# Please sign this petition - Fuel prices



## alzak

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/347


----------



## ghostsword

I would sign a petition to have the fuel price increase to £10 per litre, not decrease. 

The less people use cars the better, there are bikes, walking, etc.


----------



## ghostsword

I cycle everywhere, and think the same of motorists.  Although the issue is not so much the cars in London but the buses. 

I really think that the fuel price should increase at least 10 fold, and I own a car, a diesel meriva, but a full tank lasts for almost a month, as the car is just used for shopping and school drops. Less than 6k miles a year.


----------



## ghostsword

Also, cigaretes should increase to £20 a packet, hard liquor to £30 a bottle, and beer to £5 a pint (if not already).


----------



## ghostsword

So let me see if I understand this, fuel increase would mean a society collapse?

I think that the issue is that we may be too dependent of fuel to look at other options.

Electric cars, for example, there are some about. Smaller engine cars? Do you really need a 1.8L car? 

Local shops? 

How did people survive before fuel? 

Not attacking you, or people that are after the cheap fuel. See it as the devil advocate, think of alternatives, before saying that the society would implode if fuel increased. 

Now if the internet crashed, then we would cease to exist.


----------



## clonitza

Nobody will really look for alternatives if fuel price remains as it is. So I'm not signing.
Don't really care how long takes a delivery, people here still use horse-drawn carts. 
Luis I agree with most of the things but beer price 

Before fuel, electricity etc. people were doing just fine ... now we are just a bunch of big fat lazy bastards scared of our own shadows. 

Mike


----------



## Gary Nelson

skeletonw00t said:
			
		

> If fuel increased ten fold then the UK economy would implode & society as we know it would collapse...
> Almost everything we rely on is dependant on business being able to transport goods & if fuel costs increased then they would not be able to afford to do this.
> Think about it:
> 
> No "next day delivery" or even same week delivery on online orders.



No next day delivery! that is just not going to work for me... I mean what about my orders from TGM?


----------



## Brenmuk

Fuel prices poses dilemmas for both individuals and the government.
If fuel prices drop then the incentive to move to more greener/alternative fuels goes away and also for car manufacturers to make more fuel efficient cars.
If the prices continue to increase even by small amounts not even 10x then this would impact on the economy and means inflation, recession and job losses.

From the point of view of the government they have to balance the need for tax revenue against negative effects of increasing prices ie  inflation, recession and job losses. The level of taxes on fuel in the UK means that small increases in the commodity prices of oil results in large increases in retail prices in oil at the pump. VAT has risen to 20% adding further pressure and the underlying price of oil IMO is only set to rise. I would like to see the government ease off the taxes a bit and I think they could do this and without hurting revenue significantly. 
Also the huge UK budget deficit and the quantitative easing that the BOE has been carrying out means that our currency will weaken which means that the cost of buying oil from oil producing nations will also go up.

In an ideal world we would not have become dependent on fossil fuels that are finite and polluting but we are where we are.


----------



## Piece-of-fish

Come on people. No fuel no modern world atm. Later it will gradually change to other types but now it has to go down.
The world would really collapse.


----------



## amy4342

Switch to LPG people - a renewable resource (dependant on source), which already fuels a larger percentage of the worlds transport than people may think.

A trade-off between a faster, more able society and a cheaper, less harmful renewable energy resource.


----------



## Mark Evans

Luis! what planet do you live on?...raise fuel prices?   

It's because of current prices, i nearly went out of business!


----------



## ghostsword

Mark Evans said:
			
		

> Luis! what planet do you live on?...raise fuel prices?
> 
> It's because of current prices, i nearly went out of business!



 I still maintain that fuel prices should be raised. Bad about you almost going out of business, but there are other things to consider than businesses. 

If you almost went out of business because the fuel prices went up, then maybe you need to find something else to do, as prices will rise, not fall. It's not like there are lots of it about.


----------



## m_attt

i guess you are from london or similar, where you can walk or bus or train everywhere.


----------



## Ian Holdich

prices have fallen though??!!

Supermarkets have just taken 3p off fuel per litre. There's always going to be competitive when it comes to fuel, fuel prices will rise when there is trouble in the middle east. Saying prices will never come down, is actually wrong. They probably will drop again once Colonel Kerbady has been sorted. Admittedly they won't drop to the prices they were ten years ago, but they will drop again.


----------



## DRillo

Petrol is used for more than fuelling cars - that seems to have been overlooked.
How do you think your food gets to a supermarket, greengrocer or even a market stall. Im struggling to think of something you could buy that fuel prices would not have an effect on.

Personally I would love to not have to drive anywhere, trouble is there is no other solution for me - unless I fancied a 5hour commute each way using dirty expensive and unreliable trains and buses.
When a practical alternative to petrol comes along I will be the first to use it.

Also those nice smooth roads bikes are rode on, what do you think pays for them, could it be road tax paid by those who use petrol?


----------



## ghostsword

m_attt said:
			
		

> i guess you are from london or similar, where you can walk or bus or train everywhere.


Yep, I am from London, where you can walk almost anywhere and be mugged, take the bus and pay a very high price for the pleasure of bad service, go on the tube and pay even more or cycle on the road and pray that a truck or white van does not take you under the wheels.

Yep, I'm from London. Funny enough I think that it is London that suffers most with the increase of fuel, as almost all households have a car. 

I don't go out of London that much, maybe went out of the M25 3 or 4 times in the 16 years I've been in the UK, but I would imagine that in most places in the UK people would have other forms of transport, such a walking, buses, horse and cart, cycling, etc. 


---
- .


----------



## Ian Holdich

i can't wait til they get rid of the cobbles on my street. Its grim up north Luis.


----------



## m_attt

ghostsword said:
			
		

> m_attt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i guess you are from london or similar, where you can walk or bus or train everywhere.
> 
> 
> 
> Yep, I am from London, where you can walk almost anywhere and be mugged, take the bus and pay a very high price for the pleasure of bad service, go on the tube and pay even more or cycle on the road and pray that a truck or white van does not take you under the wheels.
> 
> Yep, I'm from London. Funny enough I think that it is London that suffers most with the increase of fuel, as almost all households have a car.
> 
> I don't go out of London that much, maybe went out of the M25 3 or 4 times in the 16 years I've been in the UK, but I would imagine that in most places in the UK people would have other forms of transport, such a walking, buses, horse and cart, cycling, etc.
> 
> 
> ---
> - .
Click to expand...


yes an no really, if had to get to work (car 35 mins) it would take 5 buses and a taxi, and at least 2 hours, but wouldn't be able to work weekends as no services. when was at uni a 10 min car journey to drop daughter to childminder would have been 3 buses and an hour then same to get back to uni so would have been 4.30 5 am starts. an not back till late. wouldn't be able to get to family on weekends. and where they an i live isn't massivly rural. down here loads of people and bussiness would be stuffed if prices went that high


----------



## nayr88

m_attt said:
			
		

> i guess you are from london or similar, where you can walk or bus or train everywhere.



That's a good point

I live in romford an I can get anywhere by bus or bike, I use public transport a hell of alot and with an Oyester card the prices are OK along as they stay at they are, going up 30p in 2 years is a pi$$ take IMO.

Back on track

If I lived where my sister does where you are not allowed to walk along the road that links you too the main town and the bus comes when it feels like it, they are dependent on cars. My young brother had an amazing social life herein Romford, he stayed there for 6months an the kid turned into a freaking recluse haha.

So because we can get by without a car everyday doesn't mean the whole of uk can.

Every business is effected by fuel prices so you cant really say change business. My dad owns a tile shop, even he has been hit by the current climate, delivery charges manufacturing ect ect. As a builder you notice items you buy going up in the stores or you wholesale company keying you know there charge for delivery has gone up.


----------



## GreenNeedle

I'm woth Luis.  anywhere within 15 miles and I bike.  Any further I bike to the bus or train station.  Taking the kids I bike with a buggy attached to the rear or bus.  Always done this.

Maybe they need to keep putting the prices up higher and higher until the lazy school runners that drive half or even 1 mile get the message that they should be walking.  I walk my kids to school the 1.5 miles and my kids enjoy it as do I.

As for rural.  There was a day when people used to work locally.  Where if they wanted a job in the city.....they moved to the city.  These days people from the city move to the rural area and then drive their Jeeps, Discoverys and Now Porsche/Audi/BMW 4x4's back to the city to work spewing fumes out at 10x the rate of a 1 litre car.  They don't go on any roads that need the 4x4 and are stuck in the rush hour just as long.

Those that lived in the city were picked up by tranny van and transported to the farms or food factories.  these days uninsured and un MOT'd wrecks containing a few europeans travel out to these jobs and the tranny vans are no more!!!  (Not a generalised view either.  I used to work at one (which I biked 9.5 miles to and from each day) and my job was to check the car park for tax discs!!!  Got through some paper on that one!!!

However I am quite happy for the tax for hauliers to be exempt.  After all they are on the road for a good reason.  Not just because they fancy living miles away from where they work or because the school is more than 10 paces.

Maybe it is time for tolls instead of fuel duty?

Andy


----------



## John Starkey

I am self employed arctic driver,the cost to the firm i am driving for at the moment between £250 and £350 a day to refuel my truck,every thing you eat,drink,wear,everything in your house,everything you use in your daily life is transported by road in the uk,so can you imagine how much the cost of living would go up if diesel prices went up to £10 a litre,if they didn't make an exemption tax for logistic's firm's then i am afraid there would be hell of a lot of people on the poverty line,

John.


----------



## Mark Evans

SuperColey1 said:
			
		

> I'm woth Luis. anywhere within 15 miles and I bike. Any further I bike to the bus or train station. Taking the kids I bike with a buggy attached to the rear or bus. Always done this.



That's a very wonderful thing to do mate. I'm glad you've got the time. 

I however, find that most of my work is at least 80miles away-1 way- and currently, i'm 137 miles away from home, 274 round trip. Sadly, i cant get on a push bike, strap my tools to a buggy and go to work. Time doesn't allow me to. 

This nonsense about hiking up fuels prices, makes me pretty angry i must admit. 



			
				SuperColey1 said:
			
		

> lazy school runners that drive half or even 1 mile get the message that they should be walking.



My wife must me lazy then?...she does it.... a 5 minute walk. Oh, hang one...i forgot...she has to go straight to work after doing so, simply no spare time. 

Please dont get me started on this  :silent: 

As 98% of people who've commented, the price of everyday living would go up if fuel prices went up. FACT.

The ever increasing number of unemployed would increase ten fold as business' collapsed. Then who's tax would pay for us all then eh?


----------



## GreenNeedle

I'm sorry Mark.  I'm pretty old fashioned really and stuck in the days where Mum (or a parent) stayed home.  One reason why I quit my job.  Wife was so obsessed with money that she got jobs without asking me how I felt so as she wouldn't give up I did instead.

I don't buy into the 2 people working idea really.  Yes families then have more money but then everyone else wants more, the more things go up, the more wages we then want then the more wages we wanted push prices up more.  Its a vicious circle really.

If we all did the one parent at home bit (if possible) there would be more available jobs and then (if we could push them into them) the unemployed would have more jobs for the government into hence reducing the benefits bill etc.  Many different circles that all counteract each other in the end.

Now wifey has lost her job coupled with the fact she now has a baby to look after again I shall return to work and she most definitely won't be.  One reason why I sold the car.  Waste of the household income that can be better spent on her not working 

I can understand people getting upset with the prices and yes some people do have to work a long way from home but back in the days companies used to pay expenses for petrol at a mile rate.  Maybe these days they don't?  Maybe thats because we all wanted higher wages and they now skimp on the expenses part.  I know my wife's petrol expenses when she was a home to home carer only just covered the petrol of a small car and even then they would try and argue about if it covered from home to the first call etc.

Andy


----------



## Nelson

sorry,but some of you haven't got a clue.
my company recently just made 400 redundancies because people ARE using their cars LESS.
theirs thousands/millions of people in this country who's livelyhoods would be lost if petrol prices went up to £10.
what jobs would they do instead ????????????.
yeah lets get cars off the roads now that motorists have paid to have them built so buses have their bus lanes and lunatic cyclists have their cycle lanes.
maybe someone could explain to cyclists what a red traffic light means !!!!!!!!!!.

i know you're talking about petrol prices,but if oil prices keep going up have you thought about what else is made from it ?.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrochemical

http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/clas ... roleum.pdf

GET REAL...........................


----------



## howanic

It would be wonderful to not have to use my car but it is a necessary evil. 

My o/h had to take a job 30 miles away after being out of work for 4 months. We would never accept benefits and our savings run out fast. The journey is awful and often with traffic adds 3 hours onto the day. I work late too and we both struggle to find time to cook dinner and do the housework, let alone spend any time together.

We cannot work locally and we cannot afford to move. We don't have flash cars, (tbh they are not even reliable), we don't eat out and we are careful with money, but the cost of living is increasing beyond our means. We can't even see ourselves start a family as we both need to work. 

