MSN News - Jeremy Clarkson gets penalty points
Discussion
La Liga said:
rich888 said:
I'm guessing that the economic scale of speed camera revenue across the UK runs into millions, I'm awaiting freedom of information requests for more localised figures but in the meantime figure that if I was fined £100 that would be £100 less than I would be spending in the local economy - multiply that by however many other motorists are fined from the area and there is the answer as to how much money won't be spent in the local economy.
The gross surplus for the treasury in 2006/2007 was 114 million. So about 2.6 million per SCP (although the standard deviation will be high for obvious reasons). The net surplus to the treasury is likely to be about 20% of that. The structure has since changed whereby a much larger proportion are dealt with by Speed Awareness Courses. If you're concerned about tax and the local economy, then a proportion will go to ltd companies who pay tax, and whose employees and Directors (likely) all pay tax. The employees of the SCPs naturally all pay tax and spend money in the LE, too. It's a bit of a money merry-go-round on a very small scale.
The summary is it's an economically irrelevant sum both locally and nationally. Research the scales of National Debt and annual revenue if you want to see why.
rich888 said:
Finally, in order for this country to dig itself out of debt will require more than speed camera revenue, coffee shops, charity shops and ever more council jobsworths to enforce ever more petty legislation.
Where has anyone proposed those things are being relied on to reduce the debt we have? I haven't seen them mentioned too much by the Bank of England over the past 8 years.Don't be too quick to dismiss coffee shops, the service industry makes up about 80% GDP.
Local Authorities are all contracting in size, too.
rich888 said:
If speeding is so dangerous, why isn't everybody dead in Germany!
We have fewer deaths per mile and per person on our roads compared with the Germans. Speed Badger said:
He was actually caught speeding about 5 years ago, but the paperwork 'somehow' became lost and it was dismissed.
IIRC there were complications around the S.172 request which resulted in no further action being taken. As to you stating the gross surplus for the treasury in 2006/2007 was £114 million, I think you are in lala land, the national debt has been rising for several years now and is even greater than official figures quoted if you add in the massive off-balance sheet PFI projects which have cost millions and are strangely not included in the figures. Is a bit like the household omitting the water, gas and electricity bills when they calculate their outgoings and reply that these are not the mortgage so are irrelevant, except they have to be repaid. If other off-balance sheet figures are added in, the national debt stands at well over £4.8 trillion pounds.
I think you need to watch the Trillion Pound Horror Story documentary to appreciate just what a massive financial mess this country is really in, and realise that boasting that coffee shops contributing 80% of GDP is nothing to be proud of, we need real design and manufacturing that countries will buy from us. Watch the documentary and weep: http://www.veoh.com/watch/v205926104rd9GssB?h1=Bri...
As for the £100 fines being an economically irrelevant sum both locally and nationally shows just how out of touch you are with reality. If £100 is taken out of my wallet via a fine or nanny state speed awareness course it will simply result in me personally spending £100 less in the local economy. Multiply that across the country and I assume it's a pretty big number of potential shoppers staying away because they are skint and well pi**ed off, more importantly, if I was indeed fined for a trivial speeding offence I would be well fu**ed off which will ultimately result in a tick in the box at the general election that you won't be so keen on.
The fact is that councils across the country and government departments are still wasting huge amounts of money on technology to catch out motorists for ever more trivial speeding offences in an effort to boost their revenue, when in reality, they should be cutting their expenditure by cutting their excessive salaries and over inflated pensions, and actually looking to stop spending excessive amounts of money on projects that really ought to cost less.
Watch the documentary: http://www.veoh.com/watch/v205926104rd9GssB?h1=Bri... and to anyone else who has taken the time to watch it, there is an orange download button so you can spread the word. The video was uploaded onto YouTube several years ago, but viewers from the UK are blocked from viewing it due to their UK IP address!!!
rich888 said:
La Liga, you haven't answered the question I asked which was quite simple 'You seem to be quite focused with your questions, must ask do you work for government, work in the camera partnership or any related company or organisation, or have access to the figures?'. I await your reply...
What difference does it make? Do you need that to conclude I have a vested interest or agenda? Why not just debate the points and not the person? It's not hard to figure out in any case. The figures I quoted are all from internet searching.
rich888 said:
As for the £100 fines being an economically irrelevant sum both locally and nationally shows just how out of touch you are with reality.
Do you have any concept of scale or proportion? Are you seriously making a case that a few million £ has any significance to a multi-trillion pound national debt? That's like saying it makes a practical difference to a river level if I pour a pint of water in it or not.
rich888 said:
If £100 is taken out of my wallet via a fine or nanny state speed awareness course it will simply result in me personally spending £100 less in the local economy. Multiply that across the country and I assume it's a pretty big number of potential shoppers staying away because they are skint and well pi**ed off
Exactly, you assume and make a case for what you want to be true. Even if it were exactly how you speculate, it's still statistically insignificant. Your wording shows your hand i.e. "taken out of your wallet" - you're entirely in charge of the variable which dictates the risk of facing a penalty / fee of £100.
From a purely economic view, the harm you speak of is probable to be mostly offset (and more) by the job creation for the people who work within the SCPs, given they a) won't be unemployed and taking rather than contributing b) won't be taking up another job c) pay tax d) spend their wages in the local economy.
rich888 said:
The fact is that councils across the country and government departments are still wasting huge amounts of money on technology to catch out motorists for ever more trivial speeding offences in an effort to boost their revenue, when in reality, they should be cutting their expenditure by cutting their excessive salaries and over inflated pensions, and actually looking to stop spending excessive amounts of money on projects that really ought to cost less.
All LAs are making significant savings. Look at the cost breakdowns for an LA if you want to see the areas that are most at risk (which spend the most). SCPs aren't a net loss on the 'balance sheet'. rich888 said:
Watch the documentary: http://www.veoh.com/watch/v205926104rd9GssB?h1=Bri... and to anyone else who has taken the time to watch it, there is an orange download button so you can spread the word. The video was uploaded onto YouTube several years ago, but viewers from the UK are blocked from viewing it due to their UK IP address!!!
Thanks for the red herring. At which point was I disputing the national debt levels? Repeating the same thing I've only used to give a sense of proportion doesn't an argument make.
Edited by anonymous-user on Wednesday 22 October 17:33
If you can't afford the fine, don't do the crime.
I got caught by a camera about 5 years ago. I paid up without complaining. I had chosen to exceed the limit, so I could hardly moan when I was caught.
I didn't whine and b
h about how unfair it was, or how it was a stealth tax to pay off our debts - because that would be childish bks.
If you don't want to line the pockets of the speed camera companies, or the SAC organisers, there is a trivially easy way to avoid the fines.
I got caught by a camera about 5 years ago. I paid up without complaining. I had chosen to exceed the limit, so I could hardly moan when I was caught.
I didn't whine and b
h about how unfair it was, or how it was a stealth tax to pay off our debts - because that would be childish bks.If you don't want to line the pockets of the speed camera companies, or the SAC organisers, there is a trivially easy way to avoid the fines.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff