6p off diesel and petrol for next 3 months.....

[Smurfy]

www.google.co.uk

And it's been referenced on here more than once - and this site has a search engine of its own.

Haven't found it. I'm not going to spend any longer looking for it.

I note from further upthread that the amount of revenue raised from fuel duty and taxes is currently believed to be around 33 Billion GBP per year. I also note that the NHS budget for 2011/2012 is 106 Billion GBP. I'd very much like to see the numerical methods used to demonstrate that the economic cost of motoring is equal to the NHS budget.

 

[martint235]

Taxes on fuel always hit the poorest harder than anyone else, so I'd say
1. anything that's based on ability to pay (e.g. income tax)
2. anything that's a non-essential (e.g alcohol)

As I've said before, when someone genuinely needs fuel to get to work, it's essentially a tax on employment.

By the way, does anyone have a proper source for that 'motoring costs society 3x more than the tax it generates' viewpoint that was floating around last week?

Ah but there's still the idea that you can charge those that will use their cars whatever enough tax to pay for a suitable and affordable transport infrastructure for everyone else.

I don't think there are that many people who need to use a car to get to work. And those that do, quite a few could make it easier on themselves by sharing the cost.

If I was chancellor, I'd raise the duty by 5p a litre this year and see if my revenues dropped. If they didn't, I'd keep raising them until they fell slightly. Use market forces to determine what is too much.

 

[Smurfy]

Ah but there's still the idea that you can charge those that will use their cars whatever enough tax to pay for a suitable and affordable transport infrastructure for everyone else

Germany and France both have similar fuel prices to the UK, they also have better public transport, and their cost of commuting by rail is far lower than the UK.The simple fact is that our elected representatives are unwilling to invest money in public transport, they're happy for people to pay through the nose no matter what commuting option they select. If I remember correctly they've even reduced the value of C2W in recent years.

I don't think there are that many people who need to use a car to get to work. And those that do, quite a few could make it easier on themselves by sharing the cost.

Need is always going to be very subjective.

If I was chancellor, I'd raise the duty by 5p a litre this year and see if my revenues dropped. If they didn't, I'd keep raising them until they fell slightly. Use market forces to determine what is too much.

According to another poster, the point at which revenue drops has already been reached.

 

[growingvegetables]

oops - misread your post. It's still daft, just not as daft as I first read it

 

[Smurfy]

As a measure of the depths to which wittering, bleating petrol heads will sink, this takes the biscuit.

Ummm - YellowTim, I hate to point it out, but 33 billion does not, never has, and never will equal 106 billion. And you want me to take you seriously?

I don't think I ever said that.

As I understand it, someone on the forum has made the claim that the economic cost of motoring is 3-4 times the revenue that is raised from motoring taxes. Motoring taxes raise ~33 Billion GBP per year, multiplied by three that is 100 Billion GBP per year, which is almost the same as the NHS budget for 2011/2012 of 106 Billion GBP per year.

 

[growingvegetables]

I don't think I ever said that.

As I understand it, someone on the forum has made the claim that the economic cost of motoring is 3-4 times the revenue that is raised from motoring taxes. Motoring taxes raise ~33 Billion GBP per year, multiplied by three that is 100 Billion GBP per year, which is almost the same as the NHS budget for 2011/2012 of 106 Billion GBP per year.

I think you'll find I misread your post? And edited it as soon as I spotted my mistake?

Doesn't affect my disdain for petrol heads who argue that taxes raised from motoring should only be spent on roads though. That'd be like maintaining that duties paid on whisky should only be spent on improving facilities for whisky drinkers in distilleries!

 

[Fab Foodie]

Does anyone else enjoy these little thread resurrections when people post stuff that's been done to death (and usually done down) earlier?

It's like deja-vu all over again ....

 

[User482]

Taxes on fuel always hit the poorest harder than anyone else, so I'd say
1. anything that's based on ability to pay (e.g. income tax)
2. anything that's a non-essential (e.g alcohol)

As I've said before, when someone genuinely needs fuel to get to work, it's essentially a tax on employment.

By the way, does anyone have a proper source for that 'motoring costs society 3x more than the tax it generates' viewpoint that was floating around last week?

The poorest are far less likely to own a car. No, significant commuting mileage is generally a middle class pursuit.