Everyones situation is different. So you cannot just increase the price of fuel to force everyone to enjoy the car-less life that you are so lucky to have. I would love to live in london close to work, I would LOVE to have children and walk them to school and have the time to ride to the shops. If I could I would but if the situation that I am in now does not change, this will never happen for me.

Andy you make me so angry. It is not the 'good old days', we are is the crappy modern days where my o/h and I are on piss poor wages and possibly if we are 'lucky' enough to continue the way we are will have enough money saved to buy a house by the time we are 36. We cannot see a time when one of us can give up work and start a family. And you keep saying how great your life is out of work, with a wife and children and a home. 

I would swap my life with you in a heartbeat. But can't. Do you really think that raising the price of fuel would help me? 

PS. Andy I am sorry that your wife lost her job. It must be a difficult and worrying time for your family.


----------



## ghostsword

Wow, so much passion on petrol.  It makes sense as we do different jobs and require different things from petrol that we would have separate ideas. It is bad for Nelson that his company made redundant so many people, but is that bad for the environment that less people are driving cars?

Don't you understand that if the petrol was more expensive it would make sense to get apples from the UK instead of buying them from South Africa, for example? The petrol being cheap means that it makes economic sense to buy items from abroad, cheaper to transport them here, than having them made here, or grown here in the UK. 

Think about that, look at the big picture and understand that although we cannot fight the flat world, we can at least understand that the ability to buy from abroad cheaper is bad for the country as a whole. 

Concessions for haulers, farmers and factories should be implemented, but all the rest should pay the price for the luxury of using a gas guzler. For example, do you need a 3L 4x4 to go to work or drop the kids? 

Couldn't you do it with a 1.1L ?


----------



## GreenNeedle

nelson said:
			
		

> sorry,but some of you haven't got a clue.
> my company recently just made 400 redundancies because people ARE using their cars LESS.
> theirs thousands/millions of people in this country who's livelyhoods would be lost if petrol prices went up to £10.
> what jobs would they do instead ????????????.
> yeah lets get cars off the roads now that motorists have paid to have them built so buses have their bus lanes and lunatic cyclists have their cycle lanes.
> maybe someone could explain to cyclists what a red traffic light means !!!!!!!!!!.
> 
> i know you're talking about petrol prices,but if oil prices keep going up have you thought about what else is made from it ?.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrochemical
> 
> http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/clas ... roleum.pdf
> 
> GET REAL...........................



If labour costs and work conditions hadn't been such a priority we would still be building cars in this country for our own brands.  Just as I would still be working in a major diesel industrial engine manufacturer (the biggies) These are the costs of wanting loads of money, loads of luxuries whilst paying as little as possible for them.  Blame ourselves and the unions we bought into always pushing for more on our behalf.

And I am not saying adding duty to fuel is the answer but at the moment parties are fumbling around for ways to get people off the roads.  There is no quick and easy answer to making people get off their bumbs (in front of TV or in their cars) and I am not sure duty is the best answer at the moment either.

As for the 'lunatic cyclists not knowing what a red light is.  Next time you see those of us cyclist who do know what a red light is and stop, count how many cars accelerate to get through.  A red light to the majority of cyclists means stop.  For the idiots it doesn't. However there is a much higher proportion of motorists that seem to think a red light is a 10 second warning!!!.

I would be quite happy to pay a proportionate road tax for using my bicycle on the road.  Would be able to fund that easily by the fuel/MOT savings 



> It would be wonderful to not have to use my car but it is a necessary evil.


I have no problem with those that NEED to use their car.  It is those that do not need to that are the problem.  those who drive 2 minutes down the road to get a bit of shopping, those who drive half a mile to the school or to work etc.



> My o/h had to take a job 30 miles away after being out of work for 4 months. We would never accept benefits and our savings run out fast. The journey is awful and often with traffic adds 3 hours onto the day. I work late too and we both struggle to find time to cook dinner and do the housework, let alone spend any time together.



I never accepted benefits in my younger more stubborn days however why?  I paid the taxes to put into the 'fund' which is there to help me and others when times are hard.  These days I fully accept it



> We cannot work locally and we cannot afford to move. We don't have flash cars, (tbh they are not even reliable), we don't eat out and we are careful with money, but the cost of living is increasing beyond our means. We can't even see ourselves start a family as we both need to work.


Sorry I don't buy that.  Do you live in squalour with no TV, no chairs, no nothing?  I can afford to live, eat well (cooking fresh foods and fresh meats not eating out) plus pay my utilities, pay my rent, have 30mb broadband, TV licence et al and whilst living week to week on the money we make do with that squalid life.  This was when one of us worked or as now where we are both out of work and £40 a week worse off.  When I get back to work I will have £40 a week extra to spend or save   whilst still living in the squalid pit.

excuse the sarcasm here but I am far from a follower of the 'cost of living is so expensive compared to how it used to be.  How it used to be people lived within their means and made sacrifices if they wanted something.  Thats why my parents generation and their parents generation have their own houses paid up and are enjoying their savings.



> Everyones situation is different. So you cannot just increase the price of fuel to force everyone to enjoy the car-less life that you are so lucky to have. I would love to live in london close to work, I would LOVE to have children and walk them to school and have the time to ride to the shops. If I could I would but if the situation that I am in now does not change, this will never happen for me.



Totally agree everyone's situation is different hence the statement above on me not knowing the answr to getting people off their bums.  Maybe a tax on sitting down (I jest.)    Its a tough cookie to crack.



> Andy you make me so angry. It is not the 'good old days', we are is the crappy modern days where my o/h and I are on piss poor wages and possibly if we are 'lucky' enough to continue the way we are will have enough money saved to buy a house by the time we are 36. We cannot see a time when one of us can give up work and start a family. And you keep saying how great your life is out of work, with a wife and children and a home.



Indeed but should we just give up and accept this modern commercialised, materialistic world where we do not have to make choices, where we demand someone else makes up the difference, where we choose to take credit and then blame others when we can't pay it?  or could we think for ourselves,  prioritise, choose what is necessary and if we get into trouble accept we made the mistake?  Surely we should start to be happy with what we've got and try to improve rather than always crying for what we don't have?  It will be a very miserable nation if we all end up that way.



> I would swap my life with you in a heartbeat. But can't. Do you really think that raising the price of fuel would help me?


Lol.  You would swap for living in a beat up council estate?  The only think you would swap with me is satisfaction of life however that is a mentality thing derived from acceptance of the situation I find myself in and willingnes to try and improve it.  I may well have started life well looked after in what they now call the middles class family. I may have had some very good jobs prior to redundancies where I frittered away both redundancies totalling £9k.  That would have been a 30% deposit on a mortgage at the age of 25 but alas foolish youthfullness saw that disappear on lifestyle choices instead.



> PS. Andy I am sorry that your wife lost her job. It must be a difficult and worrying time for your family.



She worries but she is on the same line as most. Can't afford the vital things like games consoles, leather sofas, new beds, new car et al however not me.  I will work again.  It will be soon.  It may be factory or it may be a decent office job but I will work and just as now I will continue to be happy with what I have and not cry for what I don't.

You said it all when you said 'crappy modern world'  Exactly to the point and spot on however we as people have turned our country into this 'crappy' viewpoint.  We as people are also the only ones who can change it for the better.  Not necessarily the 'good old days' but at least some semblance of people handling their own budgets responsibly and not insisting that they need more and more material things and more and more money whilst all the time pushing more and more luxuries into what they consider the cost of living!!!

Maybe I am idealistic, maybe far too old fashioned, however I have grown into that.  Believe me I bought into the materialistic viewpoint big style while I was young to the point where the only benefit is that I have a worryingly impressive credit rating (if I wanted to take on credit.)  however I am 36 just like you and we are poles apart in terms of what we think is hard times and good times.

Politics is a toughy.  Can't please everyone all the time and any decision will always please less people than it impresses especially if it involves money however until someone comes up with the golden nugget that solves the problem they will always take the easy 'stop gap' policy.

I should add that you are in London, I am in the grim north and so housing whether rented or mortgage is cheaper we earn a lot less (in general, not across the board) and goods (in the main) cost similar prices.  Tescos and Sainsburys charge the same across the country to my knowledge.

Andy


----------



## m_attt

to get people of the roads, everyone should have to take a driving test every 10 years, every 5 years once you hit 60. This would soon clear up the roads and the drivers left would be the ones who drove properly and economically. not ones who bimble around at half the speed limit oblivious to the world around causing jams and tailbacks.


----------



## Morgan Freeman

My idea for lower fuel prices.

Let only one fuel supplier operate in the UK. It sucks for the companies offering lower prices, but watch them scramble to offer the lowest they can to get that contract.


----------



## GreenNeedle

skeletonw00t said:
			
		

> If you honestly believe adding more tax to fuel is going to help the countries economy recover then you're living in a dreamworld :/
> 
> Like it or not - petroleum drives our society. Fact.
> 
> We already pay over the odds on fuel taxes and it is already crippling to the smaller businesses in the UK.
> 
> We need to help grow small local businesses not burden them with more stealth taxes.
> 
> If you put taxes up on fuel all you will do is hurt middle england more (the people who basically keep the country going) and allow companies like Tesco to destroy even more local businesses.



No I have no illusions that taxing fuel will resolve any economy issues.  Its a 2 way horse.  Yes more tax comes in to the treasury however that reduces the spending power so consumer taxes go down etc.  This is purely being done because no-one knows how to get more people to think before jumping into their car.

And saying Petroleum drives society - fact as if it is a accept and move on we could apply this to many things in society which e all agree we don't like.  Both sides can say hard luck it isn't changing or Hard luck it is changing.

I agree totally with what you are saying r.e. helping local businesses etc however it is us that demands ever cheaper goods, every cheaper bills and I don't think many of us are about to boycott supermarkets.  Why would we, we are saying here that we can't afford to pay for petrol so we aren't about to support the local grocer if it adds £10 a week to the bill!

Can't use this argument both ways.  or can we suggest to the government they reduce fuel costs and we all promise to use the local grocer and butcher in exchange?  Isn't gonna happen guys.  We would get our cheap fuel and still be going to Tesco to keep the grocery bill down. 

Like I say until someone comes up with a viable plan then its always going to be the easiest stopgap solution.  Even if there is a golden nugget that solves each problem there will still be those who suddenly are affected by the replacement deal.

Another on the subject of car tax paying people versus cyclists.  I was paying £170 a year for my Fiesta (yes I owned that car even though I can't drive) and it was rarely used.  Did 20000 miles in the 6 years I had it and much of that was when the wife worked travelling from house to house caring.  And like Luis chooses to cycle while he is still paying Car Tax.  Can we ask for refunds at the end of the year?  Nope.  So we reduce the road bill from wear and tear and amount of traffic alike and we are rewarded than nothing other than motorists telling us cyclist shouldn't be on the road!!!

As for the cycle lane comment.  I agree, get rid of them. We can't use the ones in Lincoln because on the off road ones Pedestrians do not recognise white lines walking 6 abreast the width of the cyclepath and footpath.  On the ones on the side of the road the motorists cannot read the signs that say 'no parking between 8am and 6pm'.  I see no tickets on these and police cars drive straight past.  And I still see loads of mobile phones stuck to motorists ears.  It is very easy to brand cyclists as a nuisance based on a reasonable number that are a nuisance but it is even easier to brand motorists as the same and there is a much higher percentage of them.

Come on guys, use your brains and think of an alternative.  This isn't about getting a little bit extra taxes into the treasury, that is counter productive.  It is about reducing road numbers.  So come up with alternatives and then get behind them campaigning.  I'll even help you reverse the taxes if it reduces the numbers 

Andy


----------



## howanic

Hi Andy. 

Sorry my post was a bit of a rant. I read your posts on the london riots and I agree with many of your values. I do not have any debt and I try very hard not to live a champagne lifestyle on lemonade wages. But for someone whos wages just covers the bills, the mention of prices on anything going up at the moment made me see red. 

My post sounded as if I am very bitter about my life. I am not, I just wanted you to understand that there are people that do not have these unessential "essentials" but by increasing fuel tax you are punishing everyone. And it made me angry that you feel that all car drivers are some kind of monsters that get into debt to keep up with the jones'. 

I agree that benefits should be available to all those who need them. I just feel that in my position, I can and will do anything possible to stay off of them. I understand that everyones situation is different, but do you think that if you drove you would stand a better chance of getting a job? (sorry to be cheeky)

If having a car allows me to stay in employment and out of the dole queue is it such a bad thing?


----------



## ghostsword

The main issue is the fuel prices, how the cheap petrol just corrupts the country an stops companies to look for replacement energy. 

I own a car, a 1.8 turbo diesel meriva, pay tax and insurance on it, and service the car at a dealership, but we drive so little that a full tank last for just over a month. 

I love cars, really do, would love to have a unimog, or a defender 110, a 911 and a ford Capri 3000 gt. But I have kids, and the world I would like to leave to them is not a world dependent on solid fuels. I am lucky to be able to work from home when I want, an the wife works at a local school. We live, work and shop on a radius of 3 miles. 

I do understand that all have different situations but why not try to decrease the fuel requirements? Increase the price of fuel and I am sure people would adapt to the change.

