Road charge = £1.45 per mile
#32
Originally Posted by workshy_fopp
Kyl3cook - So you're not a Socialist then?
btw, I'm not even close to the 40% tax bracket for income...but I do feel strongly about the way it works.
#33
Originally Posted by rav4640
like the we dont need bit, i was born here, dont think we really need yank bas*ards supporting a goverment thats out to screw the car owner every which way
#34
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Swilling coffee at my lab bench
Posts: 9,096
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dont believe this is utopia where everyone can live within walking distance - i just believe that it's ALWAYS a choice (and it is).
As long as some of the jobs that exist are in places that are not well served by public transport, there will be people who cannot get to work by public transport. Whether the people who work there do so by choice or because all the jobs within walking distance of their homes are filled is immaterial.
The only meaningful choice that many of us can make is what to drive, not if to drive. I have no problem with paying more tax on a thirstier car. What I object to is being punitively taxed because I happen to be one of those people whose place of work is not well served by public transport. I cannot simply choose to have another similarly paid job that brings the same sort of money into the country - I spent a year looking and there aren't any.
#35
Originally Posted by Kyl3cook
btw, I'm not even close to the 40% tax bracket for income...but I do feel strongly about the way it works.
out of your two categories:
why the F*** should one person who has worked all his/her life to earn good money, pay any more than someone who is too bone idle to get off their **** and do the same
#36
Originally Posted by AndyC_772
I cannot simply choose to have another similarly paid job that brings the same sort of money into the country - I spent a year looking and there aren't any.
#37
Originally Posted by milo
racist ****
therefore not racist!
#38
Moderator
iTrader: (1)
Too many people are against higher taxes on motorists simply because they're a motorist. they fail to see the huge proven benefits to the economy that taxing the motorist has brought.
If the average Joe Public could see a improvement to the towns and cities, the reduction of crime, the improvement of health services and schools it would never cause so much complaint. But year upon year taxation for the average working person rises in one way or another. And no benefit is seen, increase in crime, increase in NSH waiting lists, Bed shortages, decaying roads, ancient failing rail system, poor bus network that only serves "main routes" leaving people in remote villages stranded (including elderly with no cars). Pensioners recieving a pittance, dying from hypothermia due to the heating being cut off even though they worked and paid tax all of their life whilst an immigrant, gets given a warm welcome and free housing and benefits.
I know full well extra revenue raised from this scheme will just get wasted down the same drain through inefficiency, red tape, Europe, benefits, asylum and immigration This is why I refuse to accept any other excuse to increase taxation, as there is no reform on the way it is spent.
If the money actually went where it was needed - such as public transport, then perhaps we could scrap our cars.
But our living expense increases (through taxation and economy), we need more money to support our families (and mortgages). So we need a high paid job, so the average Joe is forced to look further to find a higher paid job, the job could be 100's of miles away, they can either move to that area (normally more costly- refer to North South migration studies). Or stay and travel, and rely on the car. Why is the living expense so high, oh it's because UK businesses are taxed to death as well, so can't pay such generous wages.
I notice Milo you say you come from the US, do most state schools have school buses to take kids to and from their local schools? Perhaps if all that taxation the UK wastes was put to employ the same system then we wouldn't have mums in 4x4's and MPV's clambering over curbs at 8:50am every morning clogging up our roads.
Last edited by ALi-B; 11 July 2004 at 10:41 PM.
#39
Originally Posted by Kyl3cook
therefore not racist!
note the quote i made in my post, from rav, who called me a yank *******. that's what's racist.
your comment of "i dislike you" isn't racist at all. it's just childish.
#40
Originally Posted by ALi-B
The problem is is that it DOES'NT benefit the economy. The government claims they need the revenue. But where will it go? It will go to the those who sponge off the system, the ones that burden and fight for every hand out they can get.
hopefully it will go to the nhs.
#41
and what are your views on this affecting the haulage industry milko, the industry that gets your goods to the shops, extra costs can only go one way, and thats to the shopper,
#42
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Staffordshire
Posts: 1,238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by milo
in this case, they merely want to make more money to pay for the many public services they offer to you free of charge.
Take your nose out of Blairs **** and wake up and smell the coffee will ya.
#43
Originally Posted by milo
this is interesting, because chances are then, you're being HEAVILY subsidised by higher tax payers.
out of your two categories:
you do realise that in your model here, as a non-higher bracket tax payer, you fall into the "bone idle" category?
out of your two categories:
you do realise that in your model here, as a non-higher bracket tax payer, you fall into the "bone idle" category?
