Car tax disc to be axed after 93 years

[Linford]

A huge amount of our road infrastructure built in the 60's or before; or since then, to the standards of the 60's.

And a typical car of the 60's - take the Ford Cortina Mk 1. Width 1.588m. Your Mondeo is 30% wider. Aye, and not only are cars now 30% bigger, but there's far more of them.

A Mk1 Cortina is a death trap by comparison, and you only have to look at the KSI stats of the day to see that. The roads statistically are much safer now despite having many more vehicles on them.

 

[400bhp]

I'm trying to fathom yours if I'm honest.

Are you are looking to penalise a 4x4 because it is a 4x4, or are you looking to penalise a car with a large footprint ?

I'm suggesting that we could look at penalising cars with a large footprint.

 

[400bhp]

A Mk1 Cortina is a death trap by comparison, and you only have to look at the KSI stats of the day to see that. The roads statistically are much safer now despite having many more vehicles on them.

Why have you brought the relative safety of cars into the discussion?

 

[Linford]

Why have you brought the relative safety of cars into the discussion?

Because the footprint of new cars has increased to accommodate the safety equipment they carry which helps to reduce the amount of fatalities. To reduce that level of equipment would be a step back (IMO)

 

[Linford]

I'm suggesting that we could look at penalising cars with a large footprint.

You mean like 7 series BMW's, Mondeo estates, and Audi A8's ?
They are already penalised...they are very expensive to run, very expensive to tax...and very expensive to buy (well maybe not the Mondeo's)

 

[400bhp]

Because the footprint of new cars has increased to accommodate the safety equipment they carry which helps to reduce the amount of fatalities. To reduce that level of equipment would be a step back (IMO)

Only in a small part.

Driving has become an extension of lifestyle. Sound deadening, ICE and general more roominess accounts for most of the increase in size.

 

[400bhp]

You mean like 7 series BMW's, Mondeo estates, and Audi A8's ?
They are already penalised...they are very expensive to run, very expensive to tax...and very expensive to buy (well maybe not the Mondeo's)

Yes.

Are you getting my point now?

 

[growingvegetables]

They are already penalised...they are very expensive to run, very expensive to tax...and very expensive to buy

Penalised?

Linford - sorry, mate, but martyrdom doesn't become you.






Makes me giggle though.

 

[Linford]

Yes.

Are you getting my point now?

You feel that there is already a fairly hefty penalty paid when running a large (thirsty) car without the requirement to penalise them more ?

if so,we are in agreement...that is why I only do about 2k PA in mine.

 

[400bhp]

You feel that there is already a fairly hefty penalty paid when running a large (thirsty) car without the requirement to penalise them more ?

.

No, the opposite.

I'm trying hard here. I'm not sure how else I can put across the point that :it might be worth extending VED to cover volume/floorspace of the vehicle: ?

A car can be large and not thirsty. I have a Mundano estate and get 50mpg out of it. In fact, you can see, that I would be paying more for my suggestion.

Penalise is an interesting word. No-one is forced to own such a car.

 

[screenman]

Mass exodus of people moving from rural areas into cities to cut down on mileage, would make the roads in some places a tad congested.

In truth I think most Brits would just suffer quietly.

 

[Linford]

No, the opposite.

I'm trying hard here. I'm not sure how else I can put across the point that :it might be worth extending VED to cover volume/floorspace of the vehicle: ?

A car can be large and not thirsty. I have a Mundano estate and get 50mpg out of it. In fact, you can see, that I would be paying more for my suggestion.

Penalise is an interesting word. No-one is forced to own such a car.

You seem to be at cross purposes. Owners of thirsty cars pay proportionately more due to fuel duty. If you want to discourage people taking their vehicles on the highway, make those vehicles thirsty, and load fuel duty..thus lowering the number out there as they only really use them as luxury or neccessity vehicles and not clutter up the roads with all the other 50mpg mundano's doing big mileage and spending a lot more time congesting the system....or does this seem a bit obvious ?

 

[400bhp]

You seem to be at cross purposes. Owners of thirsty cars pay proportionately more due to fuel duty. If you want to discourage people taking their vehicles on the highway, make those vehicles thirsty, and load fuel duty..thus lowering the number out there as they only really use them as luxury or neccessity vehicles and not clutter up the roads with all the other 50mpg mundano's doing big mileage and spending a lot more time congesting the system....or does this seem a bit obvious ?

I give up.

The end.

 

[mickle]

I give up.

The end.

You should have known better.

 

[Linford]

I give up.

The end.

My 4x4 has not turned a wheel since last march and has been on sorn since august due to cheaper alternatives at my disposal. If it did 50 mpg, i'd not have bought an a class and just done the miles in it. Running costs on it are so high, i can save money by taxing, testing and insuring another vehicle. Most 4x4 owners also do this unless it is a company car and they don't care. It is not a daily drive...