Like the congestion charge in London. £8 to get into London, but people still keep driving into the city. 


---
- .


----------



## Ian Holdich

skeletonw00t said:
			
		

> Sorry but this is all just nonsense thats another way to hit the hard working people of the uk.
> 
> Te unemployed on benefits dont care because they pay for nothing anyway. The rich can afford it so they dont care... Yet again its middle england that will foot the bill.
> 
> .



I partially agree with this...i know we are drifting on and off topic here, but i got my water bill yesterday, and it had increased considerably. I phoned them to ask if it was a true reading and whether they had the payment right. They had got it right, and i'm lumped with the rise. The Anglian water operator then asked if i claimed any benefits...i said no, apart from family allowance (which is also a nonsense in my book, this was introduced after the war to help people get on their feet, personally, if you can't afford children, don't have them. Purely my opinion, why should my tax go towards a family of 20 kids!). Back on track now, the operator said, that's a shame, i could have 20% off my current water tariff! What another blow for the working man??

I know it's my water and i have wasted it, but why should i lump it for a 'can't be bothered'. I make no illusions, times are hard, but there are jobs out there, i know that for a fact. It's just in this society, people don't like the minimum wage. 


Ian's rant now over.


----------



## GHNelson

Lets be honest its lets.......  Rip off the British working man/women.
Rip off Britain that's what its called if your a worker.
Nobody gives a toss...its a I'm all right jack because Ive got shed loads of money in the bank....... its been going on for years.
Privatisation the biggest rip-off of the general public ever.
Europe aaaaaaargh.I could go on and on and on   of it.

Taxes and charges I could name hundreds.
Salaries and pensions in the public sector way over the justifiable.
Bankers bonuses..we all know where that comes from the £35.00 charge for your bank account being overdrawn  .
The biggest scam ever.

And that lot who sit in Westminster when ever it takes their fancy to turn up... want us to put money away for our retirement.  
What planet are these people on.  
I wont say cheers because I'm just back from work after doing 10 hours on a Sunday to try and boost up my works pension, if ever I receive any.
 :? hoggie


----------



## ghostsword

Ok, let me see if I have this right. 

1 - Cheap fuel will help the working man get to work and help the country get back on it's feet.

2 - Don't try to lower the carbon emissions because the Chinese will mess it up anyway.

3 - If you are in favor of other forms of transport but driving you are a hippy, out of your mind, or have no clue of what you are talking about.

4 - If fuel prices increase too much then the economy will collapse, no deliveries (especially next day), no milk, bread, possibly not even newspapers, local shops would close, etc.

I really didn't know that it was that the situation was that bad, but thanks for letting me know. 

Let me go and sign the petition, got to make a stand against these hippies that want to save the earth.  


---
- .


----------



## Mark Evans

ghostsword said:
			
		

> Ok, let me see if I have this right.
> 
> 1 - Cheap fuel will help the working man get to work and help the country get back on it's feet.
> 
> 2 - Don't try to lower the carbon emissions because the Chinese will mess it up anyway.
> 
> 3 - If you are in favor of other forms of transport but driving you are a hippy, out of your mind, or have no clue of what you are talking about.
> 
> 4 - If fuel prices increase too much then the economy will collapse, no deliveries (especially next day), no milk, bread, possibly not even newspapers, local shops would close, etc.
> 
> I really didn't know that it was that the situation was that bad, but thanks for letting me know.
> 
> Let me go and sign the petition, got to make a stand against these hippies that want to save the earth.



OK mate, it's obvious your standing your ground. If your not happy with low fuel prices, and you'd like to pay more, do this one thing for me...

The money you'd like to pay for more fuel, instead, make a £100 donation to the current water shortage in east Africa!!! At least this way, the money you would of paid for expensive petrol has gone to a better, current situation
I've done it, whilst still trying to pay pay my way to make a business work


----------



## howanic

[quoteOk, let me see if I have this right. 

1 - Cheap fuel will help the working man get to work and help the country get back on it's feet.

2 - Don't try to lower the carbon emissions because the Chinese will mess it up anyway.

3 - If you are in favor of other forms of transport but driving you are a hippy, out of your mind, or have no clue of what you are talking about.

4 - If fuel prices increase too much then the economy will collapse, no deliveries (especially next day), no milk, bread, possibly not even newspapers, local shops would close, etc.
[/quote]

I don't think you are a hippy or out of your mind luis, although I would like to try your rose tinted specs   I think that you deserve praise for the way that you and your family limit your use of the car. And we should encourage as many as possible to do the same. 

The only problem I have is that increasing fuel prices will affect EVERYONE financially. And I don't like being made to feel like a lay-about, materialistic, monster because I drive.


----------



## Radik

It is funny how people complaining about increases of fuel or food or energies. Where have been these petitions against house price increases which is more essential then fuel? Thanks to HPI we are in this blahblahblahblah...


----------



## Morgan Freeman

skeletonw00t said:
			
		

> Besides all this is utter futility anyway as global warming / climate change is yet to be proven anyway.



LOL.

Really?


----------



## howanic

> Radik said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is funny how people complaining about increases of fuel or food or energies. Where have been these petitions against house price increases which is more essential then fuel? Thanks to HPI we are in this blah...
Click to expand...


lol So when they start building more cheap housing they can deliver the 24 tonnes of building material on bikes to save on fuel costs


----------



## Radik

howanic said:
			
		

> Radik said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is funny how people complaining about increases of fuel or food or energies. Where have been these petitions against house price increases which is more essential then fuel? Thanks to HPI we are in this blah...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> lol So when they start building more cheap housing they can deliver the 24 tonnes of building material on bikes to save on fuel costs
Click to expand...


If you would not have to pay over the odds for over priced house or rent and prices would be where they should be eg 2x less then you would not have any issue with some fuel price increase as your disposable income would be much higher 

Unfortunately fuel prices will go only up as oil is not in endless supply and any petitions are pointless. Just let China and India fully develop and we would need 3x Planet Earth to feed our cars.


----------



## howanic

Fuel increase does not just mean transport price increases. It increases EVERYTHING for EVERYONE. 

Sadly oil rules the world. Wars are fought over black gold not housing.


----------



## GreenNeedle

skeletonw00t said:
			
		

> Increase the price of fuel... Why not increase the price of water too?
> And also perhaps start charging for the privilage of breathing fresh air?


Like Ian who lives near me.  The water rates have gone up.  Apparently we now have to pay extra for some extra bit that has been moved from government to the water companies.  Can't remember what the leaflet says.

Thank you to the poster above who says I can get 20% off. I shall investigate that 



> Te unemployed on benefits dont care because they pay for nothing anyway. The rich can afford it so they dont care... Yet again its middle england that will foot the bill.


I am unemployed AND on benefits (at the moment) and I do care.  I don't pay for anything?............  Try 17 years solid tax and NI matey.  Is this not what the dole is for?  While I get back to work?

And before someone says get any job  I am a trained accountant.  When I lost ambition because of 2 redundancies I decided to give up and work in an egg factory.  On the shop floor as an operative!!!  I enjoyed it and stayed there for 5 years until we Brits were pushed out by the employers by any means possible in favour of the Eastern Europeans so they could lower the wage down to the minimum, remove the subsidised transport, have more reliability, less sick days et al.  I ended up out because of the behaviour of other Brits!!!  So I had to go back to working for twice as much in the offices 

This is happening all over Britain.  When questioned the answer is that they aren't working for a lower wage because there is a minimum wage. Well they are because the employers have removed the cost of tranny vans picking up from the council estates and the wage was higher than the minimum wage.  It isn't now (at least in the factories I know)



> Just so the hippys can claim their saving the earth
> 
> You do realise that even if we reduce our carbon emissions by half - china will make up that difference in growth within a year?
> 
> Besides all this is utter futility anyway as global warming / climate change is yet to be proven anyway.



I am with you there.  The idea (as I see it) isn't to get cars off the road because of climate change.  More to do with there being too many cars on the road, too much congestion, too many fumes being breathed by my children. I am not at all going on about the climate change thingamy of which only 3% is attributable to man (if I remember rightly.)



> I agree that benefits should be available to all those who need them. I just feel that in my position, I can and will do anything possible to stay off of them. I understand that everyones situation is different, but do you think that if you drove you would stand a better chance of getting a job? (sorry to be cheeky)



Should I have to drive to get a job?  If so Why?  And I guess yes if I drove I would be able to work at the factories that I used to work at before they removed the subsidised transport that was there until they didn't need to bus in the English Estate workers anymore!!!  I could get a job in Nottingham or somewhere an hour (+ whatever rush hour adds.)  My children are too important to me to be away for that amount of the day.  I'll do any job within a radius of Lincoln.  Furthest was 10 miles away so far on the bike.  35 mins there, 45 mins back (blooming great hill so quicker there than back)

Quick Answer.  I am not going to take a lesson, nor 2 lessons....ever....I will not pay that kind of money ever again to own and run a car.  And I shall be in work before the end of the year in whatever position I can attain be it working on the fields or returning to accountancy (which I detest) and still be happy with making do with whatever I have 

The hardest thing is you have to get a permanent position.  It took 6 weeks before I saw any money and it would take that every time a temp job finishes.  Hand to mouth time there.

The house price statement above is pretty good however it isn't going to change.  The 'buy to let' mercenaries may be taking a small hit now the Uni numbers are cut because that was part of their market which boomed in the last few years due to the 'degree in anything we can think of'.  However the majority market is Economic migrant sector where all the terraced housing (i.e. first buyer homes) are bought up pretty quickly to rent out.  The bigger buy to let portfolios (the pros) are picking up what the smaller portfolios (those who took mortgages to buy to let) are having to relinquish.

Your best bet is to do like I am doing.  Get on the Council list, get a council house,  live in it for 5 years, then you can get 35% discount to buy it (to a max of £24k) After 2 years you can sell it and move onward and upward taking that discount with you as clear profit.  That would make my house with a market value of circa £50k into a £33k buy minus deposit

Timescale?  Was on the list for 4 years (whilst in a nicely paid job.)  Now lived here for 3.5 years.  1.5 years to go.  then 2 more before moving away.  Thats what I mean about sacrifice/prioritise/choice.  11 year plan will get me into a reasonably nice home.  thats foresight 

As for the mortgage.  The government gives out this free money.  Called tax credits or something like that which is all going straight into my deposit fund.  Pretty hefty amounts too - £5k a year.  Very generous the government.  No idea why they think people need this money but it will come in very handy.  Thinking about it if I wait an extra 5 years before buying I may be able to pay in cash.  Will thev to do some forecasting on whether I think the housing market will rise again before 2018.

And before anyone says.  No I am not cheating the system.  The tax credits are being paid because as we (meaning as a family) started the year in employment then the tax credits carry on assuming we are in employment still.  If not by April they will stop so I need to get to work before April or my deposit fund is going to stall   I have to play by the book.  My Dad was employed investigating and taking the cheats to court.  Before he retired at 60 

Andy


----------



## Ian Holdich

> Like Ian who lives near me. The water rates have gone up. Apparently we now have to pay extra for some extra bit that has been moved from government to the water companies. Can't remember what the leaflet says.
> 
> Thank you to the poster above who says I can get 20% off. I shall investigate that



is this a flame?? You know full well i was the one who wrote that statement Andy, you're not that thick surly! lol. Go ahead and claim you lower water rates. You can do more water changes then can't you, bath the kids, wash more clothes. Before you think the post was a dig, it wasn't. Why not claim for what you can...what's the point in working other than self pride. I was talking to an old boy at work the other week and we got onto old fashioned values and one of the main things he kept reiterating was how embarrassed there generation would be to come forth and say they were unemployed, let alone benefit claimers. This is how times have really changed for the modern man. 



> The government gives out this free money. Called tax credits or something like that which is all going straight into my deposit fund. Pretty hefty amounts too - £5k a year. Very generous the government. No idea why they think people need this money but it will come in very handy



^^this is another way of the government being able to pull back quite a substantial amount. Also another kick in the proverbials for a family who just earns a little to much (which is bellow the London average BTW!). You may/will find that the tax credits need paying back now, if there is a change in employment. At least the government has started to do something about this.

Another thing i'm not a massive fan of (even though i work in the NHS and work as a professional) is free healthcare. This is the biggest waste of tax payers money. It really is. If we didn't have an nhs we'd all be a lot better off. We should be doing what the french have done regarding this. They have a great system. They don't pay a NI, they pay a small amount in private insurance (and it is a small amount). Pharmacists have more power to give drugs over the counter, which frees up GPs to be doing home visits and keeps care in the community. Hospital A&E's change a round £50 on the door, this doesn't take into account bad road smashes and other life threatening ailments (they get charged afterwards). this is for people who just walk into the A&E, it cut useless hospital admission by 45%!! this saved France a lot of money. The problems will come if this happened in the UK, would be the PC do gooders claiming that's it's against human rights!!


----------



## GreenNeedle

ianho said:
			
		

> is this a flame?? You know full well i was the one who wrote that statement Andy, you're not that thick surly! lol.


