautifully.
Parking is not a problem, and it is as easy to drive as
a mini-minor. I have driven a variety of cars of various
sizes, both left-hand, and right-hand drives, on several
continents, and I didn't have a problem with any of them.

You appear to be the one with problems.
And that is something over which I have no control.

However, -

I shan't be responding to you any further if you continue
with your unwarranted personal attacks.
All I've done is express an opinion. You are certainly
free to disagree with my opinion - but not to continue
to attack me personally.

'evening to you CHRISGAFF1000...

Your mate was mortally injured when he was allegedly shot by the 'dodger' through the kitchen window of his Chatswood home ? He was considered so severely injured, he was not expected to live. Further, if my memory serves me correctly didn't the Coroner attend Royal North Shore, and take a 'dying declaration from him ? Do you still keep in touch these days ?

There was no doubt, he was on the fast track and highly respected for his undercover work, by no lesser personage than Cec Abbott himself ?
Those were certainly heady days and the job needed to change substantially I reckon. I understand when you say he (Roger) was a fairly personable sort of bloke, and that seemed to be the popular opinion about him, by most of the troops. As I said when wandering around the corridors of the old CIB building he'd always acknowledge you, as you passed by.

A 12 cyl would work for me I reckon, but I couldn't afford to run the thing myself I'm afraid, not at 5km to the litre ? Still most everyone would get out of your road, given the vehicle's massive dimensions. Gee it'd be great drive I believe. Mate I'm tired and my eyes are giving out for the night, see you later Chris.

Foxy,

Your Holden Statesman is a big-ass limo by any measure.

It would be a monster in a shopping centre carpark and in inner city traffic too.

It is big even for a GM limo, with its extended wheelbase. It is 5237 mm long and 1847 mm wide, with a kerb weight 1718 kg. Turning circle of coal barge.

It is the limo that your Julia Whatshername loved being seen in when she was PM and she would still be ordering with chauffeur on her ex-PM gold card benefits courtesy of the long-suffering Aussie taxpayer. In black it could be the 'ride' of a Mafia crime boss, or the dictator of some unfortunate Third World country.

Those cars in the carpark were not holding you up. They were fleeing.

ex-PM gold card benefits courtesy of the long-suffering Aussie taxpayer.
otb,
Joe Hockey said the Gold Card is history.
re status vehicles, I'd like to see registrations adjusted to the number of cylinders & cc of the engine. We certainly would see more small cars in Foxy's Supermarket parking lot. RV's do not belong in inner cities.

Where do you live Individual?

In Queensland registrations are charged on the number of cylinders, & have had for years. This is most unfair in fact.

I have a 140 BHP 1 ton V8 which costs me around $1000 a year.

I have a 265 BHP 1.3 ton 4 cylinder which costs just over $500. That is a small 2 seater convertible, & the first one is even smaller. Surely the lighter smaller car should be cheaper under your idea.

There are plenty of turbo 4 cylinder cars with much higher power, & much heavier than either of the above, so how do you come up with your choice of who to hit with charges for owning naughty cars.

Personally I think we should triple the charges for paper thin dangerous small shopping trolleys. They are the dangerous cars, causing more injuries to their drivers, & should be discouraged. The really little things that fold up if hit by a sparrow should be banned if anything.

Don't believe those 5 star safety ratings either. They are the result of carefully engineered crash testing, & have very little if any relationship to the results of real world crashes. They are controlled by ridiculous things like how many airbags the things have, not by how they fold up round a driver when hit in normal crashes.

The following link may be of interest:

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/most-drivers-want-a-city-4wd-ban/story-e6frf7kx-1111118418990

It would be interesting to conduct a survey and see how many people - still feel the same way today.

Where did all of the envy that is so rife in Oz ever come from? That and constantly minding what is going on in their neighbours' backyards.

