Apparently we are all to be taxed for using the motorways from 2014.
Later perhaps. the system is to be expanded to all roads.

The gov.thinks we will soon mostly be driving electric cars, this is
probably to rake in the tax not paid by electric car drivers I think.
Tough **** if you end up not driving an electric car and paying both
petrol tax and new road tax.

I bet the present road tax will be kept as well.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...st-routes.html

harry wrote:
Apparently we are all to be taxed for using the motorways from 2014.
Later perhaps. the system is to be expanded to all roads.

The gov.thinks we will soon mostly be driving electric cars, this is
probably to rake in the tax not paid by electric car drivers I think.
Tough **** if you end up not driving an electric car and paying both
petrol tax and new road tax.

I bet the present road tax will be kept as well.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...st-routes.html

They should put all the tax on fuel. That would be much fairer.

Bill

On 09/11/2012 19:36, Bill Wright wrote:
harry wrote:
Apparently we are all to be taxed for using the motorways from 2014.
Later perhaps. the system is to be expanded to all roads.

The gov.thinks we will soon mostly be driving electric cars, this is
probably to rake in the tax not paid by electric car drivers I think.
Tough **** if you end up not driving an electric car and paying both
petrol tax and new road tax.

I bet the present road tax will be kept as well.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...st-routes.html


They should put all the tax on fuel. That would be much fairer.

I think you misunderstand the purposes of taxes and duties. They exist
to raise revenue, not to be fair.

Colin Bignell

On 09/11/2012 18:21, harry wrote:
Apparently we are all to be taxed for using the motorways from 2014.
Later perhaps. the system is to be expanded to all roads.

The gov.thinks we will soon mostly be driving electric cars, this is
probably to rake in the tax not paid by electric car drivers I think.
Tough **** if you end up not driving an electric car and paying both
petrol tax and new road tax.

I bet the present road tax will be kept as well.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...st-routes.html

Glad you are on the ball. That was 28 October. I think you will find
some follow-up stories around. If you looked.

--
Rod

Nightjar wrote:

They should put all the tax on fuel. That would be much fairer.

I think you misunderstand the purposes of taxes and duties. They exist
to raise revenue, not to be fair.

Colin Bignell

The purpose is to raise revenue. That doesn't exclude the possibility of
the tax being fair. I don't see why a pensioner who does 3,000 miles a
year should pay the same road tax as a sales rep who does 100,000.

Governments use taxes for social engineering purposes; for modifying our
behaviour. If all the tax was on fuel people would drive less, and more
economically, which is just what they want for various reasons.

Bill

Bill Wright wrote:
Nightjar wrote:

They should put all the tax on fuel. That would be much fairer.

I think you misunderstand the purposes of taxes and duties. They
exist to raise revenue, not to be fair.

Colin Bignell

The purpose is to raise revenue. That doesn't exclude the possibility
of the tax being fair.


I don't see why a pensioner who does 3,000
miles a year should pay the same road tax as a sales rep who does
100,000.

Well they do not have to if they drive a lower emmison car than the rep.

--
Adam

In article ,
Bill Wright wrote:
Nightjar wrote:

They should put all the tax on fuel. That would be much fairer.

I think you misunderstand the purposes of taxes and duties. They exist
to raise revenue, not to be fair.

Colin Bignell

The purpose is to raise revenue. That doesn't exclude the possibility of
the tax being fair. I don't see why a pensioner who does 3,000 miles a
year should pay the same road tax as a sales rep who does 100,000.

Governments use taxes for social engineering purposes; for modifying our
behaviour. If all the tax was on fuel people would drive less, and more
economically, which is just what they want for various reasons.

but that's achange of policy. Outside Slough there is a set of traffic
lights- the first set of phased ones so you could drive without stopping.
some years ago the phasing was altered to make the cars stop and start -
this was done to increase Treasury revenue. Only lasxt year was the proper
phasing restored.

--
From KT24

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18

On 09/11/2012 20:13, ARW wrote:
Bill Wright wrote:
Nightjar wrote:

They should put all the tax on fuel. That would be much fairer.

I think you misunderstand the purposes of taxes and duties. They
exist to raise revenue, not to be fair.

Colin Bignell

The purpose is to raise revenue. That doesn't exclude the possibility
of the tax being fair.


I don't see why a pensioner who does 3,000
miles a year should pay the same road tax as a sales rep who does
100,000.

Well they do not have to if they drive a lower emmison car than the rep.


They'll have a job finding a car that pays a road tax that is lower per
mile than the rep - unless it's a city biscuit box.

Tax on fuel would have the great advantage that they could dismantle all
the red tape involved in handling tax discs.