Nope I read the statement and didn't remember who wrote it. lol.  I remembered it was you who wrote the rise in water rates.  I remember reading the leaflet that came through the door the other day.  Also they are putting water meters in but giving us the option of choosing rates or meter charges.  Having been on a meter at the old house I think I know that I shall be staying with the rates



> Go ahead and claim you lower water rates. You can do more water changes then can't you, bath the kids, wash more clothes. Before you think the post was a dig, it wasn't. Why not claim for what you can...what's the point in working other than self pride. I was talking to an old boy at work the other week and we got onto old fashioned values and one of the main things he kept reiterating was how embarrassed there generation would be to come forth and say they were unemployed, let alone benefit claimers. This is how times have really changed for the modern man.


Indeed.  while my wife was working and me not (last 3 years apart from the last 3 months) people assumed I was on the dole.  Everytime someone tried to dig at me I quite proudly told them I was not on the dole and in my whole life had only spent 13 weeks on the dole and 5 weeks on benefits despite 2 redundancies.  The first time I should have been on the dole I didn't.  I felt ashamed and missed out on 5 weeks of money before landing another job.  I won't make that mistake again.



> ^^this is another way of the government being able to pull back quite a substantial amount. Also another kick in the proverbials for a family who just earns a little to much (which is bellow the London average BTW!). You may/will find that the tax credits need paying back now, if there is a change in employment. At least the government has started to do something about this.



Nope when you lose your job you remain on the tax credits if you have worked during the financial year.  The JSA then counts as earnings and the tax credits actually go up.  All above board Ian.  Tax Credits were told straight away.  With the statement I made I was just re-iterating that tax credits whilst useful to spend on silly things are not needed.  All of mine go straight into savings.  The £211 dole a fortnight + £140 a month child benefit  is enough to eat and pay the bills without using the £420 a month tax credits.  Remember those bills now don't include rent or council tax as that is covered with the housing benefit.  Ian.  You've seen my house and we're not slumming it to say the least.

Those who do need should look at their bills and work out why.  Maybe do like I do and not have any chocolate, biscuits, crisps, cakes or other nasties on the shopping list.  Kids will love you for it when they are grown up and ultra healthy.



> Another thing i'm not a massive fan of (even though i work in the NHS and work as a professional) is free healthcare. This is the biggest waste of tax payers money. It really is. If we didn't have an nhs we'd all be a lot better off. We should be doing what the french have done regarding this. They have a great system. They don't pay a NI, they pay a small amount in private insurance (and it is a small amount). Pharmacists have more power to give drugs over the counter, which frees up GPs to be doing home visits and keeps care in the community. Hospital A&E's change a round £50 on the door, this doesn't take into account bad road smashes and other life threatening ailments (they get charged afterwards). this is for people who just walk into the A&E, it cut useless hospital admission by 45%!! this saved France a lot of money. The problems will come if this happened in the UK, would be the PC do gooders claiming that's it's against human rights!!



Lol.  Ni covers a lot more than NHS Ian but I see your point.  Wouldn't work in this country though.  People wouldn't pay the small charge.  It would result in much worse health and end up costing the taxpayer more when we have to treat them or have streets of sick and injured people.

Get rid of NI and the pension won't be described as not enough. It will be described as Non existent.  Then we will have to pay more from our own pockets because it wasn't taken from those people when they worked or again they would join the sick and injured in the street.

Ni also covers some other little bits and pieces as well and remember the employee pays less than the empolyer does.

I do think though that something should be done about the time wasters.  Something like the 'ambulance charge' for timewasters.  Lucky to get an appointment same day at my GP for all the colds, coughs and itches being assessed.  And I know of 2 migrants that came to work in the UK at the factory I was at to be exact and their intention was to earn loads of money to send back to Portugal because they had a child (separate cases so 2 children) that needed an operation.  When they discovered it was free over here their children appeared within 3 months.  1 of them is now on the income support as a lone parent with 3 children in the schools.  1 of them has spent the last 2 years having the multiple operations to repair a cleft pallet.  Cost of those operations?  Probs £50k upward.  I suspect a lot more.  Cost to her?  She worked for 6 months then has spent the last 5 years as a stay at home single parent on benefits, free operations, free school etc.

Now I don't begrudge europeans wanting to make a better life for themselves.  I am after all married to one.  I don't blame them as we would probs do the same. It is governments acceptance of it that is the problem. All parties are at fault and it needs to be addressed.

Yes we're all way off topic but I am just trying to say we are a nation of moaners.  We moan about the petrol and if that gets sorted we moan about food prices and if that gets sorted we moan about.........  Lets just look a the big picture, calm down, realise how well off we are in this country and stop moaning so much.  There may be time to enjoy life a little then.


----------



## Ian Holdich

this is the electric generation i'm afraid, again, I once worked in the community health care setting, i worked alongside midwifes and assessed babies in there home environments. I won't go into that to much...but you really would be surprised on what 'poor' families had. I remember one house we went into, in a rough area of Lincoln. The house had no carpet, no wall paper, they cooked on a calor gas stove, the children had mattresses on the floor. Now, the front room/living room had a 42" Sony LCD TV, Sony Divx DVD player, Surround sound. To top it off there was an Xbox sat in the corner. 

Now professionally we would class this family as underprivileged. People just seem to have their morals all wrong in this day and age


Andy, i didn't mention about Ni contributions, i know about what we pay into Ni. Believe me a large amount of Ni covers NHS contributions. After writing a dissertation on social policies, i know how the NHS works and were my money as a tax payer goes.


----------



## GreenNeedle

Indeed Ian. But also a large percentage goes to pension even if like me you have opted out of Serps2 in which case you still pay the same but that amount goes into your private pension instead of the 'national pot'

I should really apologise for the way I rant on this subject.  Maybe like an ex smoker condoning smoking so vehemently because I got really caught up in the buy now pay later syndrome which is a disease, maybe even an addiction.  Maybe thats why I warble on so much about it however I do not blame the banks.  Even though they let me have the money that I couldn't pay for in the end it was I that signed the agreement.

So whlst I did eventually pay it all and clear the debts I can understand how everyone else is in such a position.  I was just lucky in that I knew the bubble would burst eventually and stopped my spending a couple of years before it burst.

Maybe I gloat a little about that.  Maybe 2 much.  And I shouldn't feel so smug about it but I am just putting the point across that we ourselves make choices, we ourselves access what is needed and what is an added extra and its all about understanding where the dividing line between these 2 is.  Well off topic but to me driving around even if it is to drive to work is in most cases a choice made because the job a person wants is not local.  Not in all cases of course and whilst some jobs are indeed a case of you go to wherever the work is (i.e. trades etc) many are because the worker wants that better job somewhere else.  They choose that option and they could weigh up whether that better job actually pays more than the not as good local job when they deduct their travelling expenses and account for how valuable time is.  By that I mean I would rather spend that extra hour a day with my family than travelling.

Please don't be harsh on me.  I am the world's worst at generalising and can go off on one forgetting to put disclaimers in r.e. that.

Andy


----------



## howanic

SuperColey1 said:
			
		

> Please don't be harsh on me.


 lol   

Hope I wasn't too harsh. This is a good thread and I enjoyed reading everyones posts and trying to understand the different views on things. 

Keep it coming Andy .... just don't put fuel prices up


----------



## GreenNeedle

Lol.  I've worn out my keyboard with the last 2 weeks of ranting bout the modern world. he, he.

Just to add.  Moments after I posted the last post a brighthouse wagon rolled to deliver the daily deliveries of electrical goods to the residents who live here on dole street   A dishwasher no less  

More time on the Xbox for someone or maybe some time to spend decorating their unpainted hall/stairs.  However their stairs would look funny with decorated walls yet no carpet on them. he, he.  Priorities. lol.

I think I'll give up on the long ones now though.  Make myself miserable watching what all these lucky people are getting.

Andy


----------



## Piece-of-fish

Anyone fancy a horse and cart 3 day trip to TGM?  
Sorry guys, i am a biker and although i would support lets go green campaign all the time, just not about this one.
Imagine electrical motorcycle


----------



## Garuf

I'm riding my bike from Stoke to TGM in a week or two, just choosing the right day weather wise.


----------



## Ian Holdich

Thats it then, a sponsored bike ride to TMG! Ill get in touch with Brighthouse to see if theyll provide the ukaps t shirts


----------



## J Butler

That's quite a ride there and back again! A novel way of limiting impulse purchases though


----------



## Ian Holdich

quite right J, the problem is they won't have anything in due to the high fuel costs.


----------



## Garuf

I'm only going because It's on the way to Porthmaddog which is my ultimate destination, going to see the big little trains down that way and try and have a bit of a holiday on the cheap. Buying things? Are you mad? I can't afford TGM prices, I've started thinking of it as what sea-life centres would be like if they were free and freshwater.


----------



## sanj

Lol, a few weeks ago someone at TGM said to me " some people think we are a little expensive". Garuf immediately sprung to my mind.


----------



## whatok

I'd like to weigh in on the cycling issue, here:



			
				skeletonw00t said:
			
		

> Cyclists are a nightmare on roads & their attitude stinks. "i'm on a pushbike therefore i am morally better than you & i'll take up as much of the road as a car"...



It is perfectly legal, and in fact encouraged, by law, for a cyclist to take up as much of the road as he or she sees fit in order to remain safe. Regardless of the position of any existing cycle lanes, if present. I often cycle in a primary position, taking control of the lane, to avoid other hazards such as door zones or blindspots. If i'm too slow for you, going at 18 in a 20 zone, then tough luck, i'm afraid. My life is worth more than your desire to arrive 5 seconds earlier  at the next red light.



			
				nelson said:
			
		

> ..yeah lets get cars off the roads now that motorists have paid to have them built so buses have their bus lanes and lunatic cyclists have their cycle lanes.
> maybe someone could explain to cyclists what a red traffic light means !..



First of all, motorists haven't solely paid for roads to be built, neither have they paid for their upkeep. Road Tax, which I assume you are referring to, was abolished many many years ago. Road maintenance and construction is payed for through general taxation, and so, the roads are to be used and shared by _everyone_. 

What you pay now is called V.E.D, Vehicle Excise Duty, and is a tax on your motor's c02 use, not your road use.
check it out: http://ipayroadtax.com/

Now, when we are talking about RLJ's, I will make it clear that I don't do this, and that the majority of people I know who cycle don't either. It is not worth the risk. Then again, you don't hear of many, if any, fatal cycling accidents that were the cyclists fault in the first place. I would suggest it is not only cyclists who need something explaining.


----------



## ghostsword

Thanks for the excelent post, really liked it.

Will check the legality of using the road space, and if so it will make my journey to work much more comfortable and safer as I cycle sometimes.

Usually my issue isn't cars or taxis but the bloody buses in London. The people driving them are the large majority morons and with murderous tendencies. Not all of course, but a real large part of them should be stripped of their licenses.


.


----------



## whatok

Generally I find buses to be really considerate, (much more so than cabbies, at least) if you try not to surprise them. I see an awful lot of newbies go down the inside on left turns, trying to undertake, sneaking up to overtake late etc, which of course means death. Try not to be intimidated, ride predictably, and usually they do the same.

As far as legality is concerned, there is no question. Cycle lanes are a guide, and in a knee-jerk "segregate for safety" reaction, are often installed in the least appropriate places. If you ride regularly, it is almost asking to have an accident to use them exclusively. 
If you feel it is unsafe for other traffic to pass you at a particular area, indicate, take the lane, and then let it go again when there is room for traffic to pass. Hugging the kerb or parked cars only encourages impatient vehicles to try and pass too close, and gives you no escape route in an emergency.

Once you get used to this way of thinking, and riding as if you're a vehicle (which of course. you are), you start to feel much safer on the roads, and it becomes way more enjoyable.

i type too much.


----------



## Nelson

What a load of rubbish.
VED,and fuel VAT,all goes in the 'tax pot' and is then allocated to how much is spent on road building/maintenance.
Less than is paid in by motorists.
So yes motorists DO pay for the roads,NOT cyclists.
But hey,you keep dreaming   .


----------



## whatok

what you said makes no sense. 

It is popular to argue for or against something based on how much it costs versus taxes sold to the public as being related to it e.g. tax on smokers often announced as a health measure.

However, VED, as all taxes in the UK, is* not hypothecated*. All money from VED (and other taxes) goes into 'consolidated funds', IE, it is not a tax that specifically builds or maintains roads.. (which, by the way, are worn and damaged MUCH more by motorists than cyclists). If you really wanted to specify a source for road money, you could realistically say council tax, but only 25% of that at most is raised by councils, the rest of which is granted.

This is why we ALL pay for roads, and we ALL have equal rights to use them.
That is even without considering that most cyclists also drive.

I can see your next point, however, something along the lines of:


> Hang on a sec - so if VED goes into the same pot as council tax, income tax etc. Then motorists DO pay more for the maintenance of the roads than cyclists (those who don't own cars).



This simply means that people who pay more taxes generally, pay more for the roads. Following this logic, a guy with a 6 bedroom house and a unicycle could have more rights to the road than someone in bedsit with a saloon. I think everyone would agree that this is a moot point.