#45
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Swilling coffee at my lab bench
Posts: 9,096
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
but you took your original job in the first place tho, right?
incidently, how do you feel about smokers who have to pay a ridiculously high tax for cigarettes?
#46
Originally Posted by Trem
LOL, yes you are right. The public transport system we have now is fantastic and not at all ****e.
the nhs is a life-saver for millions of people however.
and i bet you're glad that you don't have to pay for your childrens' school fees, and that university education in england costs a fraction of what it does in other countries.
#47
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Swilling coffee at my lab bench
Posts: 9,096
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
this is interesting, because chances are then, you're being HEAVILY subsidised by higher tax payers.
#49
Originally Posted by rav4640
and what are your views on this affecting the haulage industry milko, the industry that gets your goods to the shops, extra costs can only go one way, and thats to the shopper,
The documents, which also outline 10 other suggestions for cutting congestion, reveal most charges would be in urban areas and on trunk roads, especially in peak hours, while more than half of drivers could pay less than they do now to use the roads.
i suspect that since the haulage industry does NOT cause major congestion and as the vast majority of the mileage is not in urban areas, you will actually be SAVING money from this approach.
ive NEVER said diesel for the haulage industry should be heavily taxed btw, if you honestly think im on here to try to ruin your job.. im not.
#50
Originally Posted by AndyC_772
The crucial point here is that cigarette smoking has no positive side. I hate the smell of tobacco smoke, and its production doesn't achieve anything. So you're right, I'm in favour of it being taxed heavily.
seems interesting that you're in favor of taxing heavily something that you don't use.. but not taxing heavily something that you do use.
#51
Originally Posted by Kyl3cook
no, wrong again, as I'm saying all people should pay the same for taxes
YOU are not funding people who are on the dole. the people in the 40% bracket are funding the people on the dole AND they're funding you.
for example, i highly doubt you've paid back a fraction of what it cost to educate you yet.
#52
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Swilling coffee at my lab bench
Posts: 9,096
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
seems interesting that you're in favor of taxing heavily something that you don't use.. but not taxing heavily something that you do use
Why do you think it is that I don't smoke?
#53
i do deliveries into london 3 times a week at least and get hit by the congestion charge that i have to cover myself, and now they are thinking of bringing a per mile charge to add to that, i dont want to be out of work, but carrying extra costs like the can only send me one way, i dont have a very high profit margin as it is, nor do i think many others do in the haulage industry, it was rising fuel costs that caused me to down size from an artic which i ran for 6 years to a van in the hope i could still survive
#54
I have in fact paid back all of my university fees...I was in private education throughout my life, so my parents have paid for that! I owe this country no money (well I owe mitsubishi some). Where is the line which says that the 23% of tax I pay is not enough to pay for all the benefits I recieve? I may in fact only need to pay 15% to support myself in my life, and the rest goes to the low lifes!...where did you get the information stating that the higher earners are paying for me? I'd like to know, because I do not use many of the governemts institutions!...you can't know because you don't know what I benefit from taxation.
#55
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Swilling coffee at my lab bench
Posts: 9,096
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hopefully it will go to the nhs
Assume an under-funded NHS, then consider these two scenarios:
a) The Government introduces a new tax, and the people are told that the NHS will receive 100% of the revenue thus raised. The people accept this and they're happy, because they know their extra taxes are being put to good use.
b) The Government slashes its defense budget, and gives the money instead to the NHS. Now the same Government introduces a new tax, and the people are told that the military will receive 100% of the revenue thus raised. Are they so happy now?
Do you understand now, why saying that money will go to some good cause or other is just spin? Tax is tax.
#56
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Lots of different places! (Thank you Mr. Lambert)
Posts: 3,037
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by hedgehog
Tiggers made a good point about who do you vote for? I agree totally with your basic premise which is that the Tories started it and Labour are only carrying on the policies. However, where I believe you can make a difference is at a local level and on the doorstep. Tell politicians who come to your door that you will vote for the most motorist friendly party and let them know you mean it. Ask them where they stand on such policy matters and ask the same questions off local politicians.
In the end this grassroots message does get back up the party and it is the only weapon we have. I totally agree, Labour are as bad as the Tories and a change at the top tomorrow would change nothing. However, about 23 million motorists are voters and that is a considerable lobby so we should all be asking hard questions of our local politicians. If you feel inclined to do so then write to your local representitives and ask where they, and their party, stand on motoring issues. We need to make it clear to them that this WILL be a big issue at the next election and the party to get it wrong stand to lose 23 million votes before the polling station doors open.