Andy

In message
,
harry writes
Apparently we are all to be taxed for using the motorways from 2014.
Later perhaps. the system is to be expanded to all roads.

It says they are "considering a proposal"

Do you REALLY think that it's possible to go from ideas to a managed
toad taxing system in less than 24 months

stick to the cartoons - more on your level


--
geoff

On Nov 9, 8:04*pm, Bill Wright wrote:
Nightjar wrote:
They should put all the tax on fuel. That would be much fairer.

I think you misunderstand the purposes of taxes and duties. They exist
to raise revenue, not to be fair.

Colin Bignell

The purpose is to raise revenue. That doesn't exclude the possibility of
the tax being fair. I don't see why a pensioner who does 3,000 miles a
year should pay the same road tax as a sales rep who does 100,000.

Why shouldn't they? The mileage difference is more than accounted for
by fuel duty. I know w few pensioners who can afford to pay far more
tax than any sales rep.

MBQ

On Nov 9, 6:21*pm, harry wrote:
Apparently we are all to be taxed for using the motorways from 2014.
Later perhaps. the system is to be expanded to all roads.

The gov.thinks we will soon mostly be driving electric cars, this is
probably to rake in the tax not paid by electric car drivers I think.
Tough **** if you end up not driving an electric car and paying both
petrol tax and new road tax.

I bet the present road tax will be kept as well.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-drive-motorwa...

Do you believe everything in the Daily Mail?

MBQ

In message , geoff
writes
In message
,
harry writes
Apparently we are all to be taxed for using the motorways from 2014.
Later perhaps. the system is to be expanded to all roads.

It says they are "considering a proposal"

Do you REALLY think that it's possible to go from ideas to a managed
toad taxing system in less than 24 months


Its a completely crazy idea since toads rarely have any money anyway

--
geoff

On 09/11/2012 20:32, Andy Champ wrote:


They'll have a job finding a car that pays a road tax that is lower per
mile than the rep - unless it's a city biscuit box.

Tax on fuel would have the great advantage that they could dismantle all
the red tape involved in handling tax discs.

Andy

I don't think that is true. They will still want to know who the owner
is, etc. and the tax disc gives them the opportunity to try to force
that to be checked every year.

--
Rod

On Fri, 09 Nov 2012 21:09:05 +0000, geoff wrote:

In message , geoff
writes
In message
,
harry writes
Apparently we are all to be taxed for using the motorways from 2014.
Later perhaps. the system is to be expanded to all roads.

It says they are "considering a proposal"

Do you REALLY think that it's possible to go from ideas to a managed
toad taxing system in less than 24 months


Its a completely crazy idea since toads rarely have any money anyway

And they're bloody bad drivers (based on a sample of one).


--
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org

*lightning protection* - a w_tom conductor

On Fri, 09 Nov 2012 21:55:21 +0000, Bob Eager wrote:

On Fri, 09 Nov 2012 21:09:05 +0000, geoff wrote:

In message , geoff
writes
In message
,
harry writes
Apparently we are all to be taxed for using the motorways from 2014.
Later perhaps. the system is to be expanded to all roads.

It says they are "considering a proposal"

Do you REALLY think that it's possible to go from ideas to a managed
toad taxing system in less than 24 months


Its a completely crazy idea since toads rarely have any money anyway

And they're bloody bad drivers (based on a sample of one).

Yes, they make a right ol' mess of the ball.

On Fri, 09 Nov 2012 20:32:12 +0000, Andy Champ
wrote:



I don't see why a pensioner who does 3,000
miles a year should pay the same road tax as a sales rep who does
100,000.




Tax on fuel would have the great advantage that they could dismantle all
the red tape involved in handling tax discs.

As I said on one of the other groups this week I can't see any
government giving up a revenue stream that easily.

If tax goes on fuel the tax disc will be called something else or
replaced by a fee for doing a electronic check on MOT and insurance.
Initially a lowish figure but a few budgets down the line will have
increased substantially . So you could end up paying a substantial
charge plus the fuel duty.

G.Harman

In message , polygonum
writes
On 09/11/2012 20:32, Andy Champ wrote:


They'll have a job finding a car that pays a road tax that is lower per
mile than the rep - unless it's a city biscuit box.

Tax on fuel would have the great advantage that they could dismantle all
the red tape involved in handling tax discs.

Andy

I don't think that is true. They will still want to know who the owner
is, etc. and the tax disc gives them the opportunity to try to force
that to be checked every year.

Bureaucracies do not reduce themselves.
--
bert

In article ,
Andy Champ wrote:
Tax on fuel would have the great advantage that they could dismantle all
the red tape involved in handling tax discs.