So, in an ideal world, as a cyclist, I would pay LESS tax for the roads than i do now, since, A: I use/wear them less B: It costs astronomically more to build a motorist based infrastructure than that for a cyclist. Unfortunately, I pay the same/possibly more than you, but I don't mind very much, really.

Anyway, the whole idea of 'rights' to the road, is a falsity. The roads are traditionally "Crown Estate" and our taxes don't confer ownership to us. We pay for their upkeep and in return we get to use them to walk, ride or drive on as we choose.

 8)


----------



## plantbrain

Gas prices.....the USA is really good at Bull manure this claim......."....it'll hurt jobs, it'll end society as we know it(as if that is really such a bad thing in some ways) it'll raise prices..........."

We have already been paying less and subsidizing the Oil industry.
Who'd be in the Middle east if was not for cheap oil eh?

The USA is the biggest glutton. USA and BP(touchy subject here) oil companies reaped the largest profits in the history of the world..........ever ......the last 3 years running.

I feel so bad for them. 

BTW, my son works for BP, in AK in a gas collection field(not oil).

If you tax the fuel, this creates new markets that are more competitive price wise, so electric cars.........electric delivery trucks, and Rail systems are a lot more important suddenly..............and the focus goes there.

Till oil cost more, we will never get off this dope.

I ride a bike or walk most places, but I do drive as well. Most cars here are low mileage. Gas is cheaper than anywhere in the EU.

Go figure.

We have a hybrid.......and a Mini Cooper! I have a small truck.

I'd like a nice electric truck or a damn good Hybrid Truck with a power option if needed(econ and then high power). They have the tech to make it, and I'd pay $$$ for it too. Tesla is coming out with a sweet sedan with 450 km range, 4 dr.....sharp looking Electric this year, 55,000$ USD, not bad, made right here in the SF Bay area.

I also live in very sunny CA, and solar energy I can place on my roof for $$$$ for both my home.....and for the car.

So now I am an energy producer..........not just a consumer.

Now I'm no longer a salve to Big oil and my fish tanks do not consume energy either.

Solar for each and every home will decentralize the monopoly that energy companies have on all of you.
But this works if you own your own home..........if you rent? You are screwed. The poorer you are, the less options you have.


----------



## whatok

I've PM'd you my bank details, plantbrain. 

thanks


----------



## Nelson

I still don't agree on your logic,and probably never will,as you'll probably never agree with mine.
You can spin which ever way you like.Are you an MP ?.

Sweet dreams   .


----------



## whatok

nelson said:
			
		

> I still don't agree on your logic,and probably never will,as you'll probably never agree with mine.
> You can spin which ever way you like.Are you an MP ?.
> 
> Sweet dreams   .




Facts are facts, when you have devised something to the contrary, let me know. Until then, rhetoric will have to do!


----------



## Nelson

ok then,

Fact.


> In the budget of 1909, the then Chancellor of the Exchequer, David Lloyd George announced that the roads system would be self financing,[33] and so from 1910 the proceeds of road vehicle excise duties were dedicated to fund the building and maintenance of the road system





> The Road Fund Licence (later renamed as Vehicle Excise Duty) was introduced in 1921 as way to collect money for a Road Fund, in order to maintain and improve roads







> The Roads Act 1920 required councils to 'register all new vehicles and to allocate a separate number to each vehicle' and 'make provision for the collection and application of the excise duties on mechanically-propelled vehicles Hypothecation came to an end in 1937 under the 1936 Finance Act, and the proceeds of the vehicle road taxes were paid directly into the Exchequer. The Road Fund itself, then funded by government grants, wasn't abolished until 1955



Fact.


> The Road Fund is notable as one of the few beneficiaries of hypothecated taxation in British history


Though you're right,not any more.

Fact.


> The Road Fund was never fully utilised, returning a surplus each year, and it became notorious for being used for other government purposes


Nothings changed there then.



> In 1932 Lieut. Colonel Moore-Brabazon said in a debate in the House of Commons about the Road Fund: "This vote is different from any other because the money that goes to the Ministry of Transport is motorists' money. It is not Imperial taxation. It is money that comes from the motorists, to be spent on one definite thing, namely, the roads. If the Government come to the conclusion that they are going to spend less money on the roads, they have to make a case to the motorists why they are not going to reduce the taxation upon their cars. If they are going to keep on the same taxation and to spend the money derived from the motorists upon Imperial taxation, let them say so


Its quite easy for the goverment to change laws,and "rename" the tax,and then use the money raised from one source to spend on another,they do it all the time,and thats how the tax system works.
But in the real world its common sense who really paid/pays for the roads,is it not ?

So yes you are correct in your facts   ,and I was wrong   .

Oh,you missed this one,I thought it was easy   ,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qeMFqkcPYcg&ob=av2e


----------



## whatok

Unfortunately, most of your facts are pre 1937. When road tax was abolished.

The road fund was still, as i already pointed out, partly paid for through government grants, which in turn came from consolidated funds. Until 1955.

The 'value' of V.E.D is always in question, and always will be, as with all taxes. However, the point remains that any claims by government for value v service are baseless, since no hypothecation means no real relation between prices and expenditure.

So, yeah, glad you agree.


----------



## Nelson

whatok said:
			
		

> Unfortunately, most of your facts are pre 1937. When road tax was abolished.


Yeah,I was just showing why it was introduced and how local councils were using the funds elsewhere,essentially misappropriation.
Then how the goverment got in on the act and changed the name and kept the funds for themselves.
Like marathon and snickers.Different name same thing.
You can dress mutton up as lamb,change the name to lamb,but it will always be mutton.
Most people will see through the smoke screen,a few won't.

But again with the facts you are right.


----------



## dazzer1975

This thread is priceless, the display of pure intellect is staggering and the inclusion of such disparate groups as hippies, welfare claimants, car drivers, cyclists and an allusion to ethnic minorities coupled with a side debate over the existence of global warming (not man made warming, just warming per se) and a failure to grasp even at its most basic level an understanding of Britain's domestic economy and position within the global economy during the 20th century is nothing short of breath taking.

Still, there is always middle england to rescue us. 

LMAO its quality


----------



## plantbrain

I'm a bit more practical about it. I can pay the electric company 200$ a month, or pay for the solar panels which are 70$ a month and will be paid off in 3 years from now. I can plug the car if it's electric into the solar system.

I also am a net electric producer since my system has a reverse meter where I sell energy back to the utility during peak use(during the day).

This will get me off about 90-97% of the oil/fossil fuel.

So economically, it's already much more worth my while to go electric. The electric companies will likely try and legislate laws to prevent smaller folks from doing this as it catches on. the cost of oil and electric is not going DOWN. If you think like a business, then you see opportunity and profit, if you think like a consumer, you feel helpless and just want to believe anything and anyone that tells you it'll be cheaper, in otherwords, you are drinking whatever they are serving, which is almost never really in your interest(why would they serve it for free and spend lots of money to promote it???). 

It's just political marketing, and you are who they are marketing it to. A business mind set does not look at it that way. They want a piece of the pie. They do not get involved in the marketing or this "which side is right" drama. They know that does not matter(at least to them and their own interest). Markets change and this creates new opportunities.

I cannot drill for oil or make a refinery, but I can nab all the solar energy I can or wind power etc.
Now I can play the green environmental card if I chose...........and other benefits.........but the basic issues for me are economic and business.


----------



## dazzer1975

If I was getting marked I would, although I understand clauses cause issues for some.


----------



## whatok

dazzer1975 said:
			
		

> This thread is priceless, the display of pure intellect is staggering and the inclusion of such disparate groups as hippies, welfare claimants, car drivers, cyclists and an allusion to ethnic minorities coupled with a side debate over the existence of global warming (not man made warming, just warming per se) and a failure to grasp even at its most basic level an understanding of Britain's domestic economy and position within the global economy during the 20th century is nothing short of breath taking.
> 
> Still, there is always middle england to rescue us.
> 
> LMAO its quality


----------



## ghostsword

Since cars were on the road, we always had issues with fuel prices! Not new..


----------



## dazzer1975

This thread needs moar dubstep:


----------



## Nelson

Hi dazzer   .Welcome to the party  matey  .
When I first read your post I thought heres an intelligent guy who seems to know about things and will teach us something.
But three days later and you've not enlightened us with your superior intellect  :? .
I must admit i always get confused between intelligence and arrogance   .
Then the youtube link you posted is just noise  :? .Ironic,or is it hypocrisy,sorry confused again   ,considering what you wrote is just noise   .

So heres one for you big boy   .


----------



## dazzer1975

When I get the inclination, I will write a post out featuring all the ignorant, populist, daily mail reading, science denying, myopic and ill thought out ideas and suggestions on this thread and then point out exactly where and why they are wrong.

Truth is though, I'd probably be wasting my time, the kind of views expressed on this thread are usually so entrenched, despite being void of foundation, nothing will remove the scales from the eyes of those holding them.

In the mean time, you are at liberty to peruse my first post and gain some clues as to where your efforts may be better focused in understanding why this thread is full of noise.


In the mean time, enjoy, seeing as this is the way this forum communicates  :


----------



## Nelson

dazzer1975 said:
			
		

> When I get the inclination, I will write a post out featuring all the ignorant, populist, daily mail reading, science denying, myopic and ill thought out ideas and suggestions on this thread and then point out exactly where and why they are wrong.


So you're saying all daily mail readers are ignorant, populist, science denying and myopic.
I must say thats a bold statement.I trust you can back that up with some facts or scientific data.
To me that sounds like the opinion of someone who's views are entrenched and devoid of foundation.


			
				nelson said:
			
		

> Ironic,or is it hypocrisy,sorry confused again


I'm not confused anymore   .


			
				dazzer1975 said:
			
		

> In the mean time, you are at liberty to peruse my first post and gain some clues as to where your efforts may be better focused in understanding why this thread is full of noise.


I've had a peruse and I appreciate your clues,but theres so much misinformation on the internet I think its better to wait until you have the inclination to write a post.After all I'm eager to learn and would like to get it right   .
I wouldn't want to get hold of the wrong end of the proverbial stick.


			
				dazzer1975 said:
			
		

> In the mean time, enjoy, seeing as this is the way this forum communicates  :


As far as I'm aware this is only happening on this thread by a few people.Yourself included.


			
				nelson said:
			
		

> Ironic,or is it hypocrisy,sorry confused again


I'm so definitely not confused anymore   .
So to include the other 6700 forum members in your statement is,quite frankly,without foundation and maybe even insulting to them   .

So until you have the inclination,etc etc,all I'm hearing is repetitive noise......


----------



## Nelson

Ah,bigotry.......


----------



## Nelson

,I didn't mean you   .


----------



## NeilW

Just to confuse the issue more regarding 'gas guzzling' cars vs. the cyclist theres something inbetween; the motorcycle.

My little Honda cost me £15 for a years road tax (!) It also cost me £15 for my last 2 weeks of fuel with fuel economy working out to be a bit better then 100mpg. Theres a theme of £15 in my world  . I'm no 'eco-hippie' but thats good value to get somewhere efficiently at speed with the traffic. 

Fair enough use a saloon, people carrier, estate, van, pickup, or truck if you've got stuff or bodies to move around, but a lot of people don't consider a motorcycle a viable option for the local commute. Most of the vehicles I see on the road are vastly oversized for what they are being used for; most people sit in a 5-seater saloon car with just them in it (or is this a generalisation?). 

I'm not saying we should all jump on bikes as I admit its not everyones cup of tea in the miserable English weather, more that people should get vehicles that are appropriate to what they are going to be used for. If I eventually get a car for more practicality then I want something small, Japanese/German and efficient. If I had a family to cart around I would get something a bit bigger but also with efficiency in mind.

Maybe we need more small efficient transport solutions on sale at an affordable price. If these transport solutions were also powered by alternative fuels then we would be on to a winner. 

It's all about appropriate and considered use of fuel. This is why I applaud those who make an effort to cycle, but at the same time sympathise with those that pay mega bucks for the vehicle they need to use for work. 

The difficulty is that cars are often seen as more then transport. Cars can be a hobby, a lifestyle, fun, an expression of who you are, or even a blahblahblahblahblah extension   . As a result fuel economy is not often on the mind of the potential car buyer. 

Having said this I'm on dodgy ground because I burn fuel on my hobby of keeping fish and plants in a glassbox. Each to their own hey


----------



## Nelson

NeilW said:
			
		

> Most of the vehicles I see on the road are vastly oversized for what they are being used for; most people sit in a 5-seater saloon car with just them in it (or is this a generalisation?).


I'd say that probably a lot of those cars are also used at evenings and weekends for the whole family.So they need that many seats.
But as Luis also pointed out in an earlier post,a 1.8 litre engine or bigger is not really needed for driving around town.
4x4's in the city !.Ridiculous...............  .


			
				NeilW said:
			
		

> I'm not saying we should all jump on bikes as I admit its not everyones cup of tea


I used to ride a ped in London when i was younger.Not anymore though,Too dangerous for me   .



