On Mar 15, 1:24*pm, ":Jerry:" wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in ...





In article ,
* Huge wrote:
On 2008-03-14, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
* *The Natural Philosopher wrote:
What high VED does is to penalise low mileage people and benefit
high
mileage people.

But it's not high. It's peanuts.

GBP445 is not peanuts.

If you can afford the sort of vehicle that costs that in VED it will
still
be a small percentage of the overall running costs.

You are still missing the point, that is, for some this is not a
choice issue but one of need. Tax is a blunt tool and in this case
(pollution) is not doing anything to make the polluter pay for their
pollution - as I said way up, someone who does 1k in a Range Rover pa

Is probably doiong short journeys with a cold engine and causing far
more pollution per mile than...

someone does 60k
in a SMART car

Which implies long journeys at or near to the most efficient rpm.

but the Range Rover owner is subsidising the owner of
the SMART car!

Because they are polluting more per mile!

MBQ