Did lax immigration policy import the whingers, did that fool Gough Whitlam legitimise them, their quickly-assumed victimhood and endless demands, or is it simply that the tabloid media and internet have given them a podium? The media sell to an audience and they win the whingers cheaply with invitations to play 'Ain't it Awful'.

I suppose their leaders like the recently departed Julia Whatshername encouraged envy and all sorts of other nasty stuff. Who can forget her 'Progressive' gender and Class wars? Hey, it was only so Julia could live and travel in the style to which she wanted to become accustomed.

Well Hasbeen, the public servant regulators have never been known for
consistency unless it has been for getting it wrong.
A few years back the registration of electric cars was impossible
because various requirements for petrol cars could not be entered into
the various boxes on the forms.
The forms could not be accepted otherwise.
I am told it required a song and dance to be put on by the applicant
until they reverted to the old manual method.

Hasbeen's reply has made me think of another way of working out how much registration should be. How about the number of kilometres travelled at the end of the month instead of up front for a whole year? A little like an electricity meter because why should I pay $600 + for a vehicle that only does about 200 km a year or less ? Same goes for trailers. If you only tow your boat to ramp 4 times a year for a total of 10 km then $220 is a bit steep.

Ho Individual !
They have already thought of that.
It has subsided out of sight.
Five minutes looking at the idea will show that there are so many ways
to bypass it that the enforcers could never keep up.
It can only work in a small area like Central London.
The system they use there could not be afforded if it had to cover
every street in every town in the country. So that is out.

there are so many ways to bypass it that the enforcers could never keep up.
Bazz,
In this day & age of GPS tracking etc. it should be one of the easiest & cheapest ways to enforce. You renew your rego every month or perhaps three months online & the thing is done. have random checks & if you're found cheating then you'll get hit hard enough not to ever entertain the idea of cheating ever again.

Re the GPS, all you have to do is slip a metal sleeve over the antenna and lo & behold no travel !
Alternative, just have a very low power oscillator on the GPS frequency.
If it was inside your car near the GPS it would never be heard outside.
The same with odometers, you just connect a signal generator to the
pickup on the transmission and run the odometer around till it reads
less than it was.

People are actually hacking the eeproms in the car computers.
The moment the car manufacturers introduced electronics they widened
the number of people that could fiddle their systems

Please tell me you don't expect people to get a $400K job for ZERO.
Bazz,
That's not an issue at all because technically it is no issue anymore plus the consequences of being caught are not worth the attempt.
Problem solved !

Oops ! I think I crossed a couple of threads here. Apologies.

Like rental housing, all levels of government see a tax milch cow in motor vehicles.

Through fuel taxes, higher registration costs and import duties government has sent such a strong price signal to motorists that the medium (eg Mitsubihi and Toyota) and larger vehicles (Falcon and Commodore) plummeted in sales. The car makers in Australia have closed their doors.

As an observation, the city snarl could be reduced a lot if cars were not part of salary packages and if public bureaucrats had to make some financial contribution to the fuel and running costs of the work cars they home garage. While on the latter, it is amazing how many public servants home garage and commute long distances to and from their country and coastal homes.

The other consideration is work sponsored parking. It strongly encourages commuting by private vehicle. Canberra public servants provide an easy example. Not satisfied with superb roads and ample parking, they want their parking free as well. For another example, a local State primary school where I am still called to volunteer in an honorary school council role has over ten years resumed larger sections of previous pupil play areas as teacher car parking. When my children attended, the thin edge of the wedge was the introduction of parking for the principal, then her deputy. Soon later there is bitumen everywhere and a procession of teacher and administrative assistant vehicles into the school grounds every day. Yet there is public transport right outside and the school grounds were declared as inadequate for the much lower student numbers twenty years ago.

This is the problem isn't it? That is OK for people to whine about 'others' and their cars, but they expect different treatment themselves. Sauce for the goose is never sauce for the gander. A person who could walk, take a bus or share a private vehicle takes a behemoth to a shopping centre carpark expecting others to leave their cars at home.