And stop having a registered keeper, the details of which are checked at
least once a year when the VED is renewed? The 'red tape' should be
minimal now everything is computerised.

--
*It's o.k. to laugh during sexŒ.Œ.just don't point!

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

ARW wrote:

I don't see why a pensioner who does 3,000
miles a year should pay the same road tax as a sales rep who does
100,000.

Well they do not have to if they drive a lower emmison car than the rep.

They might have kept an old car a long time, because of only doing low
mileage.

Bill

Man at B&Q wrote:

Why shouldn't they? The mileage difference is more than accounted for
by fuel duty. I know w few pensioners who can afford to pay far more
tax than any sales rep.

I'm thinking of my friends, retired farm workers, who are living on a
pathetic pension and yet have to drive 16 miles to the nearest shop.

Bill

On Nov 9, 7:36*pm, Bill Wright wrote:
harry wrote:
Apparently we are all to be taxed for using the motorways from 2014.
Later perhaps. the system is to be expanded to all roads.

The gov.thinks we will soon mostly be driving electric cars, this is
probably to rake in the tax not paid by electric car drivers I think.
Tough **** if you end up not driving an electric car and paying both
petrol tax and new road tax.

I bet the present road tax will be kept as well.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-drive-motorwa...

They should put all the tax on fuel. That would be much fairer.

Bill

I have often thought that.
Electricity would still be relatively tax free though.

On Nov 9, 8:49*pm, "Man at B&Q" wrote:
On Nov 9, 6:21*pm, harry wrote:

Apparently we are all to be taxed for using the motorways from 2014.
Later perhaps. the system is to be expanded to all roads.

The gov.thinks we will soon mostly be driving electric cars, this is
probably to rake in the tax not paid by electric car drivers I think.
Tough **** if you end up not driving an electric car and paying both
petrol tax and new road tax.

I bet the present road tax will be kept as well.http://www.dailymail.co..uk/news/art...-drive-motorwa...

Do you believe everything in the Daily Mail?

MBQ

Yes?

On Nov 9, 8:32*pm, Andy Champ wrote:
On 09/11/2012 20:13, ARW wrote:









Bill Wright wrote:
Nightjar wrote:

They should put all the tax on fuel. That would be much fairer.

I think you misunderstand the purposes of taxes and duties. They
exist to raise revenue, not to be fair.

Colin Bignell

The purpose is to raise revenue. That doesn't exclude the possibility
of the tax being fair.

I don't see why a pensioner who does 3,000
miles a year should pay the same road tax as a sales rep who does
100,000.

Well they do not have to if they drive a lower emmison car than the rep..

They'll have a job finding a car that pays a road tax that is lower per
mile than the rep - unless it's a city biscuit box.

Tax on fuel would have the great advantage that they could dismantle all
the red tape involved in handling tax discs.

Andy

And catch foreigners/non taxpayers driving on our roads

On Nov 9, 11:23*pm, Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,

*polygonum wrote:
On 09/11/2012 20:32, Andy Champ wrote:


They'll have a job finding a car that pays a road tax that is lower per
mile than the rep - unless it's a city biscuit box.

Tax on fuel would have the great advantage that they could dismantle all
the red tape involved in handling tax discs.

Andy

I don't think that is true. They will still want to know who the owner
is, etc. and the tax disc gives them the opportunity to try to force
that to be checked every year.

And also to check that the ****er has insurance.

Somebody that has no insurance won't bother with road tax anyway.
You could have a disc to show you had insurance.

But they want the private motorist to subsidise commerce.

On 09/11/2012 23:23, Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,
polygonum wrote:

On 09/11/2012 20:32, Andy Champ wrote:


They'll have a job finding a car that pays a road tax that is lower per
mile than the rep - unless it's a city biscuit box.

Tax on fuel would have the great advantage that they could dismantle
all
the red tape involved in handling tax discs.

Andy

I don't think that is true. They will still want to know who the owner
is, etc. and the tax disc gives them the opportunity to try to force
that to be checked every year.

And also to check that the ****er has insurance.

Absolutely.

And when is something going to be done about checking that the vehicle
as declared and in reality match up? It is a suspicion of mine that a
lot of the customisations are never declared to insurers. I see and hear
quite a few cars that I certainly wouldn't insure for any money!

Possibly about time insurers asked for photos of vehicles.

Yes- I know that when a claim arises, the insurer will look more closely
and might well not pay out. But some people seem to be getting away with it.

--
Rod

Tim Streater wrote:
is, etc. and the tax disc gives them the opportunity to try to force
that to be checked every year.

And also to check that the ****er has insurance.

