Jump to content

Manchester Road Accident now - more chaos


Dizzy
 Share

Recommended Posts

Inky
 
I am not sure why you didn't read the whole of my posting (and even the report it referenced) before reacting. The very next part said :-
 
 

 
The authors argue that other motoring levies form part of the general tax pot and are no more reserved for the impact of cars than alcohol duties are reserved for healthcare or policing drink-fuelled disorder.
Even if motoring taxes were taken into account there remains a significant shortfall in the UK. Fuel duty and its associated VAT along with vehicle excise duty contribute around £38bn a year to the Treasury's coffers, £10bn less than the estimated cost.
 

 
So, if there is a £10bn shortfall of taxes raised against costs incurred then before motorists could even start to provide any contribution to investment in other transport schemes then they would have to raise that further £10bn shortfall. So if you are in favour of a 26% increase in fuel duty, VAT and VED so that us motorists can start to provide such a contribution then that is fine.
 
 
If you looked at the report then you would see that it does detail the costs from indiviudual countries and builds up the EU-wide picture from this. This takes into account the costs of road casualties within each country. Hence your comments about reduced casualties in UK are already taken into account.

 

With regard to air pollution then the costs in UK 3.2bn Euros per annum, and only surpassed by Germany, France and Italy. Most other countries are 1bn or less excpet for Spain at 2bn. The idea that the rest of Europe is driving around in old and polluting cars and trucks is not evident from these figures.

 

Oh.. One other thing,. In many of the other countries in Europe people feel that they have much greater freedom of choice to walk, cycle or choose public transport. Shouldn't people in UK get that freedom as well?

 

 

Regards

 

Rod

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't this supposed £10 Billion shortfall presume that motorists are a seperate species from the rest of society in that the ONLY taxes they pay are related to motoring? The reality is that motorists pay all the taxes non-motorists pay PLUS motor taxes. Statistics and damned lies......................................

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't this supposed £10 Billion shortfall presume that motorists are a seperate species from the rest of society in that the ONLY taxes they pay are related to motoring? The reality is that motorists pay all the taxes non-motorists pay PLUS motor taxes. Statistics and damned lies......................................

 

No, motorists are not some separate species. They are part of society. What the report and article was reporting was that the costs to the whole society far outweigh the taxes collected from just from motorists.

 

Regards

 

Rod

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Inky

 

I am not sure why you didn't read the whole of my posting (and even the report it referenced) before reacting. The very next part said :-

 

 

 

So, if there is a £10bn shortfall of taxes raised against costs incurred then before motorists could even start to provide any contribution to investment in other transport schemes then they would have to raise that further £10bn shortfall. So if you are in favour of a 26% increase in fuel duty, VAT and VED so that us motorists can start to provide such a contribution then that is fine.

 

 

If you looked at the report then you would see that it does detail the costs from indiviudual countries and builds up the EU-wide picture from this. This takes into account the costs of road casualties within each country. Hence your comments about reduced casualties in UK are already taken into account.

 

With regard to air pollution then the costs in UK 3.2bn Euros per annum, and only surpassed by Germany, France and Italy. Most other countries are 1bn or less excpet for Spain at 2bn. The idea that the rest of Europe is driving around in old and polluting cars and trucks is not evident from these figures.

 

Oh.. One other thing,. In many of the other countries in Europe people feel that they have much greater freedom of choice to walk, cycle or choose public transport. Shouldn't people in UK get that freedom as well?

 

 

Regards

 

Rod

 

 

Rod, I did read you're whole post, and have in the past read the "report" you cite.

 

It's still rubbish.

 

The VAST majority of people in this country see motoring related taxes as a DIRECT and unavoidable tax on motoring. 

 

Tobacco and alcohol products are discretionary purchases, fuel for transport is not. Even if we all followed your advice, did all our shopping online and filled the roads up with nothing but delivery vans flying around we would STILL be paying fuel duty and other taxes in paying for those deliveries. Road fuel is also the only product which is taxed not as a product in itself but based on the use it is put to. Users of fuel who can prove that it is not used on the public highway can easily claim back the duty on the fuel they buy - or even buy fuel which is sold free of duty in the first place. This proves a VERY direct link between fuel taxes and road useage.

