Would there be any support for a new political party?
Would there be any support for a new political party?
Author
Discussion

ArmaghMan

Original Poster:

2,802 posts

210 months

Wednesday 29th June 2011
quotequote all
Just been looking at the "petrol prices" thread and it got me thinking. it would appear that successive govts. have steadily increased the tax take from "road fuels" for the last 30 years or more.
I dont think anyone could disagree that fuel tax is an unfair tax, given that it is not in any way based on a persons ability to pay, but simply on their needs/circumstances, unlike income tax.
If a political party (new or existing) vowed to slash fuel duty but increase income tax would they get much support?

thinfourth2

32,414 posts

234 months

Wednesday 29th June 2011
quotequote all
But if you don't vote for useless wker party the useless tosser party might get in and that would be terrible

powerstroke

10,283 posts

190 months

Wednesday 29th June 2011
quotequote all
ArmaghMan said:
Just been looking at the "petrol prices" thread and it got me thinking. it would appear that successive govts. have steadily increased the tax take from "road fuels" for the last 30 years or more.
I dont think anyone could disagree that fuel tax is an unfair tax, given that it is not in any way based on a persons ability to pay, but simply on their needs/circumstances, unlike income tax.
If a political party (new or existing) vowed to slash fuel duty but increase income tax would they get much support?
No in a word.... people dont like change they either vote for red ties or blue ones then moan oh ther're all the same and there is no point in voting.....

ewenm

28,506 posts

275 months

Wednesday 29th June 2011
quotequote all
Single issue parties are pointless. What would your party's policy be on immigration, education, health, business, crime, etc etc?

Or are you saying you'd set up a political party just to collect a tiny protest vote?

As for the "fuel duty is unfair" bit, I disagree - if you use more fuel you pay more tax, use less fuel pay less tax. Much fairer than VED for example. The level of fuel duty may be too high but I don't think the concept of fuel duty is intrinsically unfair.

An existing party vowing to cut fuel duty would gain some votes, but they'd have to claw back the lost revenue somewhere so a different tax would rise or be introduced. Of course, that tax might only affect a few people (or "not me") so the "I'm alright Jack" brigade would probably think it was "fair" (i.e. someone else pays it).


Edited by ewenm on Wednesday 29th June 08:27

Huntsman

9,419 posts

280 months

Wednesday 29th June 2011
quotequote all
powerstroke said:
No in a word.... people dont like change they either vote for red ties or blue ones then moan oh ther're all the same and there is no point in voting.....
That may well be the case, but there is certainly a need for a new party.

The Common sense, modicum of intelligence and foresight party.

powerstroke

10,283 posts

190 months

Wednesday 29th June 2011
quotequote all
Huntsman said:
powerstroke said:
No in a word.... people dont like change they either vote for red ties or blue ones then moan oh ther're all the same and there is no point in voting.....
That may well be the case, but there is certainly a need for a new party.

The Common sense, modicum of intelligence and foresight party.
we already have one its called UKIP...

elster

17,517 posts

240 months

Wednesday 29th June 2011
quotequote all
powerstroke said:
we already have one its called UKIP...
laugh

That's on a comparison to respect party for common sense.

On very few issues they work.

I could see some sort of a Tea Party style working in the UK. Smaller state, lower taxes.

JMGS4

8,932 posts

300 months

Wednesday 29th June 2011
quotequote all
elster said:
I could see some sort of a Tea Party style working in the UK. Smaller state, lower taxes.
Only it'd be a "tea and biscuits" party! and we all stop work from 10.30 to 11.00 and from 3.30 to 4.00....

No really, it's time to get rid of the professional politicians, as well as trade unions, and get back to working for our money and not giving it away to the worlds flotsam and jetsam!!!

HurryUpAndWait

1,003 posts

233 months

Wednesday 29th June 2011
quotequote all
Unfortunately most voters support political parties as if they were football teams - with unerring loyalty. Come on you Reds, come on you Blues, etc. On that basis, I can't see any new party gaining anywhere near enough traction.

oyster

13,785 posts

278 months

Wednesday 29th June 2011
quotequote all
ArmaghMan said:
Just been looking at the "petrol prices" thread and it got me thinking. it would appear that successive govts. have steadily increased the tax take from "road fuels" for the last 30 years or more.
I dont think anyone could disagree that fuel tax is an unfair tax, given that it is not in any way based on a persons ability to pay, but simply on their needs/circumstances, unlike income tax.
If a political party (new or existing) vowed to slash fuel duty but increase income tax would they get much support?
So what you're saying is that driving is a need but having a job is an optional choice? Peculiar way of thinking.

Fuel tax actually is very fair. Buy 20 litres of fuel and you pay twice as much tax as someone who buys 10 litres of fuel. How much fairer can it be?

elster

17,517 posts

240 months

Wednesday 29th June 2011
quotequote all
JMGS4 said:
Only it'd be a "tea and biscuits" party! and we all stop work from 10.30 to 11.00 and from 3.30 to 4.00....