Just stick your insurance letter in your window.

JGH

harry wrote:
On Nov 9, 7:36 pm, Bill Wright wrote:
harry wrote:
Apparently we are all to be taxed for using the motorways from 2014.
Later perhaps. the system is to be expanded to all roads.
The gov.thinks we will soon mostly be driving electric cars, this is
probably to rake in the tax not paid by electric car drivers I think.
Tough **** if you end up not driving an electric car and paying both
petrol tax and new road tax.
I bet the present road tax will be kept as well.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-drive-motorwa...
They should put all the tax on fuel. That would be much fairer.

Bill

I have often thought that.
Electricity would still be relatively tax free though.

Only until it becomes popular and starts making a noticeable dent in the
tax take from fossil fuels, then they will find a way to tax its use for
transport. The government will be extremely reluctant to give up the
revenue from petrol and diesel.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

In article
, harry
wrote:
On Nov 9, 11:23 pm, Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,

polygonum wrote:
On 09/11/2012 20:32, Andy Champ wrote:

They'll have a job finding a car that pays a road tax that is lower
per mile than the rep - unless it's a city biscuit box.

Tax on fuel would have the great advantage that they could
dismantle all the red tape involved in handling tax discs.

Andy

I don't think that is true. They will still want to know who the
owner is, etc. and the tax disc gives them the opportunity to try to
force that to be checked every year.

And also to check that the ****er has insurance.

Somebody that has no insurance won't bother with road tax anyway. You
could have a disc to show you had insurance.

now that everything is computerised, the police just need to enter the
number and the insuarnce detaisl (or not) will pop up


--
From KT24

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18

In message , at 19:36:14 on Fri, 9 Nov
2012, Bill Wright remarked:

They should put all the tax on fuel. That would be much fairer.

How do you propose to tax the electricity used to charge electric cars?
(More than it's taxed already, that is).

I suppose you could have a meter fitted to the car, and pay an
electricity tax surcharge annually.
--
Roland Perry

In article ,
Bill Wright wrote:
Man at B&Q wrote:

Why shouldn't they? The mileage difference is more than accounted for
by fuel duty. I know w few pensioners who can afford to pay far more
tax than any sales rep.

I'm thinking of my friends, retired farm workers, who are living on a
pathetic pension and yet have to drive 16 miles to the nearest shop.

These are the majority of OAPs requiring a complete change in the way
things are done just to suit them?

Wouldn't it be better if they weren't living on a 'pathetic' pension? That
is the root cause - and tinkering with things like VED only masks the real
issues.

Other thing is it's unlikely they will be able to drive all their lives -
so what happens then?

--
*I'd kill for a Nobel Peace Prize *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
John Williamson wrote:
I have often thought that.
Electricity would still be relatively tax free though.

Only until it becomes popular and starts making a noticeable dent in the
tax take from fossil fuels, then they will find a way to tax its use for
transport. The government will be extremely reluctant to give up the
revenue from petrol and diesel.

Unlike diesel etc which you can mark in some way to differentiate between
that used for road vehicles and other uses, electricity can't.

The only way therefore is to tax actual road usage - perfectly practical
these days.

--
*If love is blind, why is lingerie so popular? *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

charles wrote:
In article
, harry
wrote:
Somebody that has no insurance won't bother with road tax anyway. You
could have a disc to show you had insurance.

now that everything is computerised, the police just need to enter the
number and the insuarnce detaisl (or not) will pop up

Assuming that your broker or insurance company hasn't forgotten to enter
them, of course. Same for the MOT now that's all on computer, too.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

Bill Wright :
They should put all the tax on fuel. That would be much fairer.

Agreed.

But, stupidly IMO, they moved in the opposite direction by relating VED
to emissions per km.

--
Mike Barnes

In message , at 10:00:06 on Sat, 10 Nov
2012, "Dave Plowman (News)" remarked:
I'm thinking of my friends, retired farm workers, who are living on a
pathetic pension and yet have to drive 16 miles to the nearest shop.

These are the majority of OAPs requiring a complete change in the way
things are done just to suit them?

Wouldn't it be better if they weren't living on a 'pathetic' pension?

They probably couldn't afford to save very much, on account of spending
all that money travelling 16 miles to the nearest shop.

Other thing is it's unlikely they will be able to drive all their lives
so what happens then?

They either have to move somewhere closer to a shop, or maybe there will
be an increase in mobile shops in the future, as even those in work will
be hard pressed to afford to drive to the shops.
--
Roland Perry

In article ,
John Williamson wrote:
charles wrote:
In article
, harry
wrote:
Somebody that has no insurance won't bother with road tax anyway. You
could have a disc to show you had insurance.

now that everything is computerised, the police just need to enter the
number and the insuarnce detaisl (or not) will pop up

Assuming that your broker or insurance company hasn't forgotten to enter
them, of course. Same for the MOT now that's all on computer, too.

