Wake up call: Lib Dem emission tax policy.
Discussion
3 weeks ago I wrote to the Lib Dems regarding the concern I had regarding the proposed 4x4 tax.
Well, the news is that I got a reply. It amused me, and horrified in equal measure.
The truth is, they haven't targeted 4x4's specifically, despite the media hoo-haa. That made me grin. For a moment.
Then, I read that basically it will be performance vehicles that will be hammered, not just 4x4's, it will be EVERYONE except owners of puny insignificant citi-car models.
Be afraid fellow PH'ers. They are after your 4 litre Griffs just as much as they are after my 3.2 litre 4x4.
And that's where the laughing & grinning stops. Face it folkes, we're all dead in the water, waiting for the axe to fall.
Drive safe, have fun while you still can. If you don't beleive me, ask Ted - I'll forward the email to him so he can verify what I say.
C
Well, the news is that I got a reply. It amused me, and horrified in equal measure.
The truth is, they haven't targeted 4x4's specifically, despite the media hoo-haa. That made me grin. For a moment.
Then, I read that basically it will be performance vehicles that will be hammered, not just 4x4's, it will be EVERYONE except owners of puny insignificant citi-car models.
Be afraid fellow PH'ers. They are after your 4 litre Griffs just as much as they are after my 3.2 litre 4x4.
And that's where the laughing & grinning stops. Face it folkes, we're all dead in the water, waiting for the axe to fall.
Drive safe, have fun while you still can. If you don't beleive me, ask Ted - I'll forward the email to him so he can verify what I say.
C
hertsbiker said:
3 weeks ago I wrote to the Lib Dems regarding the concern I had regarding the proposed 4x4 tax.
Well, the news is that I got a reply. It amused me, and horrified in equal measure.
The truth is, they haven't targeted 4x4's specifically, despite the media hoo-haa. That made me grin. For a moment.
Then, I read that basically it will be performance vehicles that will be hammered, not just 4x4's, it will be EVERYONE except owners of puny insignificant citi-car models.
Be afraid fellow PH'ers. They are after your 4 litre Griffs just as much as they are after my 3.2 litre 4x4.
And that's where the laughing & grinning stops. Face it folkes, we're all dead in the water, waiting for the axe to fall.
Drive safe, have fun while you still can. If you don't beleive me, ask Ted - I'll forward the email to him so he can verify what I say.
C
Look on the bright side - you've got more chance of your car making you pregnant than we have of a Lib Dem Government. The real danger lies with Blair.
I wouldn't be so sure. Think about the sort of people who vote - increasingly the majority are turning their backs on the polling station, but the most politically active sector of society, the City aside, are students. And from a university perspective I can confidently say that if only students were allowed to vote the Lib Dems would win by a massive landslide. These people are starting to find jobs, and vote themselves. I reckon other parties might be in serious danger come the end of the next government term. As bandwagon politicians whose policies are based entirely in selfish idealism, they appeal to lots of students who don't have cars or much money and are unlikely to for a few years after university. The unpopularity of the war has only boosted their appeal.
My worry is that we will see them in power, as the only people voting will be the sort they go out of their way to appeal to. When they said they'd resurface our local roads to make them safer, they put speed humps and 20 zones down all of them, then sent us a letter saying they'd been made safer. It's this approximation of the rules that'll rub off onto all the other policies, and before you know it you'll be living in Numpty hell.
Also, these people are all clueless academics. I remember talking about cars with some of them, and they considered a 1.8-litre engine to be 'massive' and 30 mpg to be 'horrendous'. To me a 1.8 is a fairly normal engine and 30 mpg is commendable. They just don't know their stuff.
But they don't want to know either. Have you seen the default response to any question to a Lib Dem on Question Time? When someone says something they don't agree with, it seems like party policy to affect a smug grin whilst shaking their head, and will always try to shout down whoever disagrees with them like a spoilt child. I don't want their approach in power.