Some self-examination is in order because self-entitlement, selfishness to be blunt, and jealousy of others are now distinguishing features of Australian culture.

I'd like to Thank everyone who's contributed to
this discussion. For me at least, it's now run
its course.

Perhaps someone else would like to start a new
discussion on the hazards of bicyles on city streets?

It would make for an interesting discussion.

Cheers.

Hello there FOXY...

Thank you for a most interesting Topic, I thoroughly enjoyed all the 'toing and froing' with diverse opinions !

Your suggestion of a Topic dedicated on bicycles on public thoroughfares...Grrrrrrrrr ! Until they at the very least display an identification number on their bicycle, they'll not get too much support from me FOXY. I'm not suggesting they pay any sort of fee, but at the very least, they should be readily identifiable.

Thanks again and please stay well.

I am sympathetic to cyclists but I found one local council advisory
group I used to attend did not like an idea I thought would have been a winner.
What I proposed was a cycle track built into the railway right of way
on its very edge. In most places there is a lot of space between the
track and the edge of an adjacent road or back yards.
It would make good cycling tracks because the railway gradients would
make for easy cycling.
There would be some places, eg cuttings, where the cycle way would
have to deviate, but in most areas long distances could be covered.

They just did not like it and refused to put it to council.

Hi there BAZZ...

There's legitimacy in your suggestion my friend, I can only conclude they didn't like it, because they didn't think of it themselves ?

@Foxy, Sunday, 8 June 2014 1:20:04 PM

That is a bit rough and rude, declaring an end to the discussion and diverting it onto bikes as well. Within a few minutes after a new post too.

otb,

Rude and Rough?
Really?

I usually always Thank all of the posters
who have taken part
in the discussions that I have initiated on this
forum. That's always been my style. And,
in this case I did add - that for me at least,
this particular
discussion has run its course - which means of course
that you are welcome to continue on with it. That's up
to you and others. It's just me who's said all that I
wanted. Or are you offended by the fact that I'm not
going to be around to respond to you? If that's the
case - then I am flattered that you think so highly of
my opinion.

As for the bicycle suggestion? That's all it was -
just a suggestion, and there does appear to be an interest
in the topic - as you can see.

Dear O Sung Wu,

Thank You for your kind words - and your continued
interest in what I post. As for my health - hopefully
it will be much better after my procedure on 21st July.
Until then - I have good days, and some that are not
so good.

Dear Bazz,

I'll have to think a bit more about the pros and cons of
bicycles on city streets. Maybe I will start a new
discussion. However, I'll have to do some more research
on the topic. Thank You though for your ideas.
They're always welcome.

You just keep on trucking with that GMH status tank 'Statesman' of yours Foxy and tell others to make way for you.

Apart from the needless bulk, there are the inevitable oil leaks to worry cyclists when the rain returns. Exxon Valdez oil trails is a common problem of the General's large offerings.

otb,

Thank You for your concern about me and what I
will be driving in the future. My Birthday is
coming up in July and as I stated earlier my
husband wants to buy me a new car (my choice).
I haven't yet decided what it will be - but I'll
be sure to get your approval before I make the final
decision. I would hate to offend your sensibilities
in any way by making the wrong choice. Imagine
if I went for another "status symbol." Although I
personally would never have picked the Statesman as
a "status symbol," there's so many others on the market
to choose from if I really wanted to go down that route.
We bought the Statesman from a farmer friend who wanted
to sell it and it was too good a deal to pass up.
But each to their own. If you think the Statesman is a
"status symbol" - who am I to judge you.

See you on another thread

LOL, very foxy to twist it that way, but you have already admitted you own and drive the General's Statesman barge. Any wonder you hold up the traffic in shopping centre carparks. However it is those 'RVs', Suzukis and Hondas that are the problem and they must be controlled through special regulations you say. Typical Left - it is always someone else who must make the concessions. Do as you say not do as you do.