Is that any different from them either not sending the certificate or it
getting delayed/lost in the post? Which are rather more likely than it not
being entered in the 'system'.

--
*Preserve wildlife - Go pickle a squirrel*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 10:00:06 on Sat, 10 Nov
2012, "Dave Plowman (News)" remarked:
I'm thinking of my friends, retired farm workers, who are living on a
pathetic pension and yet have to drive 16 miles to the nearest shop.

These are the majority of OAPs requiring a complete change in the way
things are done just to suit them?

Wouldn't it be better if they weren't living on a 'pathetic' pension?

They probably couldn't afford to save very much, on account of spending
all that money travelling 16 miles to the nearest shop.

Who said anything about saving?

Other thing is it's unlikely they will be able to drive all their lives
so what happens then?

They either have to move somewhere closer to a shop, or maybe there will
be an increase in mobile shops in the future, as even those in work will
be hard pressed to afford to drive to the shops.

The dilemma is that either you expect people to look after themselves, or
the state does it for them. Which means taxation. And not allowing
individuals to make up their mind which parts of the 'welfare state'
actually suit them.

--
*Strip mining prevents forest fires.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 10:00:06 on Sat, 10 Nov
2012, "Dave Plowman (News)" remarked:
I'm thinking of my friends, retired farm workers, who are living on a
pathetic pension and yet have to drive 16 miles to the nearest shop.

These are the majority of OAPs requiring a complete change in the way
things are done just to suit them?

Wouldn't it be better if they weren't living on a 'pathetic' pension?

They probably couldn't afford to save very much, on account of spending
all that money travelling 16 miles to the nearest shop.

Other thing is it's unlikely they will be able to drive all their lives
so what happens then?

They either have to move somewhere closer to a shop, or maybe there will
be an increase in mobile shops in the future, as even those in work will
be hard pressed to afford to drive to the shops.

or get Tesco, etc, to deliver?

--
From KT24

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18

In message , at 10:37:42 on Sat, 10 Nov
2012, "Dave Plowman (News)" remarked:
Assuming that your broker or insurance company hasn't forgotten to enter
them, of course. Same for the MOT now that's all on computer, too.

Is that any different from them either not sending the certificate or it
getting delayed/lost in the post? Which are rather more likely than it not
being entered in the 'system'.

TPTB claim it's the driver's fault if they don't spot a missing online
entry. It's much easier to spot a missing insurance certificate in the
post, or a missing MOT certificate when you pick your car up from the
garage.
--
Roland Perry

In message , at 10:42:39 on Sat, 10 Nov
2012, "Dave Plowman (News)" remarked:
I'm thinking of my friends, retired farm workers, who are living on a
pathetic pension and yet have to drive 16 miles to the nearest shop.

These are the majority of OAPs requiring a complete change in the way
things are done just to suit them?

Wouldn't it be better if they weren't living on a 'pathetic' pension?

They probably couldn't afford to save very much, on account of spending
all that money travelling 16 miles to the nearest shop.

Who said anything about saving?

Saving is what you do to provide yourself with more than the state
pension.

Other thing is it's unlikely they will be able to drive all their lives
so what happens then?

They either have to move somewhere closer to a shop, or maybe there will
be an increase in mobile shops in the future, as even those in work will
be hard pressed to afford to drive to the shops.

The dilemma is that either you expect people to look after themselves, or
the state does it for them. Which means taxation. And not allowing
individuals to make up their mind which parts of the 'welfare state'
actually suit them.

Part of the problem is that people often don't make good decisions. You
could have people opt out of the NHS (on the grounds that "they've never
had a day off sick in their life"), but 40 years later when they are
diagnosed with cancer, they'll likely want to change their mind.

It's not an especially good decision to retire somewhere 16 miles from
the nearest shop, for example (and I wonder how far away the nearest
Pharmacy is). But that's the sort of thing we allow people to make their
own mind up about, currently.
--
Roland Perry

In message , at 10:49:18 on
Sat, 10 Nov 2012, charles remarked:
Other thing is it's unlikely they will be able to drive all their lives
so what happens then?

They either have to move somewhere closer to a shop, or maybe there will
be an increase in mobile shops in the future, as even those in work will
be hard pressed to afford to drive to the shops.

or get Tesco, etc, to deliver?

That's one form of mobile shop, assuming Tesco actually deliver to such
out of the way places.
--
Roland Perry