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

[Linford]

It does, and then some. On any reasonable measure of economic cost, the road infrastructure in this country is subsidised to the tune of three or four times the amount of tax that road transport actually raises.

(Have a search in CA&D if you don't believe me).

Only in your head. You forget that these road users are running cars to get to work to generate income to pay for the deficits run up by Nu Labour...

 

[oldfatfool]

It does, and then some. On any reasonable measure of economic cost, the road infrastructure in this country is subsidised to the tune of three or four times the amount of tax that road transport actually raises.

(Have a search in CA&D if you don't believe me).

The Institute of Advanced Motorists (IAM) has reacted with anger at the news that the Government takes over three times more in motoring taxes than it spends on the roads annually.

Government figures have shown that in 2010, fuel taxes and VED raised around £33bn, £27bn of which was siphoned from money spent at the pumps.

In contrast, around £9.4bn was spent on local and national roads nationwide, while £7.6bn went to railways and just under five billion on public transport.

Correct I don't believe you and to suggest that 0ver 100bn a year is spent on roads is proposterous

 

[snorri]

Talk to the haulage companies. I think they will tell you the real situation.

Oh yeah?

 

[Linford]

You know nothing about our buisiness model - our customers have clearly been willing to pay it.

That aside, if you look at the bigger picture ALL road users are subsidised through Fuel and VED (see SRWs post thataway ^) and one 44 tonne lorry, Im guessing, carries a lot more haulage than 40,000 cars do. Ive certainly never been asked to transport a 1/4 of a pallet of empty tin cans to Schweppes for Stobarts anyway. Have you?

So why single out a single road user, the lorry, who are doing a hell of a lot more for the 'greater good' than an adrenaline junky in a 4x4?

You have to take mine for a spin one day....if only to extinguish the myth that someone might get an adrenaline fix from driving it

Hold onto your linen Smegger - I'm certainly not saying that we can do without HGVs, or buses (they are ALL part of the solution), and royal mail is prohibitively expensive now for larger stuff.

We cannot get away from the problem of road damage though (it is worse than I quoted though)

HGVs only pay between one to two thirds of the costs they impose on society, depending on the way it is calculated.
(see MTRU updated report Feb 2008 Heavier lorries and their impacts on economy and environment www. Campaign for Better Transport May 2008
Lorries are up to 160,000 times more damaging to road surfaces than the average car; some of the heaviest road repair costs are therefore almost exclusively attributable to the heaviest vehicles
–Freight on Rail research 2006

It wasn't that long ago i was paying 45p to post an A4 sized envelope through the royal mail (maybe 3 years), now it is closer to £2

They still represent good value for money when for instance I might instead of stick an item in the post for a customer in a 15 mile radius, instead drop it around in the car or on the motorbike 'by hand' and that is down to the duty on fuel, IPT and VED

 

[srw]

You know nothing

I think you could have stopped there.

 

[Linford]

Im not sure what your point here is Linfers....

a) The Royal Mail are more expensive because of de-regulation and lack of government support, are you suggesting we should nationalise Eddie Stobbarts?

b) And yes, big lorries are much heavier than small cars?

It is the axle loading which does the damage. The more the haulage co's are forced to use super big HGV's, the more damage each one does, and subsequently the bigger the subsidy other tax payers have to find.....

If Gov support means more tax payers money going into their pension pots in the Royal Mail, then I'm struggling to shed a tear.

 

[Linford]

c) Lorries carry more weight than small cars

We know that, and have to accept that from an end users point of view, they deliver better VFM, but only because the true operating costs inclusive of the damage they cause to the roads is passed onto the smaller vehicle user (not the smallest as most are only paying lipservice on VED now). It is all geared to hitting the middle ground as they are the biggest catchment, and least able to replace their cars with brand new ones every 3 years.

 

[oldfatfool]

d) Generous public service pension plans are probably a thing of the past now.

In truth the royal mail pension was also used to prop up govmt spending until the bubble burst which is why they are having to bail it out now, though not to the tune of what they have cost it!

 

[Maz]

..... but don't get excited, it is only in France.

Yeh, thanks for getting us all worked up for nothing.
Vive La bloody France!

 

[Linford]

I've agreed with you from the very beginning about HGD VED being subsidised and you also, like me, seem to think its worth it. I don't know what we're "discussing" any more

I was kind of hoping that 'we' might have see through srw's flannel about proportion of cost per modal user..

 

[Linford]

Correct I don't believe you and to suggest that 0ver 100bn a year is spent on roads is proposterous

There are lies, damned lies and then there are statistics - Leonard H. Courtney, used the phrase in 1895 and then two years later became president of the Royal Statistical Society

Ask srw what he does for a living

 

[GrumpyGregry]

S'funny. Mid-morning, as I cycled from railway station to one of our suppliers offices I was passed by 35ish cars only one of which carried more than one occupant. Three were cars I recognised as being fuel efficient Group A VED type vehicles that could be described by one more reasonable than me as 'economical'. At least six were gas guzzling extravaganzmobiles. Two others were out-and-out wankpanzers. More than half got passed by me in the queue they sat in, engines running, burning money. How expensive does fuel have to get before people change their behaviour and wean themselves off their dependency?

Shame our govt can't be persuaded to slap 60p extra duty on a litre of fuel tomorrow for three months. Might encourage the odd selfish numpty to think twice about the way they burn the stuff.

In the mean time hard-pressed over-taxed motorists consider this... if you weren't meant to be fleeced evolution wouldn't have made you such sheep.

 

[srw]

Correct I don't believe you and to suggest that 0ver 100bn a year is spent on roads is proposterous

As you'll know if you've ever read more than an IAM press release (try searching the CA&D section of this forum for starters) it's a lot more complicated than just looking at the amount of cash we spend on the roads. I was very precise in my language - the total economic cost to the nation of the road network is about 3 times the amount that road users pay in taxes for that use.

 

[oldfatfool]

As you'll know if you've ever read more than an IAM press release (try searching the CA&D section of this forum for starters) it's a lot more complicated than just looking at the amount of cash we spend on the roads. I was very precise in my language - the total economic cost to the nation of the road network is about 3 times the amount that road users pay in taxes for that use.

Truly can't be arsed,please explain or provide a link and I will give it my consideration

 

[srw]

I was kind of hoping that 'we' might have see through srw's flannel about proportion of cost per modal user..

Someone else is free to correct me if I'm wrong, but flicking back through the thread I think the first person to start wiffling about cost per model user was someone called ...errr... Linford.