			
				NeilW said:
			
		

> or even a blahblahblahblahblah extension


Yeah,I really need to get a,err,bigger car   .

Great post though Neil   ,unlike some of the other verbal diarrhea   .


----------



## dazzer1975

Generally speaking, I think it is a ludicrous suggestion to double the price of fuel, as has been stated, the economic life of the world, and with it, the kind of life we are only equipped to lead in this modern world will also cease. I am a firm believer that Malthus was wrong, however, we most definitely live within a closed system, so whatever technology we develop in the future to maintain our life styles, it had better be renewable, or short term until the next development arrives... ad infinitum.

Brenmuk on page 2 covers my sentiments adequately:



> In an ideal world we would not have become dependent on fossil fuels that are finite and polluting but we are where we are.



Now back to explaining to nelson what is already before his eyes, although I suspect he thought it was his views I did not agree with, not so.

page 1 skeletonwoot:



> Don't worry - theres more than enough crude oil left in the world to last a good couple of hundred years more - and don't worry about global warming because that is vastly overstated & still unproven.



The first part is debatable, and only debatable simply because no one can say what oil reserves will be found in the future, there is debate regarding the accuracy of opec reserve figures and also what technology will be invented to enable ever more efficient oil extraction, but as it stands right now there is not one country on Earth with reserves expected to last 200 years.

The second part about global warming is complete tosh. I think you got mixed up with man made global warming, however, the scientific community has a very broad consensus that the current 'rate' at which the planet is warming is faster than at any time throughout the earth's history and it is that which can only be attributed to man's actions.

There is no debate that global warming per se exists, none, zilch, nada.

The planet is engaged on a continuous cycle of warming and cooling. Incidentally, there is even one model that predicts cooling as a result of the warming, if that happens, it is game over, for Britain at least, as she will be plunged beneath a layer of 2 mile thick ice.

page 3 supercoley1:


> these days uninsured and un MOT'd wrecks containing a few europeans travel out to these jobs and the tranny vans are no more!!! (Not a generalised view either. I used to work at one (which I biked 9.5 miles to and from each day) and my job was to check the car park for tax discs!!! Got through some paper on that one!!!



Here is the example of bigotry, incase you can't work it out for yourself.

So, on a thread about fuel prices, we have a post about immigrants and illegality, how very refreshing. 

I note the job was checking tax discs, not nationality, mot state or insurance (although I admit, insurance will be void if they knew there was no tax) yet we have here examples of un-roadworthy vehicles overladen with foreigners.

The lack of empirical evidence, is, I am sure, not much of a surprise.

page 4 skeletonwoot...again:



> We buy from abroad due to labour costs. Because everyone in the UK thinks they deserve a cushy job haanded to them on a plate. They arent willing to work in a factory for £2 an hour because benefits pay more!



This is just breathtaking ignorance of the highest order and actually makes me sad that there are people walking around with this kind of ignorant viewpoint without any understanding as to how our economy got to where it did and the whys of it.

We buy from abroad due to labour costs, that is true, the part about everybody in the U.K. thinking they deserve a cushy job handed to them is just baseless vitriolic rhetoric straight out of the right wing book on pithy but baseless sound bites.

It may have passed you by, but Great Britain is no longer the manufacturing powerhouse with an empire with which to exploit raw materials from at greatly reduced prices, while offloading her manufacturing output at greatly increased prices, she once was. Our dominant economic position was starting to decline before WW2, during it, we were bankrupt, literally, and after it we engaged on a massive Keynesian economic path to rebuild the country and provide jobs and investment. This kept us ticking along nicely until the latter part of the 60's and into the 70's when the investment and building had run its course and we were again trying to stand on our own two feet. Unfortunately for us, by this time, our empire had all but vanished, and the global economy had moved on, meaning we were now having to compete on the global stage with all the other manufacturing center’s which had started to spring up, in Asia, along with our pre-existing competitors in Europe and America.

Couple this with increasing workplace union - management struggles and a singular lack of capital investment in industry, and it is very easy to see how the costs for British made goods were becoming non competitive on the global economic stage especially at a time when the rest of the world was increasing investment and efficiency.

As a result, unemployment started to increase as this lack of competitiveness drove companies to close down or shrink in size, which in turn had a knock on effect of reducing demand for those who supplied goods and services to British manufacturing, thus further increasing unemployment and driving down demand.

It is evident that something had to be done. Step forward Thatcher. I hate Thatcher, with a passion, but on this she was absolutely spot on. She realised the economy needed a change of direction and a different make-up than that which was failing, and failing badly. The thing she did get wrong however, will be the same mistake, indeed IS, the same mistake Cameron is making, shrinking the state at a time when state investment in infrastructure is badly needed to stimulate jobs, growth and building. 

Sure, selling off all the nationalised industries went some way towards increasing efficiencies and providing the investment the tory government was unwilling to provide, and also fattened the govt’s coffers. Which as a good thing, considering under Thatcher unemployment rose and so did the state as benefit claimants expanded along with it… naturally. So fair enough, be a right winger, but at least understand where right wing ideology falls down, particularly at times of economic distress, rolling back the state is never the answer, and actually, quite ironically, increases those groups you despise so much, the unemployed.

Back to the main point regarding Britain’s changing economy. Switching from a primary and secondary based economy to a tertiary and quaternary based economy is what drove the coal mines to be shut down, but it's also why we have the Britain of today that we have, in both its economic and its social structure.

As a side issue, this is why New Labour introduced tuition fees for university. The population was to be better educated for a high tech and specialised tertiary and quaternary economy, in a world where manufacturing of easy to automate and low skill items being focused in the 3rd world, Britain was to become the world leaders in skilled manufacturing such as bio tech, nano tech, and providing highly specialised engineering and services, along with expanding the financial sector and encouraging outside investment from foreign companies in these industries... thus providing Britain with a niche on the world stage.

That is why we buy from abroad, and that is why it is not even a fraction towards an answer simply saying people in Britain are lazy, it is those who say that who are the lazy ones.

People are not willing to work in a factory for £2 an hour because the national minimum wage is over £6ph, this has also increased, as it should, as a result of the changing face of Britain’s economy. £2 ph no longer cuts it in a world that is post industrialised.

Don't like it? Change the system, do not villify those on the national minimum wage who earn a full and massive £12k p.a.

I think you would agree, £4k p.a. (for someone on £2 ph working 40 hrs a week) would barely cover a person's food for a year.

Another side point you are most certainly unaware of, is that a population of the size we have in Britain, living under a capitalist economy how we do, requires that in periods of FULL EMPLOYMENT, there is to be between 500,000 and 750,000 people unemployed.

That is how the system works, that is how the system is at it’s most efficient, that is how the economy and monetary policy is best balanced.

Tell me, what would you do with those half a million people who are sacrificed at the alter of capitalism so the rest of us can find well paying jobs and not have to worry too much about inflation getting out of control?



> Whereas in India & China people will work because their societies have not yet been corrupted by the welfare system.



I think you will find, that in India and china there is little in the way of social justice, social responsibility or socialised directives governing employment law.

As a working class man, I thank my lucky stars I live in a country more enlightened towards worker's rights which have increased my safety in the workplace, increased my wages and increased the time I get to spend with my family. Trust me, I have spent 70 + hours per week engaged in back breaking manual work for very little pay and little heed to health and safety, and I am eternally grateful the work place has been brought, albeit kicking and screaming, into the 21st century.

If you want to go back to that, enjoy yaself, but I reckon you'll be working on your own.

I also rather like the fact that my taxes go towards a system that takes note of, and tries to help those who find themselves in unfortunate circumstances.

There but for the grace of god go I (I am not religious, but you get the sentiment)

And if you are still in any doubt as to the real problem areas in our society, especially during these times with economic woes a plenty, you may wish to take note of the following regarding benefit claimants and benefit cheats.

More money goes unclaimed that people are legally entitled to through the benefit system than that which is estimated to be lost through benefit fraud.

The figure for unclaimed benefit is circa £2billion
The figure for benefit fraud is circa £1billion.

Now pay attention to the following:
vodafone owe £6billion tax
google pay something like 2% tax
Tesco is registered offshore so it diverts most of what it should be paying outside the country
HMRC's building, is part owned by a company registered in the channel islands, and thus even the rent the british government pay is squirrelled away into tax havens.

And you come out with this tripe about £2 ph for factory workers? get a clue.

page 4 supercoley1:



> If labour costs and work conditions hadn't been such a priority we would still be building cars in this country for our own brands. Just as I would still be working in a major diesel industrial engine manufacturer (the biggies) These are the costs of wanting loads of money, loads of luxuries whilst paying as little as possible for them. Blame ourselves and the unions we bought into always pushing for more on our behalf.



no, blame human nature... and that which I write above.

As for the rest of SC's post from which I take the above quote, i have some sympathy with the views expressed, however, I would say we are not in a perfect world, and everyone and their circumstances are different.

page 4 skeletonwoot:



> If you put taxes up on fuel all you will do is hurt middle england more (the people who basically keep the country going)



Given the rates at which working tax credits are paid and family tax credits, in addition to who child benefit is paid to (a couple earning £80k between them can claim under Tory plans, previously the sky was the limit) it seems massively ironic he would choose to invoke middle England, while holding the views on benefit claimants that he does.

BTW, where do you stand on a universal welfare system? Do you think people should be able to opt out of paying national insurance, of course, with the proviso that they refuse to accept any national assistance.

Before you answer, think carefully about the costs involved, education, primary, secondary, higher, then there is healthcare, which may not seem so daunting, until you factor in emergency care ala A&E.

You either agree with a system that provides a safety net, but which costs money, or you don't.

And back to the quote above, actually, you hurt everybody if you increase costs for everybody, and lets be honest here, you hurt those on the lowest wages the most, not to mention the disabled who depend on vehicle ownership but who may have to rely on benefits just to be able to function to any meaningful way within society.

But yer, middle england will not only hurt the most, but be the only ones hurt   

and yet again, skeletonwoot entertains us with his insight into the hard hitting social issues of the day in 21st century Britain, page 5:



> Te unemployed on benefits dont care because they pay for nothing anyway. The rich can afford it so they dont care... Yet again its middle england that will foot the bill.



"The unemployed on benefits don't care because they pay for nothing anyway"

So good I quoted it twice, this man is a comedy genius and I urge him to forward this thread to bbc new talent, they surely would sign him up in an instant.

At a time of economic meltdown, when every job is being chased by 5 people, when the private sector is incapable of replacing the number of jobs lost in the public sector in addition to the meltdown of employment security, this guy comes out with comedy gold.

Buggar it, I will write it again it really is that good.

"the unemployed on benefits dont care because they pay for nothing anyway"

Where to start with this gem? How about trying to establish the rigorous work gone into forming this conclusion, on what is it based, on who is it based, what case studies had been done that can substantively back up claims of this nature that the unemployed simply do not care.

It is true, in some skewed indirect but easily understandable to those with limited cognitive ability, that the unemployed on benefits do not pay for anything, as they receive benefits, bordering on a  tautology there, but what have we come to expect from this chap? 

An alternative way of looking at the issue, would be to more accurately explain that those on benefits, have at some point in the past, and will at some point in the future contribute via direct taxation in the form of income tax. Thus, (using the figures I mentioned earlier regarding eligibility of benefits) it is entirely right, proper, legal and correct that people who find themselves unemployed (for whatever reasons) meeting the requisite eligibility criteria, are infact given the benefits to which they are entitled.

Additionally, these benefit recipients will not only pay out more as a percentage of their income than anyone else in society on food, clothing and fuel, they will, rather perversely, further erode whatever original benefit entitlement they had, through paying the taxes on these goods and services.

I think you will find, the unemployed on benefits, do care if prices increase, they care only too much.


and here, in the same post on page 5 as the quote from above, we have the invokation of hippies:



> Just so the hippys can claim their saving the earth.



and still, this nugget still finds itself being put forward, again, by skeletonwoot, on page 5:



> Besides all this is utter futility anyway as global warming / climate change is yet to be proven anyway.



So good he said it twice.

but there is some chink of light I can see within humanity as Morgan Freeman also see's the ridiculousness in skeletonwoots comment:



			
				Morgan Freeman said:
			
		

> skeletonw00t said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Besides all this is utter futility anyway as global warming / climate change is yet to be proven anyway.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LOL.
> 
> Really?
Click to expand...



and again, on page 5, they must be starting to feel safe now, seeing other comments aligning with their own deeply held prejudices, ianho gets in on the action:



> Back on track now, the operator said, that's a shame, i could have 20% off my current water tariff! What another blow for the working man??
> 
> I know it's my water and i have wasted it, but why should i lump it for a *'can't be bothered'.* I make no illusions, times are hard, but there are jobs out there, i know that for a fact. It's just in this society, people don't like the minimum wage.



Given what i have responded to above, I don't think we need to read me repeating myself. But for Nelson's benefit, seeing as he can't read the thread in conjunction with what i had originally posted, i include it here in the hope he learns something about comprehension and then going off to do your own research.


I hope this will suffice for now, it is currently 02:30 and I am bored now of explaining things that are right in front of your eyes.