 

[srw]

I don't think I ever said that.

As I understand it, someone on the forum has made the claim that the economic cost of motoring is 3-4 times the revenue that is raised from motoring taxes. Motoring taxes raise ~33 Billion GBP per year, multiplied by three that is 100 Billion GBP per year, which is almost the same as the NHS budget for 2011/2012 of 106 Billion GBP per year.

And the economic cost to the country of the NHS is negative.

Mysterious stuff this economics, isn't it?

 

[Linford]

Ah but there's still the idea that you can charge those that will use their cars whatever enough tax to pay for a suitable and affordable transport infrastructure for everyone else.

I don't think there are that many people who need to use a car to get to work. And those that do, quite a few could make it easier on themselves by sharing the cost.

If I was chancellor, I'd raise the duty by 5p a litre this year and see if my revenues dropped. If they didn't, I'd keep raising them until they fell slightly. Use market forces to determine what is too much.

And risk stalling the economy in the mean time ?.

We need to have growth in the economy as it is geared around this. I'm surprised how short peoples memories are when thinking back to the few months of deflation we had in 2008/2009

Why not bang interest rates back up to 15% as well for good measure if you really want to create a system of haves and have nots.

Higher transport costs only get turned into higher costs of living for everything we purchase.

How many bicycles are actually made in the UK now each year, and not just assembled from chinese made components ?

what are you trying to achieve with this in any case ?

 

[martint235]

Higher transport costs only get turned into higher costs of living for everything we purchase.

At the risk of repeating myself. There will be a point where the revenue raised from fuel will be enough to compensate the ordinary customer for the rise in cost of distribution. Plus distribution companies will always find a way to lower costs.

As I've also said before, fuel is not too expensive while people are still wasting it by flying little England flags from their car windows. Use market forces, there is obviously still demand.

And what benefit would raising interest rates have to the economy? It would benefit savers who by definition are saving, the people you need to benefit are those who need to spend most of their income. Raise fuel duty until it hurts and lower the basic rate of tax.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

As I've also said before, fuel is not too expensive while people are still wasting it by flying little England flags from their car windows. Use market forces, there is obviously still demand.

Fuel is not too expensive when people choose to drive cars that can't do 50mpg.

 

[martint235]

Fuel is not too expensive when people choose to drive cars that can't do 50mpg.

That too. I think this high cost of fuel stuff is just bleating really. If someone really, really needs to drive (and I mean need) they will find a way. Remember necessity is the mother of invention.

 

[martint235]

FTFY

Thank you. Much appreciated.

 

[Linford]

At the risk of repeating myself. There will be a point where the revenue raised from fuel will be enough to compensate the ordinary customer for the rise in cost of distribution. Plus distribution companies will always find a way to lower costs.

As I've also said before, fuel is not too expensive while people are still wasting it by flying little England flags from their car windows. Use market forces, there is obviously still demand.

And what benefit would raising interest rates have to the economy? It would benefit savers who by definition are saving, the people you need to benefit are those who need to spend most of their income. Raise fuel duty until it hurts and lower the basic rate of tax.

The fortunes of this country were built on manufacture and export. For decades now, the ability to do this has been eroded.
As a manufacturer and exporter myself, as I see it, if we want to re acquire the good fortune we had, what we should actually be doing is to encourage the re growth of this sector massively.
How:-
1) Make transportation of goods in the UK much lower as these are built in costs which have to be carried on to the customer, High transit costs makes for more expensive goods
2) Make transit of workers much lower by improving all the road links. You can't take cars out of the equation, so why penalise them ? The knock on effect will be that wages can be reduced over time, and this lower wage bill makes our goods cheaper - cap the minimum wage also..
3) Increase levies on imported goods - especially white goods which can be sourced from the UK already
4 Encourage companies who are currently manufacturing and sending large quantities of goods to the UK to set up manufacturing facilites in the UK, then export back to the rest of the world.

Just squeezing everyone here as you want with more taxation is incredibly short sighted, and will mean having to print more money and devaluing sterling in the process to keep fluidity in the economy due to the increasing numbers of the economically inactive population who demand a high standard ofliving, but either can't or won't work for it - or the army of overpaid public servants who need to be paid for by the efforts of the people who bring the hard foreign currency in to pay foe all their oriental made gadgets.