No really, it's time to get rid of the professional politicians, as well as trade unions, and get back to working for our money and not giving it away to the worlds flotsam and jetsam!!!
I kind of agree that politicians should have a 'life' and not be allowed to represent in parliament for decades.


Alex

9,978 posts

314 months

Wednesday 29th June 2011
quotequote all
elster said:
laugh

That's on a comparison to respect party for common sense.

On very few issues they work.

I could see some sort of a Tea Party style working in the UK. Smaller state, lower taxes.
If you look at UKIP policies across all areas, they make a lot of sense.

elster

17,517 posts

240 months

Wednesday 29th June 2011
quotequote all
Alex said:
If you look at UKIP policies across all areas, they make a lot of sense.
They are never never policies though.

Fittster

20,120 posts

243 months

Wednesday 29th June 2011
quotequote all
elster said:
Alex said:
If you look at UKIP policies across all areas, they make a lot of sense.
They are never never policies though.
Considering the way parties act once in power does it actually matter if they have policies?

elster

17,517 posts

240 months

Wednesday 29th June 2011
quotequote all
Fittster said:
Considering the way parties act once in power does it actually matter if they have policies?
They have to at least add up, I suppose only really the 2 main parties can have policies that actually add up.

Lib Dem
UKIP
Green
Respect
SNP
Liberals
Socialist

All had a manifesto that did not add up.

Esseesse

9,027 posts

238 months

Wednesday 29th June 2011
quotequote all
ArmaghMan said:
Just been looking at the "petrol prices" thread and it got me thinking. it would appear that successive govts. have steadily increased the tax take from "road fuels" for the last 30 years or more.
I dont think anyone could disagree that fuel tax is an unfair tax, given that it is not in any way based on a persons ability to pay, but simply on their needs/circumstances, unlike income tax.
If a political party (new or existing) vowed to slash fuel duty but increase income tax would they get much support?
Why is it fairer to tax someone more who has more ability to pay?

I only earn a very average wage, but broadly prefer regressive taxes. If you earn more just to be taxed more, then what's the point in being rich?

sinizter

3,348 posts

216 months

Wednesday 29th June 2011
quotequote all
ArmaghMan said:
Just been looking at the "petrol prices" thread and it got me thinking. it would appear that successive govts. have steadily increased the tax take from "road fuels" for the last 30 years or more.
I dont think anyone could disagree that fuel tax is an unfair tax, given that it is not in any way based on a persons ability to pay, but simply on their needs/circumstances, unlike income tax.
If a political party (new or existing) vowed to slash fuel duty but increase income tax would they get much support?
Hell no. Not from me.
A percentage increase in income tax would have me worse off than the situation fuel tax currently puts me in. 40% and 50% are bad enough as it is.

otolith

69,394 posts

234 months

Wednesday 29th June 2011
quotequote all
oyster said:
Fuel tax actually is very fair. Buy 20 litres of fuel and you pay twice as much tax as someone who buys 10 litres of fuel. How much fairer can it be?
That depends whether you think the amount of road fuel you use should significantly influence the size of financial contribution you make to the cost of running the country.

CzechItOut

2,156 posts

221 months

Wednesday 29th June 2011
quotequote all
ArmaghMan said:
Just been looking at the "petrol prices" thread and it got me thinking. it would appear that successive govts. have steadily increased the tax take from "road fuels" for the last 30 years or more.
I dont think anyone could disagree that fuel tax is an unfair tax, given that it is not in any way based on a persons ability to pay, but simply on their needs/circumstances, unlike income tax.
If a political party (new or existing) vowed to slash fuel duty but increase income tax would they get much support?
I disagree.

If you choose to commute 50 miles to work, then you should negotiate a salary that reflects your choice to drive further. Likewise, businesses should factor in the cost of transportation into the final price of their goods or services.

Likewise, if I am able to secure a job within walking distance or a very short commute, why should I pay more income tax just so someone can drive their car cheaply?

Fuel duty is in fact a good tax because you pay for exactly what you use, unlike income tax which is based purely upon somebody's ability to earn, regardless of what services they actually use.

Zod

35,295 posts

288 months

Wednesday 29th June 2011
quotequote all
ArmaghMan said:
Just been looking at the "petrol prices" thread and it got me thinking. it would appear that successive govts. have steadily increased the tax take from "road fuels" for the last 30 years or more.
I dont think anyone could disagree that fuel tax is an unfair tax, given that it is not in any way based on a persons ability to pay, but simply on their needs/circumstances, unlike income tax.
If a political party (new or existing) vowed to slash fuel duty but increase income tax would they get much support?
I spend a few thousand pounds a year on fuel. I pay a massive multiple of that amount in income tax, so no.