Ex-PM Julia Whatshername was similarly pretentious and hypocritical: one woman being toted around in GMH's showboat barge, and all the time claiming she was worried about the burning of fossil fuels and global warming.

Your husband is going to buy you a new car? Jolly good. Pleased to know that a man has finally become useful in some way for you, even if it is still his wallet that counts.

Foxy,

Thanks for an interesting thread, and my best wishes for your upcoming procedure. Take care, and keep well, dear lady.

OTB,

You are at times 'beyond the pale'.
Self-control has much to commend it.
You're 'playing of the man' would best be reserved for the Rugby field.
One word: Decorum.

Saltpetre,

You seem to do that yourself at times.

How anyone can possibly blame others for a minor hold up in a car park is beyond comprehension, but to seek more regulation of others while driving an enormous Yank tank that is only contributing to the problem is beyond the pale.

Insight doesn't come so easily to some and that includes 'White Knights' who come to rescue M'lady.

Dear Saltpetre,

Thank You for your well wishes.

As for otb's behaviour?

Shadow Minister once summed things up rather
aptly - words to the effect that having any
sort of a discussion with people of a certain
calibre was like playing chess with a pigeon.
They crap all over the board, and then delight in
wobbling around in it.

Although I must admit that the reference to my husband's
wallet was low and uncalled for, especially
when it's been my stable income that has seen us through some
rather difficult times for many years
during my husband's (he's an architect)
slack periods. We've a team - and always have been, and I
love and adore the man greatly. Totally inappropriate,
uncalled for, and low, by otb! (He seems to be taking a page
out of Clive Palmer's book here).

As for my car choice? - if I drove a Humvee - I could at
least understand the fuss.

You do the self-righteous outrage rather well.

Go back to your opening post and consider how silly it was to blame others and to demand more laws to control 'them', when you were driving a 'monstrosity' yourself.

Think insight and accountability for your own actions.

otb,

Pigeons are in no position to give advice
to others on how to behave when they crap
all over the place.

Hi there FOXY...

You're so right, marriage these days is very much a team effort ! Whereas forty or fifty years ago, the traditional roles dictated that the husband was the bread winner, and the wife, the homemaker. When I was first married and very junior in the job, without both the financial and moral support of my dear wife, we'd be in some trouble trying to service a large mortgage, back then ?

Apropos ONTHEBEACH, I reckon much of what he says is 'tongue in cheek', which can be occasionally construed as either derisive or indirectly, impertinent. In my opinion, he's a pretty decent sort of bloke with a solid grasp on life per se, and that of current political reality. Notwithstanding he's clearly from the right, which does motivate and influence much of what he says, and that doesn't always delight his critics ?

It's no secret either, that my political views are so far to the right, it would make Genghis Khan look like a 'leftie' !

FOXY, I would also like to join SALTPETRE in wishing you all the very best for your scheduled procedure on the 21st of July. I'm sure it'll prove most successful for you on this occasion !

That is fair comment, o sung wu.

What is at issue here is the (entitled Left) foolishness and arrogance that would propose more law to 'solve' anything and everything they happen not to agree with. In the subject case, something than caused a minor wait and not even discomfort. First World whining of the entitled. Refer back to the OP. Honestly how difficult is it to take one's turn and care when leaving a car park?

What I don't take lightly at all are invasions of our freedom and liberty. We Aussies need to learn to be very concerned indeed and take action where others propose more regulations, ie laws, to control us. All for our own 'good' of course.

G'day there ONTHEBEACH...

Nobody, neither left nor right wishes to live under a 'nanny state' ! We all have too much government intrusion into our lives, without giving them anymore invasive powers to interfere with either our privacy or our freedoms. Moreover, I don't trust governments anymore, whatever their proposal, whatever their promises. Once bitten, twice shy ?

Dear O Sung Wu,

Once again Thank You for your well wishes.
They are greatly appreciated.

As for politics?

