Road Tax on driving a vehicle

[John]

But now, of course, there are no jobs where we live and where the jobs are, the homes are well out of price range so travel is unavoidable, not a choice.

John.

[Huge]

Absolutely. Totally and completely.

T2000 are a lobby organisation funded by, controlled and operating on behalf of the PT Operators.

They aren't. Their paymasters want you out of your car and on one of their buses/trains. Just so long as the taxpayer keeps ponying up that subsidy, mind you.

[Huge]

As opposed to the tax disincentives presently applied.

[dennis]

It has been done by the Japanese.. they just buy two cars.

[dennis]

That is to cut down on pollution caused by buses.. A bus with less than about 6-10 passengers on it is going to increase pollution so you have to stop running them. Don't believe all the hype about buses solving the problem.. they only do so if managed to ensure they have passengers on them. Shame that managing them inconveniences the passengers.

[The Natural Philosopher]

I cannot believe *you* actually believe that. They have a MASSIVE effect on congestion, and waste incredible amounts of fuel and do almost nothing for safety..in one case I have seen them cause an accident that would not have happened without them.

I have timed empty junctions at traffic light controlled junctions. The average is 15 seconds of lost road per cycle on any given access to the junction.

Everyone in Cambridge reports better traffic flow when the lights actually fail.

Because the facilities are crap where the work is?

Its all simple cost benefit..travel to an well paid job in a shitty city is cheaper than living in that city in a decent sized house, and the salaries are not available outside of it.

Plus city living is crime ridden and pollution ridden.

The answer is simple,. Raise fuel prices..and get rid of obstacles stuck in the road to slow people down and cause congestion.

[The Natural Philosopher]

Well it ought to be about three times the price..then scrap all road tax and all congestion charges and all traffic calming and most of the lights.

People will not drive fast if it costs them an extra pound every ten miles if they do.

Nor will they drive casually if its costing them half a days salary to go to the shops in the next town.

[Clive George]

[DMac]

ie line the pockets of the bus companies shareholders

[Bob Eager]

There really is no other choice in this case. There are no grammar schools in our twon, or the next one. Nearest one is as I said. PT is as I said.

No doubt Mary or someone will now tell us we should send him to the nearest school regardless, because 'it was good enough for them'.

[Huge]

I never drive anywhere "casually". Am I unusual in that respect? I suspect that people have simply got used to the cost of fuel and no longer think about it. The fact that it costs x pounds to drive somewhere generally causes me to think twice about it, or combine trips.

[Clive George]

Is your local one non-selected?

The grammar school I went to was probably one that people would choose - high in tables, etc. However it wasn't as good as the comprehensive I went to in another area.

Nearest grammar school to us is about 15 miles away. If we had kids they'd go to the local 'comp' (aka high school). It's not unknown for others to send their kids to another comp in preference to the grammar, despite it being a highly rated school.

cheers, clive

[dennis]

As long as you know that most of these successful schools are successful because they actively get rid of pupils that would fail to get the results they need to stay a "good" school.

That is the figures are rigged.

[Peter Parry]

I thought he was President of the "let's see how many air miles we can get in a week" club, but irrespective of the tame celeb as a figurehead Transport 2000 cannot conceivably be called "independent" as it is largely funded by the Rail Unions and led by and stuffed with anti car campaigners.

"Transport 2000 seeks movement towards a society that relies less on cars..."

"Activists' briefings...How to counter motoring myths"

"use of cars damages the environment, reduces quality of life for communities and places the burden of external costs on society. Bearing this in mind, many would argue that it is right to restrict ownership and use of cars."

Seems a pretty straightforward summary of their position.

As for their Chairman; wasn't he previously the head of Alarm UK who published a document called Roadblock described thus: "Roadblock is dedicated to all the campaigners in the anti-roads movement"

"John Stewart, who ultimately came to chair ALARM, explains: "ALARM was clearly focused from the very beginning. It was a transport organisation whose objective was to stop all the road schemes... It had no other objectives, no political affiliations, no constitution and only one rule: each group had to oppose all roads in the Assessment Studies, not just those in their own back yard - only then would ALARM be able to argue that road-building was not the way forward"

He was also Chairman of RoadPeace (and still their advisor) and a luminary of the Pedestrians Association.

