two faced government

[hollydog]

News this morning . the government is starting worrying for the puplic in ref to high power bills . Two faced in my eyes . Based on 2 cars per family which i would of thought most people have 2 cars in a house hold . Running costs just for petrol.The tax on that is roughly the same as average gas and electric bill.base on £60 per week in petrol.If the government is truely worried . Then they should reduce the duty on petrol an diesel as well .

[Cupramax]

hollydog said:

If the government is truely worried . Then they should reduce the duty on petrol an diesel as well .

And where do you suggest they then make that deficit up from? or had you forgotten we're in possibly the worst financial situation EVER.

[hyperblue]

People cannot survive without heating and to some extent electricity, cars not so much.

[DieselGriff]

Cupramax said:

hollydog said:

If the government is truely worried . Then they should reduce the duty on petrol an diesel as well .

And where do you suggest they then make that deficit up from? or had you forgotten we're in possibly the worst financial situation EVER.

Get rid of the climate change bill and drop the Quangos - that's a lot of money that could do something useful in the economy.

[grumbledoak]

hyperblue said:

People cannot survive without heating and to some extent electricity, cars not so much.

Now go to your corner store and find they have either nothing or loaves of bread at £15. All that stuff has to get there somehow.

[Cupramax]

DieselGriff said:

Get rid of the climate change bill and drop the Quangos - that's a lot of money that could do something useful in the economy.

Yep, I'd go along with that. Infact lets also stop throwing millions at third world countries in aid until we've sorted our own problems. Oh, and while were at it tell the EU to do one...

[crankedup]

hyperblue said:

People cannot survive without heating and to some extent electricity, cars not so much.

You obviously do not live in the Countryside.

[don4l]

Cupramax said:

hollydog said:

If the government is truely worried . Then they should reduce the duty on petrol an diesel as well .

And where do you suggest they then make that deficit up from? or had you forgotten we're in possibly the worst financial situation EVER.

They could easily trim £7Bn from the foreign aid budget. They could also trim £20Bn from the Climate Change budget. This would allow the Government to reduce the "Pump" price by 58p a litre, in a fiscally neutral measure.

Around here, that would mean a litre of unleaded dropping from £1.34 to 76p per litre.

Don
--

[Derek Smith]

Cupramax said:

And where do you suggest they then make that deficit up from? or had you forgotten we're in possibly the worst financial situation EVER.

We are nowhere near as badly off as we have been in the fairly recent past.

For the rich elite, the post first world war years were not too bad. Labour was cheap and there were no laws to protect workers from exploitation. People starved. Rickets was rife. Those in employment were paid so little that families with only one breadwinner were starving.

In my area of east London the nubmer of fathers with bow-legs was considerable. A sign of just how bad things were.

Oddly enough, post the 1930 financial collapse, when the rich and powerful caught a cold, things got a little bit better for the majority of the population, at least in the south of England. But it was hard for those at the top. The government and the bosses had wasted the post war years and did not do anything towards wealth creation. The reference of the BoE bloke with regards thing being worse than 1930 show that he hasn't got a clue how bad things really were for the majority of the population in 1919 and for the next 19 years.

WWII was the saviour of the workers.

Post war things were even worse for this country. We were broke, utterly and completely. There were plans to take children from schools to work in the fields to limit the import of food. That crisis passed with a loan, paid off in 2005, from the USA. The government then decided not to wast any of the money and cut back just about every expenditure other than buying the virtually useless coal fields and the damaged railways.

But on top of that they entered a period of wealth creation. Export of die was the rather simplified mantra. They also encouraged individuals.

After both wars this country was in a state much, much worse than we are now. In 1919 we had a dreadful, dogma controlled government. After WWII we were blessed with one of the two best PMs we've ever had.

The problem now of course is where does our beloved leader fall: 19 or 45?

[Rude-boy]

crankedup said:

hyperblue said:

People cannot survive without heating and to some extent electricity, cars not so much.

You obviously do not live in the Countryside.

It is funny that having lived in both I would say, as a yokel, that I could fend without gas or electric (if i had to) at home but would be rogered without the car for more than a week or two tops.

Living as a townie the roles are reversed to a large degree.

[johnfm]

don4l said:

Cupramax said:

hollydog said:

If the government is truely worried . Then they should reduce the duty on petrol an diesel as well .