Many people nowdays don't see things in views
of Left/Right. They look at the descriptors
of Left and Right as anachronistic paradigms that
divide people. Besides, most people don't vote as a
bloc on issues. There are
conservative voters who are at times - quite progressive on
certain issues just as there are progressive voters who are
quite conservative on certain issues as well. We are
all individuals and for most of us sweeping generalisations
don't really apply. Therefore divisions of ethnicity, gender,
sexual orientation, occupation, class, age, all need
to be questioned.

I look forward to further discussions with you
on another thread.

Cheers.

o sung wu,

The Left of some years ago, the traditional Left if you want, would not find much(anything?) in common with the so-called Left today and they would be shocked by the intrusive laws than have been mooted and passed as 'left' legislation, that is true.

I am not 'Right' or 'Conservative' because like so many people (you too I would warrant) I am heartily sick of the,

"Your-rights-end-where-my-feelings-and-sense-of-entitlement-begin"

attitude of present day 'leftists'.

The modern 'leftists' are a constant threat to free speech and liberty. They suck big time and 'traditional' lefties would say the same. Of course you could say that there are no real lefties around, only the political 'Progressives' with their Cultural Marxism and no traditional leftie (nor I) might disagree with that.

Hi there FOXY...

It's always a pleasure to speak/debate/reason with you. Otherwise, why would we continue following Graham's exceptional Forum, and engage in the various debates as they emerge from the minds and thoughts of the many excellent contributors who favour both OLO and the Forum ? As always, please take care FOXY !

Good evening to you ONTHEBEACH...

I do agree with you, the 'left' of today are quite different to those of earlier times, more like the traditional Labour 'Left' of years gone by. I also agree there appears to be a real sense of entitlement originating from the 'modern' Left if you will. No doubt they'd deny it, nevertheless there's evidence that it does exist.

Further, in the last twenty five, thirty five years, the 'Left' have become far more abusive, derogatory and disrespectful in the way they continual challenge those of the LNP persuasion, aka the 'Right' ? This in turn has caused we of the 'Right' to engage in similar insulting, rude and disrespectful retorts towards them.

Consequently, neither side emerges with any sense of claiming the moral high ground ! As both sides are just as bad, and as culpable as the other ! Which is a pretty sad state of affairs really ?

I just don't get it ! We're all Australians, we all have our own particular needs, our goals and our individual feelings, and visions for our own futures. Of course we have our families too, who have their needs also. And we all have debts, that need to be regularly serviced. Most of us are either employed or retired. And regrettably some of us are unemployed, wanting and needing a regular job. There are just a few, who don't wish to work but for reasons of their own, prefer to accept regular benefits from the government.

More importantly though, we're still all Australians ! We all bleed when we're cut, whether we're from the 'Left' or from the 'Right' in our political beliefs ! Yet we continue to rip each other asunder...? When on earth will it all cease ?

Dear O Sung Wu,

It's also a pleasure to discuss issues with you.
And I fully agree with your last post. Many people
see the Left and Right as anachronistic paradigms
that divide people leaving them open to being
manipulated by the two party system. This must
change and there is no doubt that the old paradigms
that have restricted the emancipation of humanity need
to be shattered. Divisions in our society of ethnicity,
gender, sexual orientation, class and age all need to be
questioned. Perhaps that's why we currently see people
like Clive Palmer and his party attracting support.

In the modern indusrialised countries much has changed only
very recently in terms of governance. Today the bureaucratic
class (at its highest levels) is likely to be drawn from
economists and in particular those with a tunnel vision of
their discipline. There are economists and economists!

Of course, bureaucratic personnel are not the bulk of a
country's citizens and we need only to be wary of such an
elite if they control the information citizens need in
putting pressure on their elected representatives.

In a democracy the citizen is supposed to be in charge, not
the bureaucrat. How much (and what kind) of information
(and education) should the citizen have if he or she is to have
an effective vote in a democracy? Bureaucrats, given their
job description as public servants, you would think exist to
serve the public.

