muggle Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 First we could not afford to live anywhere near our place of work due to high property prices. Soon we will have to pay for the privilege of our hellish commute! This is the last straw!!! :angry: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4756763.stm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laurejon Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 Interesting that as a Labour Minister he states He said that it was time to face "certain basic facts" that as the nation's prosperity improved, people would want to travel more and to travel further. "And as we travel more, because we live on a crowded island, congestion is set to grow, so if we do nothing we simply face eternal gridlock," he told BBC News So when it comes to immigration we are not crowded, his party adopt the "let them all in the more the merrier" yet another minister tells us we should pay to use the roads we own, despite paying for them 1,000 times over already in vehicle licence tax. New Labour really have got confused, they dont know their head from their backside. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ca-uk Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 what an idiot. i wonder how much damage this prat can do before we lose labour at the next election? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muggle Posted May 10, 2006 Author Share Posted May 10, 2006 Note "...people would want to travel more". Like we WANT to travel f*$!ing miles every day to find work! :angry: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murpaul Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 Interesting that as a Labour Minister he states He said that it was time to face "certain basic facts" that as the nation's prosperity improved, people would want to travel more and to travel further. "And as we travel more, because we live on a crowded island, congestion is set to grow, so if we do nothing we simply face eternal gridlock," he told BBC News So when it comes to immigration we are not crowded, his party adopt the "let them all in the more the merrier" yet another minister tells us we should pay to use the roads we own, despite paying for them 1,000 times over already in vehicle licence tax. New Labour really have got confused, they dont know their head from their backside. I saw him this morning and have decided that I am definately getting old, he looks about 12! :angry: As to congestion charging, I dont think its a bad idea, BUT the monies raised MUST be ring fenced and offered back to businesses who have an active policy of home working or who relocate to less densely populated parts of the country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkG Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 (edited) As to congestion charging, I dont think its a bad idea Of course it's a bad idea. IT ACTIVELY ENCOURAGES THE GOVERNMENT TO MAKE CONGESTION WORSE! For the government to ****** up our roads and then charge _us_ for congestion is absurd. Motorists pay vast amounts of tax every year which in any rational country would be spend on improving roads: but here it's spent on hiring losers into worthless government jobs to keep the unemployment figures down instead. Labour's destruction of basic infrastructure (itself merely a continuation of policies since the 70s) is yet another reason why I can't understand anyone believing this country can sustain some of the highest house prices in the world. Our roads are a joke compared to the rest of Europe. Edited May 10, 2006 by MarkG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marko Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 First we could not afford to live anywhere near our place of work due to high property prices. Soon we will have to pay for the privilege of our hellish commute! This is the last straw!!! :angry: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4756763.stm I think there are several pressures leading us towards this system: 1) The government never miss out on an opportunity to tax the crap out of people; 2) The government never miss out on an opportunity to track/control people; 3) The EU is looking for new and imaginative ways to use their expensive new Galileo navigation system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkG Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 I think there are several pressures leading us towards this system: You forgot the nimbies, who are just as opposed to building new roads as they are to building new houses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AteMoose Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 4) The underlying decission has already been made in europe.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laurejon Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 Surely it now makes economic sense to offshore every job in the UK, and pay the occupants of the UK 1k per week benefits. The money for the benefits payments can easily be covered as Gordon Brown has a money tree in his back Garden that defies the logic of previously tried and tested economic studies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DTMark Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 It seems outrageous, doesn't it, something which would be so unpopular that it would never happen. But it will happen, and it will work, to see why, you would need to have seen the look on the face of my passengers when driving up the M6 about to enter the gridlocked part which goes through Birmingham and queue for an hour, when I explained that if they wanted us to use the empty toll road to bypass it, they would have to pay as I refuse to on principle and would rather sit in a queue than pay to use a road which the money I already paid should have been used to build. "But it's only £1.20". And they paid it. And so will everyone else. I wonder if it makes me an anarchist or everyone else gullible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy James Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 Road charging is a great idea - it will reduce the number of cars on the road, raise revenue and also put extra pressure on peoples disposable income - making a house price crash more likely. Stop moaning, you're starting to sound like Jeremy Clarkson. Douglas Alexander is a great bloke - very competent and not afraid to take on the road lobby. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkG Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 (edited) Road charging is a great idea - it will reduce the number of cars on the road And that's a benefit how, exactly? Or are you another nimby who believes the proles should all live and die within twenty miles of where they were born? Edited May 10, 2006 by MarkG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murpaul Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 Of course it's a bad idea. IT ACTIVELY ENCOURAGES THE GOVERNMENT TO MAKE CONGESTION WORSE! For the government to ****** up our roads and then charge _us_ for congestion is absurd. Motorists pay vast amounts of tax every year which in any rational country would be spend on improving roads: but here it's spent on hiring losers into worthless government jobs to keep the unemployment figures down instead. Labour's destruction of basic infrastructure (itself merely a continuation of policies since the 70s) is yet another reason why I can't understand anyone believing this country can sustain some of the highest house prices in the world. Our roads are a joke compared to the rest of Europe. OK, labour are sh1t, no doubt, but if the money raised is given back to businesses - as business will ultimately pay for it - who relocate to less densily populated parts fo the country? Or used to encourage home working? It could achieve social/community gains for the the SE, and a