And where do you suggest they then make that deficit up from? or had you forgotten we're in possibly the worst financial situation EVER.

They could easily trim £7Bn from the foreign aid budget. They could also trim £20Bn from the Climate Change budget. This would allow the Government to reduce the "Pump" price by 58p a litre, in a fiscally neutral measure.

Around here, that would mean a litre of unleaded dropping from £1.34 to 76p per litre.

Don
--

Hi Don

Have you a source for annula UK petrol/diesel consumption.

I need some data for an argument..

[hollydog]

Cupramax said:

DieselGriff said:

Get rid of the climate change bill and drop the Quangos - that's a lot of money that could do something useful in the economy.

Yep, I'd go along with that. Infact lets also stop throwing millions at third world countries in aid while were at it until we've sorted our own problems. Oh, and while were at it tell the EU to do one...

Don,t get my started on that 1 . I no its harsh but giving money to third world countries just prelongs there suffering .The counties that we keep throwing money at can never sustain the people there and keep them alive . We will have enough money to sort that out. Best thing to do there is move the people from drout counties where they can,t grow crops and farm to countries where they can.

[mrmr96]

DieselGriff said:

Get rid of the climate change bill and drop the Quangos - that's a lot of money that could do something useful in the economy.

But surely the people working for the Quango's spend money in shops etc which helps the economy?
I'd rather they were doing /somthing/ for their money (even if it's st) than being on the dole.

[DieselGriff]

mrmr96 said:

DieselGriff said:

Get rid of the climate change bill and drop the Quangos - that's a lot of money that could do something useful in the economy.

But surely the people working for the Quango's spend money in shops etc which helps the economy?
I'd rather they were doing /somthing/ for their money (even if it's st) than being on the dole.

I'm not sure what type of economics advocates paying people a lot of money to produce st over paying the same people a small % of that not to produce st.

[chris watton]

mrmr96 said:

But surely the people working for the Quango's spend money in shops etc which helps the economy?
I'd rather they were doing /somthing/ for their money (even if it's st) than being on the dole.

So what you're saying is this - We pay them money via our taxes to make our lives more difficult, so that they can go and spend that money in shops. In the meantime, the quangos do nothing to help the economy, but quite the opposite!

Again I ask, when exactly did the Civil Service become 'The Economy'?

Edited by chris watton on Monday 17th October 11:43

[Tuna]

I'm guessing the government can see the **** slowly hitting the fan for fuel prices, and want to look like they're doing something. I'd be amazed if they did something as beneficial as cutting vehicle fuel costs though - the immediate loss to an already precarious budget would hurt them and the theoretical benefit to business cannot be measured, so it has no political value.

Home heating costs are going to give a few people a nasty shock this winter, especially if (as predicted) it turns out to be at least as cold as last year.

As for petrol prices, in my lifetime (and I'm not all that old) I can remember having more than one car in a family being quite a luxury, and that first car purchase being a big deal. Now it's just assumed that as soon as you can you have some right to your own motor.

The credit card generation has overreached itself and still hasn't realised.

[Odie]

All governments are 2 faced.

Where is all the money going? Why did the sectretary for defence have an aid who was paid for by a private concern, how many other MPs have similar arrangements.

How much money is being over spent on dodgy dealings by our MPs lining their pockets? How many deals have been down to bribes. We live in a society of greed and corruption.

Put MPs on the national average wage, strictly monitor their expenses and outside interests. Then we will see some change.

[don4l]

johnfm said:

Hi Don

Have you a source for annula UK petrol/diesel consumption.

I need some data for an argument..

I got most my info here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrocarbon_oil_duty
and here http://www.petrolprices.com/fuel-tax.html.


From the first link:-
"The government revenue from Fuel Duty was £25.894 billion in 2009, with a further £3.884 billion being raised from the VAT on the duty"

Don
--

[CzechItOut]

What exactly can the government do to reduce utility bills, other than reduce the tax?

[DieselGriff]

CzechItOut said:

What exactly can the government do to reduce utility bills, other than reduce the tax?

Nothing, but if you include the "Government obligations" which is a self induced tax then cutting tax would free up a lot of dosh which could be spent somewhere useful, required or desired.