Pay as you drive

Sorry if I`ve missed any discussion about our PM in waitings new gizzmo for taking yet more crinkly fivers out of my pocket but how will it affect "tax exempt" or limited mileage historics? Think I know the answer though !

Reply to
bottle
Loading thread data ...

"bottle" wrote

As it's designed (by a Labour/socialist? Govt!) to raise tax revenue and keep some poor people off the roads so the wealthier ones can drive around more easily I would imagine they won't exempt anyone except the disabled (and those that buy/steal blue badges). However I suspect everyone will have to fork our for one of the windscreen devices (about £200 est) for every vehicle they have. A bonus for the police is they will be able to know where every vehicle in the country is and has been etc etc (1984 come late). Some legislation to effect this national scheme has recently been passed through Parliament in the usual underhand way they do these things by attaching it quietly to another Bill, the Proposed Transport for London (Supplementary Toll Provisions) Bill (see Clauses 11/14 & schedule 11 &12) .

Reply to
Bob Hobden

Thing is if they know where your car is, you won't need a tracker if it gets nicked will you?

I'm figuring there will be enough cheats anyway chipping the thing or even driving a ringer sans device whilst leaving the tracked one at home.

Its not the idea of the thing I am against but the price, if fuel duty were abolished and the road fund licence as well, then it might work out.

I still don't see how it will work in tunnells and steep valleys or during high sunspot activity, or when your on your mobile.

Its not going to be 100% accurate whatever. And beyond that considering the amount of opposition howmany people will simply disable it and hope to get away with it, after all if the cost is higher than any penalty what the heck, drive around in an uninsured, heap and let them crush it if they catch you.

There are still people out there who have never paid for a TV licence.

Reply to
Larry

On or around Fri, 12 Jan 2007 01:23:37 -0000, "Larry" enlightened us thusly:

they'll be able to detect the mobile interefernce and can then fine you for drivgin while hfvat yer mobile as well...

Reply to
Austin Shackles

"Larry" wrote

And even more driving around without tax, insurance, registration documents and an MOT.

- Tom.

Reply to
Tom Bennett

There won't be any such benefit as these things won't be concealed the (expensive) way trackers are to prevent their removal.

I'm against the ide of big brother tracking us as well as the price, if you think they will reduce some other tax sufficiently for most to be better off you're on some good stuff mate 8-)

Presumably you don't think satnavs will take off either, too many tunnels around...

Another reason satnavs won't take off...

It won't be cheaper, you'll get automatic fines the way you do if you don't SORN and quite possibly automatic points on your license. The plod will have gadgets built into their cars that will automatically tell them if a car is naughty so they will sit beside the road and pick you off, when they catch you your car will be crushed and you'll get a fat fine.

Greg

Reply to
Greg

Long

formatting link
?xml=/news/2007/01/12/nroads12.xml Short
formatting link

Reply to
Rob

formatting link
?xml=/news/2007/01/12/nroads12.xml>

It all sounds a bit like a pile to me, if they want to charge people for how far they drive the simple way to do it would be to scrap road tax and then pile even more duty on fuel, the low milage people wouldn't mind ( no road tax on the motors that come out once a week), and the high milage types reps etc will be forced to consider public transport ( who along with hauliers would be able to use "red diesel")

I am sure that there must be a huge problem with this plan or it would have been done years ago but I cann't see one but no doubt one of you inteligent types who use this ng will point it out :-)

Icky If you've got a problem stick a worm in it (Berk, The trapdoor)

Reply to
icky

Immediate one is that public transport only works in cities, out in the sticks people have to travel under their own steam to get to work, and unless they earn enough to absorb the hit on tax then they'll be in trouble, unable to afford to go to work. Once unemployed, they'll be unable to afford to get a new job due to high fuel costs. So there would need to be some kind of benefits system in place.