boost to the economies of the regions. If properly implemented it could work. Thats the problem though, Labour cant implement it as they are useless, and GB would want it to waste on more public sector non-jobs. Depressing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gravity's Rainbow Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 Much ignorant commentary on this thread (but what's new?). As usual It is wise to first familiarise yourself with the proposals before mouthing off. The introduction of road user charging will be "tax neutral", meaning that the tax raised from it will be offset by reducing taxes on vehicle licensing and fuel. There will be lots of winners and losers. The elderly who only take their Nissan Micras out once a week to go shopping will be big winners. Commuters travelling long distances by busy A roads and motorways will be big losers. My beef with the proposals is that someone driving a fuel efficient small car from point A to point B will be charged the same as someone driving a monster 4x4. This can't be right. Much anxiety has been expressed here in the past about the effects of peak oil. If you take peak oil seriously then road user charging has to be a good thing in that it will incentivise more sustainable communities. Finally, the thing about renting is that you can always just move closer to work. Those stuck in negative equity or overpriced houses they can't sell will have no choice but to keep commuting and being bled dry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy James Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 And that's a benefit how, exactly? In London where they've brought in the congestion charge it's meant less polution, safer roads for other roads users and pedestrians, it's made using public transport easier and quicker and it's improved my quality of life no end. Or are you another nimby who believes the proles should all live and die within twenty miles of where they were born? And are you another car driver who believes he has a god given right to do what he wants regardless of anyone else? Grow up. You are permitted to use your car based on your staying within the laws of the country and dependent upon your impact on others - this isn't texas. Car's have turned most of our cities into horrible places, the less cars the better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzMosiz Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 They will force cars off the road to ensure oil consumption stays low. Will this benefit inflation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laurejon Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 Much ignorant commentary on this thread (but what's new?). As usual It is wise to first familiarise yourself with the proposals before mouthing off.The introduction of road user charging will be "tax neutral", meaning that the tax raised from it will be offset by reducing taxes on vehicle licensing and fuel. Well I suppose the retort should be what an arrogant up your own ars3e t0ss3r but that would be plain rude. You are yet another Muppet, that has fallen for the New Labour policy of bullsh1t. No doubt you too have arrived on the last bannana boat, a gratefull elector of a dispicable and ruthless party of war criminals. The simple fact is, it would not be neutral, in the following budgets they would in the first instance reduce road tax charges to compensate, then annually increase them as they do with council tax, above inflation. Face facts, the roads belong to the people already, the Labour Party could not run a bath, when they are not abusing their office by shagg1ng their underlings, they are having their own oriffices attended to by rent boys. New Labour are a party of ex pot smoking public schoolboy misfits, who had a chip on their shoulder because the posh boys at boarding school didnt play with them. And their Mummy collected them each night in a Cortina. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy James Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 The simple fact is, it would not be neutral, Who cares? As long as it makes you angrier HPC should be welcoming this news with open arms - it makes people's ability to pay for higher prices even more constrained. You're rather selfishly going against the common cause. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jp1 Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 Douglas Alexander is a great bloke - very competent and not afraid to take on the road lobby. IMO Alexander is an irritating Scottish Tw*t Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil D Possitt Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 My beef with the proposals is that someone driving a fuel efficient small car from point A to point B will be charged the same as someone driving a monster 4x4. This can't be right. Yes, the DVLA have the official CO2 emissions figures for every new car registered since early 2001, so why not base the charge on this to some extent? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laurejon Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 I dont think the Labour Party should think of any new ideas, based on the fact that their performance since taking office has been a complete disaster. They should just bow out gracefully now, before the people turn up and kick their sorry backsides back to Scotland where they belong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBFTB Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 How interesting. Does this proposal include abolishing all the various road taxes, car taxes, fuel taxes etc. etc? Or is it the usual arrangement where we pay that as well. That's the bit that really gets me. We pay taxes to keep the roads in good shape, then we are expected to pay again through tolls like the M6 toll road. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Property Dreamer Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 Well I suppose the retort should be what an arrogant up your own ars3e t0ss3r but that would be plain rude. You are yet another Muppet, that has fallen for the New Labour policy of bullsh1t. No doubt you too have arrived on the last bannana boat, a gratefull elector of a dispicable and ruthless party of war criminals. The simple fact is, it would not be neutral, in the following budgets they would in the first instance reduce road tax charges to compensate, then annually increase them as they do with council tax, above inflation. Face facts, the roads belong to the people already, the Labour Party could not run a bath, when they are not abusing their office by shagg1ng their underlings, they are having their own oriffices attended to by rent boys. New Labour are a party of ex pot smoking public schoolboy misfits, who had a chip on their shoulder because the posh boys at boarding school didnt play with them. And their Mummy collected them each night in a Cortina. No, Morris Marina Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gravity's Rainbow Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 Well I suppose the retort should be what an arrogant up your own ars3e t0ss3r but that would be plain rude. You are yet another Muppet, that has fallen for the New Labour policy of bullsh1t. No doubt you too have arrived on the last bannana boat, a gratefull elector of a dispicable and ruthless party of war criminals. Sorry Laurejon, but too much of what you say is merely just reiterating your preconceived political predjudices rather than engaging in informed debate. You have not raised any serious objections to road pricing other than the fact that Labour is behind it. If Cameron and the Tories came out in favour (as well they might do) what would be your objection? Come up with some original contributions and leave off the crude, misspelt insults. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.