Please sign this petition - Fuel prices

Status
Not open for further replies.

whatok

Member
Joined
16 Feb 2011
Messages
67
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

Expert
Joined
2 Aug 2007
Messages
1,946
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.
 

Nelson

Member
Joined
17 Nov 2008
Messages
2,551
Location
Norfolk
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

Member
Joined
16 Feb 2011
Messages
67
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

Member
Joined
17 Nov 2008
Messages
2,551
Location
Norfolk
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 :clap: ,and I was wrong :oops: .

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

whatok

Member
Joined
16 Feb 2011
Messages
67
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

Member
Joined
17 Nov 2008
Messages
2,551
Location
Norfolk
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

Member
Joined
29 Aug 2011
Messages
46
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

Expert
Joined
2 Aug 2007
Messages
1,946
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.
 

whatok

Member
Joined
16 Feb 2011
Messages
67
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
 

Nelson

Member
Joined
17 Nov 2008
Messages
2,551
Location
Norfolk
Hi dazzer :wave: .Welcome to the party matey :D .
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 :oops: .
Then the youtube link you posted is just noise :? .Ironic,or is it hypocrisy,sorry confused again :oops: ,considering what you wrote is just noise :D .

So heres one for you big boy ;) .
 

dazzer1975

Member
Joined
29 Aug 2011
Messages
46
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 :rolleyes: :

 

Nelson

Member
Joined
17 Nov 2008
Messages
2,551
Location
Norfolk
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 :oops:
I'm not confused anymore :thumbup: .
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 :rolleyes: :
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 :oops:
I'm so definitely not confused anymore :D .
So to include the other 6700 forum members in your statement is,quite frankly,without foundation and maybe even insulting to them :thumbdown: .

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

NeilW

Member
Joined
25 Jun 2009
Messages
1,146
Location
Basingstoke, Hampshire
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 :thumbup:. 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 :lol: . 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 :lol:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
S Another plant ID please Off Topic / Chit-Chat 8
Gill Wheeled Frame Suggestions Please Off Topic / Chit-Chat 0
Similar threads


Top