My worry is that we will see them in power, as the only people voting will be the sort they go out of their way to appeal to. When they said they'd resurface our local roads to make them safer, they put speed humps and 20 zones down all of them, then sent us a letter saying they'd been made safer. It's this approximation of the rules that'll rub off onto all the other policies, and before you know it you'll be living in Numpty hell.
Also, these people are all clueless academics. I remember talking about cars with some of them, and they considered a 1.8-litre engine to be 'massive' and 30 mpg to be 'horrendous'. To me a 1.8 is a fairly normal engine and 30 mpg is commendable. They just don't know their stuff.
But they don't want to know either. Have you seen the default response to any question to a Lib Dem on Question Time? When someone says something they don't agree with, it seems like party policy to affect a smug grin whilst shaking their head, and will always try to shout down whoever disagrees with them like a spoilt child. I don't want their approach in power.
I'm sure the apparant "picking on" 4*4s was a divide and conquer tactic.
4*4s represent only about 8% of vehicles so the tax policy may have been pushed through if enough ignorant sheep are happy to see "someone else" picked upon. Then, of course, it will be their turn.
If the Lib dems. gain power, life in many ways will be even worse than under this current bunch of fools.
4*4s represent only about 8% of vehicles so the tax policy may have been pushed through if enough ignorant sheep are happy to see "someone else" picked upon. Then, of course, it will be their turn.
If the Lib dems. gain power, life in many ways will be even worse than under this current bunch of fools.
The anti-car 'war' is as pitched as ever. The divide and conquer tactic works so frequently because there are so many different types of motorist, but only one type of environmentalist. We need to stick up for each other. I also think an awareness campaign relating to dispelling the negative myths about so many cars needs publicizing, perhaps with the assistance of the ABD. And some damning statistics about the thirst and emissions of buses wouldn't go amiss, as they're so hypocritical they make all so-called environmentally-based transport policy a total mockery.
v8thunder said:
And some damning statistics about the thirst and emissions of buses wouldn't go amiss...
Definitely. And some proper evaluation of the financial and environmental costs of railways. Rail seems to be comparatively inefficient and amazingly thirsty.
From REIGNITING THE RAILWAY CONVERSION DEBATE:
"The annual income to the exchequer provided by taxes on road vehicles minus expenditure is in excess of £30 billion. Thirty-seven per cent of vehicle miles are driven on the motorway and trunk road network. The lane length of this is 55,000 km. Hence the income per lane-km from the road network is at least £200,000 per year. In contrast to this, the annual subsidy to the national rail system per track-km will extract at least £150,000 per year from the exchequer"
The Lib Dems seem to be aware of the argument that rail eats up far more money than it could ever generate in a relatively free transport market. So, they're trying to argue that if the sums were done correctly, road transport would be seen to be costing the Exchequer far more than it generates.
Here are their figures:
"The total revenue from motorists equates to 4.4 pence per km.
A study commissioned … from the Institute for Transport Studies* at the University of Leeds made the following estimates of the marginal external social costs of car use per vehicle kilometre in Great Britain:
(a) Congestion costs: 9.0 to 10.4 pence/km
(b) Accident costs : 0.79 to 1.38 pence/km
(c) Air pollution costs: 0.18 to 0.88 pence/km
(d) Noise pollution costs: 0.01 to 0.52 pence/km
(e) Climate change costs: 0.12 to 0.47 pence/km
* 'Surface Transport Costs and Charges', Great Britain 1998, Institute for Transport Studies, University of Leeds, July 2001, page 49."
If the study seems woolly, the Lib Dems use of it is even woollier. Cost (b), and possibly cost (d), are direct expenses to the Exchequer, though even if we accepted that (b), (c), (d) and (e) all cost the Exchequer measurable amounts of money, road transport would still generate revenue at a rate of at least 1.15 pence per km.
The Lib Dems seem to be using the study to suggest that road transport COSTS the Exchequer 9.25 pence per km travelled. It's puzzling, and presumably means that HMG under the Lib Dems would generate even more revenue by taxing all transportation to buggery. Scary.
Gassing Station | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff