http://ipayroadtax.com/itv-ignorance-about-road-tax/why-isnt-beer-tax-used-to-build-better-pubs/
Private motoring is subsidised, motorists are a net drain on the economy.
There is a widespread perception that motorists are already unfairly taxed.
This is simply not true(1). In the year 2002-03 £26.5 billion was raised from fuel and road tax(2). Around £6bn went toward road building and maintenance that year(3). The cost of policing the roads and the expense incurred by the judicial system is estimated to be between £1bn and £3bn(4), while congestion costs businesses and other drivers £20bn in delay(5).
The costs of the effects of air pollution and accidents due to road transport were estimated at £12.3bn(6) and £16bn(7) respectively.
Sorry, I can't get onto the link that you gave there. Something is either wrong with the site or my machine. So I'll work with what I can glean from your posting.
To be honest, I thought you would come back at me with figures of that sort. (nothing wrong with that). The problem with the congestion, judicial and pollution figures is that they are, inevitably, guesstimates rather than hard facts.....though I am not suggesting that there should be no attempt to quantify these things. But we also need to read beyond the figures.
Take the £20bn guesstimate for congestion. Does that mean that drivers should pay an extra 20bn in tax on top of the cost they have already incurred as a result of congestion? Or does it mean that we should make massive investment in the infrastructure to reduce congestion? Does it mean that only those who could afford to pay high taxes should have a car? Alternatively do we simply balance the books and spend less on the roads.......even though business, the economy and the roads themselves would inevitably grind to a halt.
The same applies to the air pollution and accident guesstimates. We could, in theory, just ban car driving on the basis that it doesn't pay its way. But the cost to our economy would be disastrous.
One other figure which does not appear to be included in what you have quoted is the contribution which the road network also makes to the economy in terms of the business which is genereated. Remove the employment and profits and taxes which are created by road and vehicle contruction and maintenance and a big hole would be created.
In a long winded way, I am saying that we need to look at the straightforward accounting figures (tax revenue versus actual cost of road construction and maintenance) and the "social cost" figures (the guesstimates) separately.
Yes, we need to be aware of the social costs, but to use them to make a sweeping statement that motoring is subsidised is, in my view, taking it too far. I can simply counter it by saying that without the road network our economy would collapse and not only would we have nowhere to ride, we would not even be able to afford to have bikes.
More importantly, I also believe that it is a mistake for cyclists to be attacking (for want of a better term) car drivers. We need them to be on our side. We need to share the road with them and we certainly need them to share the road with us. I really do believe that we would be better off by trying to win them over rather than confronting them and effectively saying "make them pay more tax"......even though it is very difficult at times and I can't claim to be an angel!