Dick Barry, Director, Policy and Research Officer for Unison.

Jonathan Bray, Director, produces reports for Transport 2000 from "Jonathan Bray Associates". Another Alarm founder and assistant Director of the "pteg Support Unit" dedicated to "Promoting integrated public transport networks".

David Harby; Director, Membership Secretary of Rail Futures (The Railway Development Society as was)

Jenny Raggett - Director, also member of Rail Futures and Wiltshire Friends of the Earth.

James Harkins; Director, also Managing Director of Light Rail (UK) Ltd

Nicola Marsden; Director, also PR Director for National Express [Coach] Group Plc

Frank Ward - Director, also Transport and Salaried Staff Association policy adviser

Independent?

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Similar schemes have been tried elsewhere - people just buy a second car and increase parking problems.

[Peter Parry]

Because they cannot afford to rent or buy houses anywhere near their work and no work is available near where they live. Well over half the London Firemen based at central London stations live outside the M25, many up to 60 miles away from their work. Nursing is in an even worse situation with no affordable housing near most major hospitals inside the M25 sphere.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

It would be an excuse if there was no PT at all. At the moment all you're saying is a car is more convenient to you. And always will be for everyone. No PT service can be waiting at your door to take you wherever you wish.

I'm not criticising your views - just stating that the inevitable will happen one day, people will be forced to reduce the increase in car usage by whatever means - even if that is they can't get the car off the driveway because of solid traffic jams on their road.

[The Natural Philosopher]

If only...

My wife had a £30k job in the city..a job that was completely doable at home (graphic design).

Despite actually doing work at home perfectly successfully on occasion, the cost and stress of the job finally got to her, and when we calculated that after all expenses and taxes it was actually netting only about £600 a month..for what amounted to a 12 hour working day..we decided to give it up. We offered. I mean it would have been so easy to go self employed at a reduced rate..but they didn't want to know.

"everybody will want to do it and how will we know if they are doing the crossword or not!?"

Cries of "if they are doing the work, who cares" fell on deaf ears..

Managers would rather outsource to India than east Anglia...

The answer is so bloody simple.

Tax fuel to the hilt, and chuck income tax. Nay, *subsidise* incomes. By giving everyone a citizens pension..man woman and child.

Once employing someone in London will mean £100k a tear just for he commute, whereas employing someone at home in Orkeny for the same job will cost maybe not much more than "Bombay Call centers inc". then the patterns will shift.

The government has proved totally inept at manging any process to achieve the actual results it says it wants..Want less accidents? well simple. Forget traffic calming. Every time someone has an accident that results in death or injury, hold a full CAA style enquiry. Blame must be assigned,. Whether its to the car drivers, the car makers or the road designers or maintainers. Or the stupid mother that let her kid run across the road.

Adopt swingeing fines or imprisonment, and potential lifetime bans. With luck half the population that can't actually drive a car properly anyway will be taken off the roads, and the rest will be so damned careful ...

Want to stop people burning fossil fuels? Make it very expensive

Want to stop people causing accidents?. Make them very expensive.

Want jobs to stay in this country? Make them cheaper to employ here than in China.

Want people to recycle more and buy less? Tax new goods, but not secondhand sales, and not repairs.

Want to solve the drug problem? make em so cheap and legal no one can make money pushing them. That will sort out Afghanistan as well. No one need steal to get them or commit violent acts because they haven't got them. Just get them on the NHS like you do anyway for the ones with more side effects that usually make you feel worse anyway.

With a pissing lawyer at the head of the country, and a bloody religious lawyer tho, we have no chance. Ban everything and reintroduce Puritanism.

I can't think of ONE piece of anything this government has done to encourage people to *do* anything *good*. Its just 'ban this ban that ban the other tax that fine this '

So MUCH is illegal its now costing us £27k a year to keep 'criminals' locked up, let alone the police to arrest them and the courts to convict them..

Government has two ways to tilt playing fields in socially desirable directions....legislation and taxation. Legislation is entirely a negative force, It never permits, only denies.

So far they have used the one to appallingly bad effect.

Taxation can be net neutral to the balance of the population, and if applied slowly over a period, gives people time to adjust their lifestyles.

[The Natural Philosopher]

In a nutshell, yes.

[pebe]

Plus a tax to cover the Olympic Games overspend

-- pebe