The reality is that the citizen has had to delegate to elected
members of a parliament the task of directing and
overseeing the bureaucrats. The citizen has no direct control and
his or her influence is remote and irregular - occuring only
when the people's representatives are chosen in elections.

At present people are certainly expressing their frustrations
with the way things are. As John Howard made quite clear
at his recent appearance at the National Press Club -
people will not accept things that they consider to be
unfair. And he was spot on with that.

That is a lot of words to say that the rigid, ideologically-driven Left 'Progressives' aka the international socialists and radical feminists for example should not accept any accountability for the unintended (we hope unintended) negative consequences of their re-jigging of social policy, that apparent under the previous Labor/Greens government.

Returning to the OP, I object most strongly to any suggestion that there should be more regulation of vehicles and licences simply because you, Foxy, cannot handle your massive GMH limousine in a private shopping centre carpark and you don't think you should wait your turn.

That is the matter being discussed, the typical leftist (but far from traditional left) knee-jerk reaction of more laws and Big Sister State continually being called upon to intervene more and more to control the private affairs of citizens. The Labor/Gillard push actually boasted of passing 2,000 new pieces of legislation to control us. THat is the problem with leftist 'Progressives', they always know what is best for others, but sauce for the goose is never sauce for the gander.

I say again, I am heartily sick of the,

"Your-rights-end-where-my-feelings-and-sense-of-entitlement-begin"

attitude of present day 'leftists'.

If you can't handle your large limo in a shopping centre carpark, it is simple, don't take it there. Laws and State intervention should be the very last resort in a democracy and based on evidence, not your emotional reaction to having to wait your turn..

While on the subject of barges, GMH Statesman limos at least, something to lighten the mood,

Mark Antony is out of town. When he gets back, he and Cleopatra go out on the Nile in her royal barge. He says, "What did you do while I was gone, Cleo?" She says, "I studied metaphysics with a guru." "What did you learn?" "He convinced me that if I want to, I can walk on water." "Show me." She climbs up on the railing and says, "Here I go." A minute later, she yells, "Look, Tony! I'm doing it!" He walks over to the railing." After a minute, he says, "Cleo, you're in d'Nile." (denial)

If our former Prime Minister Julia Gillard would
have been able to walk on water - the headlines
from the NewsCorp media would have read -

"Prime Minister Can't Swim!"

cont'd ...

I drive a vehicle that is compatible with city life.
I do not block any one's view. I am an excellent driver -
I have no problem with parking. Nor do I have any sense
of "entitlement." However, I do feel that having a
HUGE utility vehicle in a city makes no sense. That is
my opinion - to which I am entitled. Here is a link that
verifies the fact that I am not the only one who shares
this opinion:

http://www.nosuv.org/melbournetimes.html

I shan't be responding any further to this discussion.

Cheers.

Hi there...

I love it ! FOXY & ONTHEBEACH ! Nothing like a bit of humour to lighten the day from all our worries and our fiscal problems !

Both of you, take good care of yourselves please. And remember; 'Don't do anything that can't be done on a bicycle' ?

Dear O Sung Wu,

Seeing as its you I shall respond one last time.

A man on a bike, carrying two sacks on his shoulders
was stopped by a guard while crossing the
US-Mexican border.

"What's in the bags?" asked the guard.

"Sand," the cyclist replied.

"Get them off; We need to take a look."

The guard emptied the bags and found they contained nothing
but sand. The man re-loaded his bags and continued across
the border. A week later, the same man was crossing again with
two more bags. The guard demanded to see them, and again
they contained nothing but sand. This continued every week for
6 months, until one day the cyclist failed to appear.

A few days later, that same guard ran into the cyclist in the
city.

"Hey, where have you been?" the guard asked.

"You sure had us wondering! We knew you were smuggling something
across the border. So, tell me and I won't say a word.
What was it?"

The man smiled and told the guard the truth.

"Bicycles!"

See you on another discussion my friend.