And all on a thread about petrol prices


----------



## dazzer1975

skeletonw00t said:
			
		

> Dazzer basically sums up the liberal wet wipe Guardian reader. Basically he is right - anyone else who disagree's is a racist Daily Mail reader. Oh but obviously, like any other liberal wet wipe - he won't have any real solutions of his own. Just leftist rhetoric that more than likely involves penalising anyone with a half decent work ethic & rewarding those who cannot be bothered to make a success of themselves.
> 
> About time this country wakes up to reality and not these looney leftist ideals populised by celebrities and incompetant job-for-life MP's.



Theres one thing I can say for your post's, they say more about you in an infinitely more succinct manner, than I ever could.


----------



## GreenNeedle

dazzer1975 said:
			
		

> page 3 supercoley1:
> 
> 
> 
> these days uninsured and un MOT'd wrecks containing a few europeans travel out to these jobs and the tranny vans are no more!!! (Not a generalised view either. I used to work at one (which I biked 9.5 miles to and from each day) and my job was to check the car park for tax discs!!! Got through some paper on that one!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is the example of bigotry, incase you can't work it out for yourself.
> 
> So, on a thread about fuel prices, we have a post about immigrants and illegality, how very refreshing.
> 
> I note the job was checking tax discs, not nationality, mot state or insurance (although I admit, insurance will be void if they knew there was no tax) yet we have here examples of un-roadworthy vehicles overladen with foreigners.
> 
> The lack of empirical evidence, is, I am sure, not much of a surprise.
Click to expand...


Ask my Black Portuguese wife if I am a bigot, a racist, a xenophobe?  She agrees with me r.e. the migrants from Europe.  It was a trickle.  It has turned into a flood.  They were filling in the odd job and were very beneficial.  they now provide governments reason to openly state _ 'They are doing jobs that Britons won't do'_ (and yes politicians from both sides have said exactly this comment in these exact words.  I have not summised this from reading between lines nor did I even need them to tell me this.

As for the 'immigrants and illegality' I have no bones with the mmigrants.  They are doing what we would do.  Going to another country to find work.  I have bones with the government old and new for allowing this to happen to fill in for those who will not work and should have been forced to do these jobs instead of being hidden away on 'disability benefit'.

Those who are genuininely unable to work due to disability etc I have no problem with.  Those that are depressed, stressed, have continual pains that have not been diagnosed ever and leave all physicians stumped I have no time for.  My Dad used to catch a fair few of them when he was an investigator but Labour chopped away half of his powers and he decided that he would no longer do the job as he was not allowed to do it properly.

When people above talk about unemplyed in benefit you know full well they do not mean those who are unfortunate to not be in work at this time.  They mean those who have no intention of working.  The £2 was an exaggeration and you know this too however you choose to take it as it is written and make a point.  These scroungers (of which I would not consider myself one although I am currently unemplyed) will not work for the minimum wage.  They will not work in the jobs that their demographic typicaly would have done in years gone by on the land, in the factories etc and those jobs are happily scooped up by the migrants.  Not their fault.  It is the authorities that should have got their shoe horns out of their holsters and prised these wasters off their Sofas.  And if they wouldn't leave their Sofa then they should start to send the bailiffs in, removing their plasmas, Games consoles et al to pay toward the benefits they are getting.  They should at least be banned from wasting their 'pitiful' benefits (as they would call them) on a taxi to the jobcentre and taxis every night to Ritzy nightclub!!!  Vouchers instead of money would go some way to ensuring that these wastes of space are given enough to survive and not waste the majority on fags booze, taxis, Sky TV, new mobile phones (and associated high value contracts) and PS3 games etc.

No one is saying we should return to the old Britain where lack of H&S is a major danger and rights are minimal however people must start to realise that if the worker demands more, the company has to spend more, the product costs more and it can be a vicious circle where eventually the company cannot sell.

Where is my evidence? 
Do you think I carry a notebook to take witness statements?  Do you think I carry my camera around with me?

As I say I worked in a food factory before the EU migration started.  In fact it was one of the largest factories of its kind in Europe  I watched it go from a fully british workforce to where within 5 years there were no british below management level.  do you really think all these people left of their own free will?   No they wanted to work there but the wages gradually crept down to the min wage.  That was moaned about but not the killer blow.  Many of these people had worked together for years.  A kind of community feeling however these factories are nearly always in the rural areas and for decades subsidised transit vans had collected the workers from the surrounding towns and citys.  These transit vans were cancelled within one swoop and thet took out 45% of the shop floor.  The british 45%.  yes there were some left but they soon departed once all their colleagues from years had gone and they became the minority in a european workplace.

Of course the 100% british workforce did lose some naturally over that time.  And it was indeed getting harder and harder to keep the numbers needed to run the factory as replacing these long term workers that left over that 5 years was getting harder and harder as the British replacement's mentality was such that you could not rely on them.  Would be at least 1 day off sick a week and very high turnover hence why Europeans originally were taken on through agencies.  To fill the gaps.

however once they did arrive and then the eastern Europeans the employers saw their chance to wipe out costs and wipe out the British.  And that is exactly what they did.

So  Don't believe what you read in the papers, what farmers will tell you, what Newsnight or Politicians will try to convince you of.  The argument they don't work for less, because there is a minimum wage is not true at all.  They do work for less because they do not enter the company pension saving the employer contributions.  they get to work drive in their own agency transit vans (and yes some are untaxed and uninsured I never said they all were) hecnce saving the subsidising costs.  They work For the minimum wage where the wage was higher than the minimum wage before they came.  and they will work over 40 hours without argument.  Doesn't matter that there is supposed to be no such thing as 'compulsory overtime'  these factories will tell you at dinner time that you are working 2 hours longer that day.  they may tell you that you MUST work on christmas and new year some years.  Sometimes you are told you are working 60 hours this week.  Of course it is within reason and not compulsory but it is something that they had a problem with when it was English workers that they do not now because the Europeans I used to speak to would be happy to work 100 hours a week because then they would've earnt enough in 1 year to go home and buy a new house for cash.  This was their aim.  Most had a 2 year objective.  To work earn the money, go home.

Why have I gone onto this on a fuel thread.

All these things areinterlinked.  British want more but don't want to pay for it.  They want everything to be cheaper,  want their wages to be higher etc.  Should fuel duty go up?  I'm not so sure.  I would like to see the amount of lazy gets on the road reduced however I think there should be some consideration for those who 'need' to use fuel for their jobs.  maybe some sort of system where those who use their car for work get a discount car or something where those who use it to drive 400 yards up the road to buy a packet of fags and a big mac do not get the discount?  Maybe some way of a rebat at the end of the year for proof of milage for work purposes?  I do not know.  What I do know is there are far too many lazy British people who think that their time and energy is so important and would think they were so hard done by if they had to walk to the shops, school, use a bus etc like the generation (s) before us did.

Get your facts right before calling me a bigot.  I though my my wife was a bigot.  She says the English think they are so clever.  You just proved she is in fact just stating facts!!!  You are as bad as GB was pre election thinkng anyone who has an opinion that involves immigrants or migrants is a Bigot!!!  I am not.  I just want the lazy gets that I live amongst on this council estate to get off their arses and do some work.  And it would be ideal if the Dover doors were closed so we could get those jobs back that we used to do (or at least I used to do)


Andy


----------



## dazzer1975

SuperColey1 said:
			
		

> Ask my Black Portuguese wife if I am a bigot, a racist, a xenophobe?



I know the ex treasurer of Veritas political party, he too is a bigot, and funnily enough, he has a brazilian wife.

What is it, the white man's burden? It is akin to I'm not racist, but... or I have black or asian friends, one even came to my wedding etc but...



> She agrees with me r.e. the migrants from Europe.  It was a trickle.  It has turned into a flood.  They were filling in the odd job and were very beneficial.  they now provide governments reason to openly state _ 'They are doing jobs that Britons won't do'_ (and yes politicians from both sides have said exactly this comment in these exact words.  I have not summised this from reading between lines nor did I even need them to tell me this.



I am sure she does agree with you, ah right, you don't think people can be bigoted or racist because they are from a foreign country, or if they have black skin and come from portugal?

If it is a bigoted view, then who it has come from is a bigot, it is immensely simple, much like your argument.



> As for the 'immigrants and illegality' I have no bones with the mmigrants.



except your one reference to them was in a derogatory remark wrapped up in illegality and wrong doing and how somehow they have detracted or diminished the previous way of life the natives enjoyed.




> They are doing what we would do.  Going to another country to find work.  I have bones with the government old and new for allowing this to happen



Say that then, instead you mentioned un mot'd cars that were not taxed and laden with eastern europeans traversing our highways and byways... see the problem? i doubt it.



> to fill in for those who will not work and should have been forced to do these jobs instead of being hidden away on 'disability benefit'.



Ok, someone else needs a "big picture exposition" too I see.

The consistent policy of British governments throughout the 20th century has been about competing at the very top of the world stage in all matters, militarily, economically, diplomatically. the truth is, we lost our role as being globally relevant over 60 years ago. The trouble is, no one bothered to tell the English, or at least, the English politicians.

Thus we have a situation were we needed to increase the population, not to work in jobs that the feckless benefit claiming hidden on disability English wouldn't do, but to work in jobs per se alongside the english and whoever else happens to be here, basically to expand the workforce, not subsidise it (why have British citizens when short term economic migrants would do the job just as well?), to increase the tax revenue.



> Those who are genuininely unable to work due to disability etc I have no problem with.  Those that are depressed, stressed, have continual pains that have not been diagnosed ever and leave all physicians stumped I have no time for.  My Dad used to catch a fair few of them when he was an investigator but Labour chopped away half of his powers and he decided that he would no longer do the job as he was not allowed to do it properly.



Jesus, you really are a small minded, bitter and mean spirited individual aren't you.

How do you decide what a genuine disability is? Who has decided that? Could it be the same people who have decided those with depression or constant pain, or whatever other issue they have? If so, why are they right in their diagnoses and treatment path for supercoley sanctioned disabilities, but they are wrong in supercoley non sanctioned illnesses.

Then of course there are these illnesses that have not been diagnosed. LMAO who the blahblahblahblah are you? How many doctors and patients have you discussed this particular problem with? I take it you are personally privvy to a statistically relevant sample sizing of patients and doctors and are involved and informed from initial doctor contact right through to conclusion of investigation and treatment?

Yer, I didn't think so.

The real irony here, is that you yourself admit to having received benefits for what? simply being out of work whose to say what the reason is, we only have your word for it... see the problem? You even found cause to defend your decision to claim those beenfits on this very thread, and you find it acceptable to perpetuate the same baseless assumptions and short sighted prejudices that you yourself have faced.

wow, it takes a very special person to do that.



> When people above talk about unemplyed in benefit you know full well they do not mean those who are unfortunate to not be in work at this time.



Ahhh so there are deserving unemployed and undeserving unemployed?

Thanks, that clears a lot up for me.

It means your entire world view is based on bigoted, mis and ill informed prejudices usually based upon your knee jerk, automatic and un thought through political and social beliefs. 




> They mean those who have no intention of working.



Who are these people, have you personally consulted them, are you aware of even one person who you can provide the name of, that you understand their life history and how it led them to the place they are at today? What are this person's internal issues? the hopes, fears, beliefs, thoughts in relation to work, their circumstances, their past and what they think about all of it and more?

No, didn't think so.




> The £2 was an exaggeration and you know this too however you choose to take it as it is written and make a point.  These scroungers (of which I would not consider myself one although I am currently unemplyed)



Oh but of course, when you find yourself unemployed.. AND CLAIMING BENEFITS its the "others" its not "you" everyone means everyone else, they couldn't possibly be making sweeping generalisations about those who claim benefits, yet have the rationality, ability, subtle nuanced outlook to distinguish between one unemployed benefit claimant and another could they?

after all, what do they know about you as a human being and how you got to where you are today and what do they know about these "others" to be able to furnish themselves with an adequate position to be able to compare and contrast.


I think i have highlighted enough things now and a pattern is forming.

and for those who remain in any doubt, check out the last line:




			
				SuperColey1 said:
			
		

> And it would be ideal if the Dover doors were closed so we could get those jobs back that we used to do (or at least I used to do)
> 
> 
> Andy



What's up? aren't you prepared to do the jobs that the lazy, benefit claiming, feckless, idle, english don't want to do? Too lazy to take any work, easier on benefits i suppose.

Only one thing worse than a bigot, a thick bigot.


----------



## GreenNeedle

You should star up your own quango where you can take every generalisation as a belief of people(s).  You can then dismiss everybody's social responsibilities and anyone who doesn't 'toe the line' has reasons internally (hopes fears etc.) to remove any cause to cal lthem lazy etc.

I am tired of hearing about 'lost generations'  about social this and that.  That 'lost generation'  The 'eighties kids?  By the look of your username you and indeed I are part of that 'lost generation'.  I am not lost, are you?  I may be mislaid at the moment but I will be found   Just as soon as I get a single reply from a single application instead of the abject ignorance that is the inability to reply en mass to failed applicants via e-mail   however at least the reply will lift my spirits enough that someone has dained my CV to be worthy of a read for once.