 

The authors of this claptrap have done their level best throughout the report to maximise their estimates of costs whilst minimising their estimates of the economic benefits of cars. The quoted £10 billion "shortfall" between revenues from fuel duty, VAT and VED and economic costs is based on such an inflated view of the costs. For example, the full costs of ambulances, paramedics, fire brigade resources, A+E facilities and hospitals related to road accidents is attributed to the economic "costs" of motoring. Well I've got news for you, we'd still need ambulances, paramedics, firemen, doctors, nurses and hospitals - and in pretty similar number too if we're to maintain a decent level of service generally - even if cars were banned completely.

 

The "costs" of air pollution are also massively overstated using numbers just plucked of of the air and typically dishonest statistical sleight of hand. How can you put a "cost" in Pounds on air pollution anyway???

 

On the revenue side, the report also ignores ALL of the other compulsory motoring taxes I previously mentioned - insurance premium tax (the majority of which is levied on motor insurance) raises nearly £2.5 billion alone, car parking charges are over a £billion, speed camera fines are well into the hundreds of millions, VAT on new cars is in the billions, employment within the car industry and its suppliers generates tens of billions more in tax revenues and - just as importantly - export trade.

 

The £10 billion "shortfall" soon vanishes when any kind of real world view of the costs is compared to a true total for the revenues.

 

The report also completely ignores what would be the economic costs of moving people and goods from where the are to where they need to be by any other method.

 

Recent reports have shown that the cost of rail travel across the network as whole in pence per passenger mile is well above the cost of running a car averaging around 15 to 20p PER PASSENGER mile - that's even WITH the tax breaks and subsidies given to rail travel which are not available to road users. Anyone who has taken a bus from here into Warrington recently will know for a fact that it is FAR more expensive for two people to pay return fares than it is to drive, park, shop at ones own convenience, and then drive home. And all of the major supermarkets who provide online shopping and delivery options acknowledge that even with a delivery charge of £5 or more they ALL lose money on the service.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometime over the last few days saw a program on one of the channels showing the new system in I think Hong Kong....... the platforms had perspex panels that closed just before the train doors did to prevent people from trying to get on at the last minutes.

 

What do we have, trains that were the height of sophistication in the Victorian era and a mental attitude to match. :mrgreen:

 I'm never sure when you're serious... but I'll rise to it.  The Jubilee Line has had platform glazing and doors since 1999...  And I don't think any train did Warrington to London in two hours in the Victorian era.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, many on this website have said that they rule out cycling on the roads for themselves or their children because they consider it too dangerous.

 

That's very true Rod and even with a drop to 20 mph you will never get me on a bike on the main public roads... and my son still has his instructions from me should he ever get in trouble for riding on the pavements at night. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe just the 'Happy New Year' would have sufficed for tonight Rod. 

 

Infact there's a topic about that on another area of the forum that you could post it on.  I realise that you don't often venture onto other forum topics/subjects but maybe you should once in a while just to show willing :lol:

 

Incase you don't..... well Happy New Year to you too Rod and I'm sure 2013 will bring you everything you wish for :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:lol: I have no idea Rod.

 

I guess the rest are all partying hard or flat out in a heap somewhere.  :lol:

 

Me ... well our dog has finally calmed down after the fireworks now so I may get to bed soon.. our son should be in sometime after 3.30am as that's the only taxi he could book to get home (I hope it turns up on time) and as for my other half.. well I just hope to goodness he doesn't borrow someones bike as he sounded very 'merry' last time he rang me   :wacko:  :shock:  :lol:  

 

I knew I should have offered to pick them both up from their seperate watering holes but one thing I will NEVER do is drive after having even one drink so they are on their own.

 

Night night

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure it will Algy and I have great faith in your abilities... if it doesn't though I shall tell you :lol:  Now stop posting and get a move on !!!  I've only got a slight cold at the moment but it might turn into severe man flu by tomorrow and I might not have the strength to sit up or do anything for myself  :lol:   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It's the way you ask them!

 

Question was  "whether such a blanket limit should be implemented in residential areas to improve road safety," and if it was for safety reason of course it should be but the fact is it is being introduced for political reasons pushed by the EU.

 

Islington claims a 65 per cent fall in accidents in its 20mph areas.yet as I understand it they have not implemented it yet.

 

The# fact is it will be many years before any meaqningful statistics can be obtained as to how it effects accident/casualty/imjury.

 

Until then anyone claiming they have statistics to back up their claims that 20mph will improve safety they are liers!

 

If slower is safer how is it motorways are the safest roads?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...