Road toll - Police stupid obsession blaming speed

[Akzle]

What you are saying then is that if all fines for everything were dumped there would be no behavioural change made by anyone? Your a fuckwit if you think that.

did i say that? please quote it for reference. the exact point at which i said that.

you, being a fuckwit, do not get to determine whether anyone else is.

you're a fuckwit.

[Akzle]

You still dont get it with your question as to how the lower reward premium for those not at fault is funded now do you? You need to read some of my previous posts to find out but I doubt you will. Sorry to leave you hanging but I have stated the answer to your question many times.

yet you go to the effort of posting a lot of non-answers.

you're a fuckwit.

[Woodman]

Someone on here posted yesterday that compulsary schooling will not work as it will create over confidence or people will just go back to their old ways after they get out of school anyway. Financial penalties do work as a deterrant as when you pay rates or power bill (as examples) there is a financial penalty applied if you do not pay on time.

That isn't stopping people using more electricity though is it?

[Viking01]

You still dont get it with your question as to how the lower reward premium for those not at fault is funded now do you? You need to read some of my previous posts to find out but I doubt you will. Sorry to leave you hanging but I have stated the answer to your question many times.

"You still dont get it with your question as to how the lower reward premium for those
not at fault is funded now do you? "


I will admit to some working knowledge of ACC and some of its internal business systems
and operation.

Enough to know ACC deals in levies, and not premiums. Which you continue to confuse.
And think it's just semantics.

Enough to know that ACC groups vehicles into classes deemed to have similar levels
of risk, with levy rates being calculated and assigned per class (whether a car, truck
or motorcycle).

Enough to know ACC levy rates may be varied, after consideration of underlying fund
balances, provisions, draw-downs, scheme cross subsidy etc.


But I do have to admit that your ACC "premium reward scheme" does have me beaten.

Especially as your leading comment above seems to imply it already exists, and that
you're familiar with its funding (or payout).

The ACC search engine - and Google - couldn't seem to find any mention of your
"premium reward scheme". Perhaps you could just point me to a link re this ACC
"product" on the ACC website ?

Shouldn't take you more than a minute to find. Even for a busy person like you.


"You need to read some of my previous posts to find out but I doubt you will."

Don't be in doubt - I have no intention of doing so. I'm always happy to learn
something new, but prefer fact to fantasy.

"Sorry to leave you hanging but I have stated the answer to your question
many times. "

Replied - maybe . Actually provided a meaningful answer - No.

[granstar]

Wow what a ramble!! Sure what I propose lacks technical detail but a simple vehicle insurance model could be applied to ACC by imposing a higher charge for those with an at fault history. For example when you apply for vehicle insurance you are asked to declare any past "at fault crashes" going back a number of years and your premium is set at a higher rate because of it.

Annnd your going to tell them

[granstar]

What you are saying then is that if all fines for everything were dumped there would be no behavioural change made by anyone? Your a fuckwit if you think that.

There is no need to be rude to people.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=sEk6Kha1lB8

[george formby]

The last few pages are some of the best I have read on KB for yonks. All prompted by someone with a very small cauliflower between their ears.

I take back what I said about KB going down the shitter. Vive la resistance!

[FJRider]

What you are saying then is that if all fines for everything were dumped there would be no behavioural change made by anyone? Your a fuckwit if you think that.

He is correct. Those that get fines fall into two groups ... those that pay them (some immediately ... and pay even if they can [or can't] afford it) ... and those that don't (and never will ... even if they can afford it).

Thus ... the behavior of both will never change.

[Daffyd]

You and a few others just attack my ideas because you are jelous you cant think up anything better yourself. Maybe you would have some credibility if as well as attacking my idea you responded with an idea of your own. Or are you just fearfull your idea would be attacked by others as well?

I like me. Who do you like?

[Akzle]

"You still dont get it with your question as to how the lower reward premium for those
not at fault is funded now do you? "


I will admit to some working knowledge of ACC and some of its internal business systems
and operation.

Enough to know ACC deals in levies, and not premiums. Which you continue to confuse.
And think it's just semantics.

Enough to know that ACC groups vehicles into classes deemed to have similar levels
of risk, with levy rates being calculated and assigned per class (whether a car, truck
or motorcycle).

Enough to know ACC levy rates may be varied, after consideration of underlying fund
balances, provisions, draw-downs, scheme cross subsidy etc.


But I do have to admit that your ACC "premium reward scheme" does have me beaten.

Especially as your leading comment above seems to imply it already exists, and that
you're familiar with its funding (or payout).

The ACC search engine - and Google - couldn't seem to find any mention of your
"premium reward scheme". Perhaps you could just point me to a link re this ACC
"product" on the ACC website ?

Shouldn't take you more than a minute to find. Even for a busy person like you.


"You need to read some of my previous posts to find out but I doubt you will."

Don't be in doubt - I have no intention of doing so. I'm always happy to learn
something new, but prefer fact to fantasy.

"Sorry to leave you hanging but I have stated the answer to your question
many times. "

Replied - maybe . Actually provided a meaningful answer - No.

brevity not your strong point eh. and i think you'll find it's "sematicals"

[Viking01]

brevity not your strong point eh. and i think you'll find it's "sematicals"

Occasionally.

"Sematicals" - Not in my dictionary.

[Akzle]

.

"Sematicals" - Not in my dictionary.

oh. well i guess your not a fuckwit.

[pritch]

Somebody mentioned autonomous cars, can't remember where and I'm buggered if I'm reading back through 47 pages of this.

Anyhoo, hot from the USA: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.8ee05b9c0488

[caspernz]

oh i see. you think a driving license is indicative of some kind of ability.

dont get to see the road much huh?

Yes, in my country of origin a driving licence was indeed indicative of actual ability to drive to a certain standard. In NZ it seems a licence comes in a Weetbix packet

Oh yeah I must admit I don't see the road much, down to maybe 120,000 km a year now, used to be more like 175,000 km a year...

I can't help responding to this one

If all the penalties were removed there would be behaviour change - someone you have driven crazy would kill you ..

Can we turn up unannounced or is there a booking system?

The last few pages are some of the best I have read on KB for yonks. All prompted by someone with a very small cauliflower between their ears.

I take back what I said about KB going down the shitter. Vive la resistance!

Please stop insulting cauliflower...you meant to say cabbage surely?

[Scuba_Steve]

. In NZ it seems a licence comes in a Weetbix packet

That's not quite true, in NZ our licence is based primarily on an age limit & having a spare hundy