Alas I do not interview all these dossers on my street.  Nor do I ask the chap 2 doors up who gets a very tidy disbability benefit if they can clean my gutter while they have their ladder out.  Alas if I did their limp may return as they can only stand on that leg for the length oftime it takes to clean their own gutter.

Alas the man across the street who gets allowance for a back pain that the doctors cannot cure if he can bring me a crate of Stella next time he goes.  It may be too much for him to carry 2 crates on his shoulder.

However this is not just my bigoted view.  I regularly see those whom I used to work with.  Some working, some not,  Some doing better work than they were at the factory, some doing worse but all agreed they would have still been there if the transport hadn't been removed.

These Bigots are just a small seciton of societey that has been long forgotten.  After all they should all have learnt to drive and added yet more cars to the road howeverthinking about it to pay for the car and petrol they wouldn't have been able to continue in the factory job so I'm all confused now.  Makes a little mockery there a bit of Catch22.

So whilst the Quangos want to label anyone who makes any argument whilst deciding that there is a valid reason for anything like this that needs more quango employess to investigate then we shall all await the outcome.  No doubt that all people have a problem that is valid as to why they do not and have not worked for a long long time.

As for me championing my use of the benefits system.  This is my 21st week on the dole.  housing benefits included and I slip further and further into the mire of depression.  I am stresssed to the hilt because of having to search for the jobs that aren't there whilst seeing loads of 'non jobs' like commission based selling.  however I have re applied for McDs and Burger Kings and maybe I shal strike it lucky this time.  Other than that I can hope that the retail assistants positions may reply whilst dreaming that the 12k admin asst (aka bog standard clerk as was) replies as that is my standard at the moment.  Not aiming high, just wanting a job that is full time.  pays anything and leads me out of this state of depression.  although thinking about it I can surely go to your quango once it is setup and find I am in the prefect state to relieve myself of all social, and moral duty due to my situation 

What makes me laugh is I have just asked the job centre if I can go on the job program where they put you in placements or work trials.  This is where they put you after 12 months.  I have been on the dole for 5 weeks and I asked them.  They told me I couldn't to which I basically (but more politely) told them it was ridiculous , why not,  are you crazy.  It was the first time I asume anyone had actually asked for them to do this because they rang me up next day to tell me that they could do it and would be contacting me with further details.  So hopefully through my own pro-active nature I may well be working soon.  Not for the want of trying because believe me I have made a lot of applications.  zilch replies though.

As it happens the Anglian Water thing I didn't do.  Partly because of the traditional moral way of being a little embarrased to be on benefits.  Partly because I can't be bothered 

Our Great grandfathers would've disowned us for how we have become.  For how posh we think we are.  for how we want more than we can afford and then complain.

Anyway back to the grind.  I have 5 applications to fill out this afternoon.

So if I am a Bigot for saying what I see, detailing what I know,  detailing actual things that have really happened then so be it.  Others call this experience, modern Britain calls it Bigotry.

And I shall not be detailing any names for you.  Much as I would like your new Quango to be able to help these poor downtrodden souls in their hour of no need I am prevented from doing so for fear that I may get into trouble for actually disagrreing with their sorry thieveing, dependent way of life.


----------



## dazzer1975

SuperColey1 said:
			
		

> You should star up your own quango where you can take every generalisation as a belief of people(s).
> Alas I do not interview all these dossers on my street.  Nor do I ask the chap 2 doors up who gets a very tidy disbability benefit if they can clean my gutter while they have their ladder out.  Alas if I did their limp may return as they can only stand on that leg for the length oftime it takes to clean their own gutter.
> 
> Alas the man across the street who gets allowance for a back pain that the doctors cannot cure if he can bring me a crate of Stella next time he goes.  It may be too much for him to carry 2 crates on his shoulder.
> 
> However this is not just my bigoted view.  I regularly see those whom I used to work with.  Some working, some not,  Some doing better work than they were at the factory, some doing worse but all agreed they would have still been there if the transport hadn't been removed.



When was the last time you saw their income and where that income comes from. I don't mean the last time you heard it from someone as equally myopic as you, i literally mean when was the last time you saw documentary evidence of their income and its source, bank statements, p60's, share dividends, letters of notification of their benefit entitlement.

Not to mention this deep understanding of their personal medical situation.

And even then, what inside knowledge of their attitudes and outlooks are you specifically privvy to?

Thats right, you aren't.

but still, you carry on claiming benefits because you don't want to do jobs that i suspect you think are below you, while making your ill informed judgements about those you suspect of doing the same thing but have absolutely no evidence for it.

I think there is a reason you are unemployed, brain power is required in much of the workforce.

Oh, whats that? I don't know you or your personal circumstances, yer that's right, it's good innit.

Like I said before:



> Truth is though, I'd probably be wasting my time, the kind of views expressed on this thread are usually so entrenched, despite being void of foundation, nothing will remove the scales from the eyes of those holding them.


----------



## dazzer1975

good comeback


----------



## Aquadream

Bloody hell guys. Why did you not meet in person to discuss this HOT subject rather than writing this bibles here?
Perhaps I can shed some little light on the subject.

Oil is one of the major economic substances in our era.
All of the most important commodities in our time (including oil) are misleadingly thought to be the necessary material for the modern world development and this is how it should be indeed.
BUT IT IS NOT. What it is then? Tools for creating slaves in modern days.
All most important commodities are controlled by one bank system or another as it is the oil on this planet.
Now since the very purpose of the banks very existence is to generate as much profit as possible those prices will never go down.
Let me explain why!
Because for the fuel prices to go down it is absolutely necessary to increase the production of goods in the country first. When the money used to buy the oil are made by producing goods the prices of oil will be equal only to the absolute amount that is paid for it.
But when the money used to buy oil are made out of thin air (generated by the banks computer system) then the price of oil will be equal to the amount paid plus the debth that the generated funds are adding to it.
With simple words. 
If oil is paid with capital acquired from production of goods then the price of a gallon may be worth let say a 1£ for example.
If the oil is paid with bank generated funds the price of a gallon will be 1£ plus 1£ for covering the debt that the electronically generated pound is creating.

This is the very basics of inflation and it is the very reason that will prevent ever dropping of the fuel prices or any other price for that matter.

I would say that the one and only way for the prices to drop will be all people in the country (possible the whole world) stand together as one and say; We are not paying this price. Drop it or drink this bloody oil.
Needless to say that this is not going to happen.

dazzer1975 a little advice for you if you do not mind. Leave Supercooley1 alone. You are not going to win argument there. People that live on public funds for a long time do not really understand the value of hard earned cash with sweat and suffering. You will hear there a lot of theories, a lot of personal opinion, but all that will have little real estate value as it does not originate from real experience, but reading books, listening talks  and making a lot of assumptions.
It is quite similar to the computer generated funds I am talking about. They seem to be helpful at a time, but adding a lot of depth and cost just like all benefit seekers.

The conclusion.
Do not fight over this or anything else or be against each other over pointless little things. As long as the current system exists we are all going to loose.
The fuel prices will never drop, but this kind of bubbling will most certainly produce a lot of enemies on every side.


----------



## GreenNeedle

Oh Aquadream.  I am glad you understand how all I believe is Gospel.  Maybe you can convince me that it is true  as I am open minded enough to know that I am not always right. Indeed I have been wrong before..........I think. lol

However do read before you castigate me as someone looking from within with no idea of what is outside.



> People that live on public funds for a long time do not really understand the value of hard earned cash with sweat and suffering.



Considering I am 36 yet have been on the 'public funds' only for the last 20 weeks, which I have stated in this thread a couple of times you can work out I fully know th value of hard earned cash.  Indeed simple maths means 36 years minus school days = 20 years minus 20 weeks.  I think that makes just over 19 and a half years or is it 5?  can't remember what 2+2 is so I shall trust someone else's maths for this toughie.

That is unless you refer to my mentioning of tax credits which are also public funds however all of us (apart from those on super dooper salaries) have been enjoying those so we can now envelop all of us into the not knowing the value of hard earned cash because we've all been getting that freebie top up.  And we all now accept it, or more to the point we expect it and think it is necessary.  Something that we are entitled to.

So Aquadream, If you read through I have been arguing the opposite, that while others bemoan how tight their money is I do not.  I live within my means (albeit with a recent history of doing the opposite and learning from that mistake.)  It is the others that suggest we are actually suffering whilst I suggest that we have it too good and would not know suffering if it hit us straight in the face.

Personally it would be great if others could take advice off me and follow my examples.  I will give you one for free:

Copy me and wear the same set of clothes for the whole week.  do not shower or bath.  this not only means you only need 2 sets of clothes saving a fortune but also saves you on water.  saves you the gas to heat that water and saves you electricity and water from less washing   I must admit (ashamedly) that I do keep a spare pair of boxers in case of accidents 
So a snippet of my genus there.  For the rest you will have to buy the book.

So please read what I type.  I do enjoy you putting me down but try to read first to see what my argument is before taking the opposite side.  You have chosen to argue with me yet are arguing on the same vain as I have been which is quite amusing. lol

It is also quite amusing how so many people are so serious that they take everything I say word for word without seeing that I am actually lampooning myself whilst trying to point out what I believe.  Yes I do believe there are huge swathes of the British Citizenship who will do almost anything to stay on benefits rather than working.  I know many.  They will openly tell me that they think being told to do a 13 week placement or lose their benefits is against their human rights. Is slave labour.  That they are being made to work for nothing, for free.  Not that they are having to prove that they are worthy of the benefits.

And we all know that a lot of people a large number not just a little minority think they are the Jones' let alone try to keep up with the Jones'.  They are the 'must have now' brigade that include Sky TV and the latest iphones as necessities and part of the cost of living!!!

Food and heating vs what my mate Dave thinks of me?  Hmmm.  I think I'll put the coat on turn the heating off and eat plastic packages from Iceland then I can go for the flashy phone and invite everybods round for the ManU chelsea game.  Cost of living is extreme these days. lol

However I do make fun of my own situation.  Maybe it takes my mind of the boredom.  And I am not looking for a good job. I am looking for A job that i CAN do.  however responses are rare and patience is a virtue I struggle with so I do get a little down here and there.  So good to read other people's posts to cheer me up   I like being told that the UK is not as bad as it seems to be 

Forgive the typos.  I am typing with one hand because the baby is in the other arm 

Andy


----------



## Nelson

dazzer1975 said:
			
		

> Given what i have responded to above, I don't think we need to read me repeating myself. But for Nelson's benefit, seeing as he can't read the thread in conjunction with what i had originally posted, i include it here in the hope he learns something about comprehension and then going off to do your own research.
> 
> 
> I hope this will suffice for now, it is currently 02:30 and I am bored now of explaining things that are right in front of your eyes.


Wow dazzer,you wrote all that for me   .You're too kind,I feel like we've become friends   .
But as I stated before,theres too many different opinions on the internet and,god forbid   ,they may not be of the same opinion as you and I wouldn't be able to comprehend that.
So I'll decline the option of doing my own research as I'm sure you're right and they'd be wrong.
Also,thanks to you,I've learnt loads,arrogance,hypocrisy,bigotry,narcissism,fundamental attribution error and actor-observer asymmetry .
To name just a few things,and I sincerely thank you for the lesson you've given me.
Please don't feel the need to stay up until 2.30am just for me.

Sleep well "dear friend".

p.s......Have you ever read anything by Alfred Adler ?.


----------



## Dolly Sprint 16v

Hi Gang@UKaps

The goverment will not put a hold on fuel prices, if they did this would reduce the fuel duty revenue - what amazes me is that they keep banging on about electric car - you still need to burn fossel fuel to generate the electricity to power the cars and another way to look at it: for those people using electric / hybrid cars who are not paying any road tax or a small amount which is a loss to the goverment we who are running petrol or diesel powered cars are making up the shortfall.

After reading the comments of page 11 & 12 - there is only one thing I would like to "Get A LIFE". 

Regards
Paul.


----------



## Aquadream

Dolly Sprint 16v said:
			
		

> Hi Gang@UKaps
> 
> The goverment will not put a hold on fuel prices, if they did this would reduce the fuel duty revenue - what amazes me is that they keep banging on about electric car - you still need to burn fossel fuel to generate the electricity to power the cars and another way to look at it: for those people using electric / hybrid cars who are not paying any road tax or a small amount which is a loss to the goverment we who are running petrol or diesel powered cars are making up the shortfall.
> 
> After reading the comments of page 11 & 12 - there is only one thing I would like to "Get A LIFE".
> 
> Regards
> Paul.


Thumbs up  . All that can happen while this discussion is going on is those prices to only go up.


----------



## whatok

Guys, I won this thread maybe 4 pages back!


----------



## a1Matt

Aquadream said:
			
		

> All that can happen while this discussion is going on is those prices to only go up.



 

I think they've gone up about 5p a litre (local to me) since this thread started


----------



## dazzer1975

nelson said:
			
		

> Wow dazzer,you wrote all that for me



For your benefit in the hope you would learn something... I am an optimist.


----------

