The government says they want us to use cars less to save the environment and hence all the motoring relate taxes fines etc.fines etc. Local councils say they want us all to use public transport to ease congestion etc. and would like us all to walk around in town centres. Given the enormous revenues derived directly and indirectly from drivers, what would happen if we all called their bluff and did what they say they want for a while ? I think they'd soon start encouraging us to get back in our cars !
Likewise new car prices - what would the manufacturers do if we all refused to by a new car starting tomorrow ??? I bet the rip off prices would start falling PDQ !
|
Govt certainly does not want us to stop using cars - far too much employment and taxation.
Ever since the '60s every govt has done as much as possible to put people into cars by underfunding public transport and encouraging remote siting for retail & business parks.
The fact that they now pay lip service to environment issues and all that is just more of the same old humbug. Making the national infrastructure totally car dependent and then trying to pretend it isn't is just pure politics isn't it?
Just like they can't afford for smokers to give up despite all the cod they talk about increasing the nation's health.
|
Probably easier to stop smoking and drinking as a lever. That would produce a loss of revenue with no personal inconvenience but added health benefits.
However, offlicences and tobacconists wouldn't be so chipper!
|
Judging by the amount of tobacco flooding in to this country I think that process has started and is definitely hurting the government. I do think car use needs to be controlled and public transport improved but whilst the government derives so much revenue from us motorists I can't see them doing anything about the real issues. It's too easy to tax the motorist isn't it and I wonder how long it'll be before the revenue lost from tobacco is claimed from motorists..
|
|
Off licences and tobacconists ain't so chipper now. 90% of all rolling tobacco smoked in UK is non-duty paid plus 1 in 3 of all cigarrettes. Not sure what the figures are for alchohol but must be similar.
Read a story that C&E went in and swept the Millwall terraces after a football game to examine the cigarrette packets and found 60% non-duty paid!
Beware when the person who pays the bill decides to rebel.
|
The Government is committed to spending the money so it has to come from somewhere. If not motorists, smokers or drinkers, then it will be income tax. At lest, in most cases, end user taxes are 'voluntary' whereas income tax is not. Don't get me wrong however, I do believe that we motorists are overtaxed for what we get back. It's easier to put up this sort of tax, rather than the headline grabbing income tax.
What really gets me is that we have to pay VAT on the tax we have already paid on fuel - surely this must be the ONLY example of double taxation. How does tax constitute a value adding exercise????? I also object to the Government's line of "we were given a clear mandate to do this". In fact 60% of the electorate (me included) did NOT vote for the government.
This is perhaps the prime advantage of driving a diesel, you get to put 2 fingers up to the treasury every time you go to the pumps. Can't be bad!
Now what was this thread supposed to be about before I get censored - oh yes, calling their bluff. I guess it would work - but only if you could get enough people interested. Remember the people queuing outside petrol stations 2 years ago just to buy a couple of litres of petrol? I doubt you would get enough interest to make it worthwhile.
Richard
|
|
Tells you something about the kind of person who works for the C&E. Government-funded dumpster diving!
|
I'll say this then shut up or I'll get in trouble for going off topic.
I agree with Richard's point that the tax will come from somewhere but it is the dishonesty of it that annoys me.
Before they came to power Labour commissioned a Fabian Society report that proved that the only thing the public focus on is the income tax rate. Therefore they pushed all other taxes through the roof and got plaudits for not raising taxes.
We now have the highest taxes in Europe (direct + indirect) but when someone points out that the French health system makes ours look like Malawi's the Government says ah but they pay higher taxes. Direct yes, total no.
Its a conjuring trick and stops people asking where all the money goes, by the way the answer is the social security budget, thats why the first thing that the Chancellor says when he presents his Budget is that social security is excluded from his figures.
|
Of course you're right Thommo, it is the deceit that gets me. The government get elected by saying they won't increase taxes and then they do by stealth. As regards the social security budget - I don't think they want us to know just how much of our tax money is being used to pay for the chaotic asylum system. What was it ? 250,000 immigrants (most of which are bogus asylum seekers) every year. A town the size of Cambridge every year !! In 10 years that's 2.5m extra people many of whom are being housed, fed, educated and legally represented at our expense (See Daily Mail 24th August). £35k for a jet just to send ONE family back to Germany where they had already claimed asylum ! No wonder our taxes are going through the roof.
Before anyone acuses me of racism or anything like that - I'm married to an Eastern European and went went through the convaluted immigration process the correct way (depite the 'efforts' of all those idiots at the Home Office). My wife has now lived here since 1994, has indefinite leave to remain, works and pays taxes and she is entitled to ....... NOTHING !!
|
|
Since 1997 the government cut a penny off the basic rate of income tax.
Next April they will put a penny on National Insurance contributions.
Contrary to popular belief, NICs go into the same pot as Income Tax.
But people will pay up because they think it's for a good cause.
|
Use the trains? No chance. Since I learnt to drive (at the age of 35) I avoid them.
Staff often rude, trains often late, connections missed, overhead video information often wrong, booking offices sometimes closed after official opening time.
The above is Slough, Reading, New Forest. It was far worse in Loughborough when I lived there. Wait 1 hour for a train, only to find impossible to board due to all seats and standing room taken. Then wait another hour for the next one.
And what about buses? Well 1 per hour is usual for much of Slough. Quicker to walk. And then there's the dirt.
Or I can drive in my lovely car, listen to music, no wierdo sitting next to me, unless I give a friend a lift, and it is door to door. Or I can cycle short distances. Even better.
|
|
"NICs go into the same pot as Income Tax"
Of course. They had to stop referring to the National Insurance 'Fund' when it became apparent that there wasn't one and that the money was just another bit of general taxation. This means that your NIC's go to pay current pensions and that your pension (if they still have them by then) will come out of general taxation.
Add to that the fact that employers have to pay more NIC on your behalf (money they could pay you instead, even though it doesn't show on most payslips) and the overall tax burden is something like 40%. That's the figure that should be discussed at election time...
|
Or if you are self employed like me, the tax burdon is 52% thanks to NIC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|