If every politician is opening a mailbag full of motoring issues each and every day then be assured that the party will have to move it's position. You need only look at the success the BNP have been having, based upon politics at a local level, to see that this can and does work.
What we need now is a motorists party! 23 million potential voters, big oil companies and car firms as potential sources of "donations," an electorate sick of PC spin. You could hardly go wrong.
In the end this grassroots message does get back up the party and it is the only weapon we have. I totally agree, Labour are as bad as the Tories and a change at the top tomorrow would change nothing. However, about 23 million motorists are voters and that is a considerable lobby so we should all be asking hard questions of our local politicians. If you feel inclined to do so then write to your local representitives and ask where they, and their party, stand on motoring issues. We need to make it clear to them that this WILL be a big issue at the next election and the party to get it wrong stand to lose 23 million votes before the polling station doors open.
If every politician is opening a mailbag full of motoring issues each and every day then be assured that the party will have to move it's position. You need only look at the success the BNP have been having, based upon politics at a local level, to see that this can and does work.
What we need now is a motorists party! 23 million potential voters, big oil companies and car firms as potential sources of "donations," an electorate sick of PC spin. You could hardly go wrong.
tiggers.
#58
Hedgehog's original point is quite right of course and the only power that the People still have is the vote. The politicians are still frightened of that and that always shows when election time comes around. All of a sudden they start to show concern for the electorate, at least until the election is over that is.
Hutton D has got it about right too. Milo you are living in your own "dreamland". If you cannot see what is steathily being done in this country and the EU then you should take a look at it all with an unbiased view! Of course they want total control over our lives, that is the way to absolute power, knowledge is power and all the proposed "modernisations" are slanted to achieving that. Modernisation is another word for changing things around to suit those in power, never for the real good of the electorate. Given a few years then they would certainly be fitting us with personal chips and Logan's Run will become a reality! Read your Orwell, now there was a far seeing man. How much longer before they get rid of effective voting I wonder?
Hutton D has got it about right too. Milo you are living in your own "dreamland". If you cannot see what is steathily being done in this country and the EU then you should take a look at it all with an unbiased view! Of course they want total control over our lives, that is the way to absolute power, knowledge is power and all the proposed "modernisations" are slanted to achieving that. Modernisation is another word for changing things around to suit those in power, never for the real good of the electorate. Given a few years then they would certainly be fitting us with personal chips and Logan's Run will become a reality! Read your Orwell, now there was a far seeing man. How much longer before they get rid of effective voting I wonder?
#59
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Derbyshire
Posts: 12,304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by milo
for example, i highly doubt you've paid back a fraction of what it cost to educate you yet.
Personally I'd have no problem seeing the NHS scraped. It swallows huge amounts of cash and doesn't seem to get any better. I'd be happy to pay in to Health Insurance scheme as an alternative in the event that I may need treatment at some time in the future.
If I choose to have kids, then I would be happy to support them and pay for their education, as my parents did for me. Having kids is a lifestyle choice, nobody forces you, so you should have to pay the costs associated with them, otherwise please can the 16 year old single Mum's please start paying for my lifestyle choices?
#60
Originally Posted by OllyK
Personally I'd have no problem seeing the NHS scraped. It swallows huge amounts of cash and doesn't seem to get any better.
Funny that, 'cos heart bypasses are now routine, heart/lung transplants no longer uncommon, and what can be done with cancer care beggars belief. I guess that doesn't count as improvement, does it?
<Daily Mail mode>
But no, you're probably right. The NHS is ****, has never got better, and the people employed there are lazy, workshy scroungers. They sit around doing nowt all day, not bothering to treat the ever-lengthening queues, because they're all being paid masses to sit on their fat *****.
EVERY PENNY is spent on expensive consultants and fat-cat administrators, every one of whom drives a BMW. Probably.
</Daily Mail mode>
The NHS was consistently underfunded during the Thatcher/Major era. Guess what? It stopped improving. After nearly a decade of investment, it's finally starting to get to the point where it's no longer a laughing stock amongst European nations, and can deliver what we as a nation quite rightly demand. It's sure as hell not perfect, but it's improved out of all recognition (at least in my experience, in my area) in the last five years, admittedly from 'crap' to 'blimey, it's not too bad now'.