Reply to
Ian Rawlings

formatting link
?xml=/news/2007/01/12/nroads12.xml>>

I'd love to see you do my 35,000 miles per year on public transport. I'm not a typical sales rep, but the 40 minute drive I regularly do to a client would take at least 3 hours on public transport, which means I'd be able to arrive in time for lunch, do an hours work and then come home. Brilliant....

Still, public transport needs more users. The environmentally wonderful new buses in York do approx 3 mpg and seem to be running just about empty. Not to mention the cost (financial and environmental) of all the roadworks that have had to be carried out to make them fit. 3mpg doesn't hurt too much when you get a Govt (read taxpayer) rebate for half the cost of the diesel.

We need to get the political crap out of the transport debate and look sensibly at solutions to the problems of both urban and rural transport. A national approach rooted in taxation cannot possibly work for everyone, or even anyone.

Reply to
Tim Hobbs

Sorry, but this sounds like a typical bloody townie solution. Anywhere outside a city can NEVER have a working public transport system, since (by definition) the people are too spread out. To my mind, the best solution would be to introduce tolls on the Motorways in order to stiff the reps, and encourage long distance travel by the public onto trains. Increasing fuel duty just makes rural life (read: food) more expensive, and decreases the likelihood of rural youngsters staying in the villages, so that the houses will just become weekend places for rich townies, whilst the towns become bigger slums. Bah!

Stuart

Reply to
Srtgray

"Stuffing the reps" will damage commerce and cripple the economy ultimately. How I am suppose to carry all the gear I have to take on a service trip by public transport I do not know. The knock on effects of Bliar's government's stupid ideas will be to destroy our economy - which is probably what the Europeans want.

Steve

Reply to
Steve Taylor

D'you know....makes you wonder how on earth people managed before we could all afford private transport, dunnit? Nobody is prepared to sacrifice their 'absolutely critical' car journey for the greater good.....not saying I'm any better, before anybody has a go at me ;)

Icky If you've got a problem, stick a worm in it (Berk, The Trapdoor)

Reply to
icky

Will they charge the user of a horse and buggy?

Reply to
Larry

Cars are far cheaper than horses!!

Reply to
Ian Rawlings

Yes - horse fart is a greenhouse gas so it'll have to be charged for ;-)

Reply to
EMB

Things where provided locally. Alston has the essentials like basic medicine, food, banking and communications but not much more and it really only has those because of the isolation. The other small towns/large villages around do well to have more than the village PO/shop (and for how much longer will they have that?)

There is no where to buy basic clothing/footwear other than outdoor hiking up the fells stuff. The garages carry a few spares but no many, the newsagent has a very limited range of plumbing/electrical bits. Basically if you want anything other than basic foods you have no option to travel 20+ miles to Hexham, Penrith or Carlisle. There are buses to those places but pretty close to one there and one back M-F only.

In the past everything was available in the town. It had to be, no one had the time to do a forty+ mile round trip by horse & cart. It would take all day or maybe two to get there... Maybe if they hike private transport costs it will become viable for small shops to open in remote place like Alston again but if transport costs go up the people won't be able travel to work to earn money to spend in the (new) shops...

Reply to
Dave Liquorice

Way back when horses were the main source of transport, apparently London's streets were awash with shit and piss and evil stenches, some things never change eh ;-)

Reply to
Ian Rawlings

We were all a lot poorer. And died younger.

Steve

Reply to
Steve Taylor

Well, in earlier times, mass transport was less necessary. People lived near where they worked, industry was smaller and more local, there wasn't the commuting culture. As life got more complex, industries centralised, people got richer and so moved away from their workplace to a "nicer" place, councils decided that houses had to be sited away from factories and shops ("zoning"), and companies decided that their sales people had to drive from one end of the country to the other. Me, I'd far rather not drive ANYWHERE, but the round trip to my children's school and on to work is about sixty miles (usually I share with another family for the school run). I'm currently looking for a helpdesk job or something else where I can telecommute most of the time (unfortunately teaching involves physically standing in front of children).

Stuart

Reply to
Srtgray

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.