Oliver Keating wrote:

"Ian Smith" wrote in message
...

"Tom Sacold" wrote in message
...

The effects of a congestion tax may not be what NuLabour want to

hear.

"A national road charge will put more pressure on Britain's already

brittle

public transport infrastructure, Ministers have been warned. With

rural bus

services already under threat, and overcrowding endemic on urban

train

lines, public transport would be stretched to breaking point."

See:
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/polit...086280,00.html

Perhaps as more traffic jams occur, more people will be encouraged
to find other means of getting there. Perhaps we don't need even more
taxation, which is really just money pulled from somewhere else, and
which we would throw back into the economy anyway, of our own accord.
Funny thing, free market forces.


But of course free market forces only work if people are charged for the
services (ie roads) that they use. Currently roads are free(1)

(1) So you may argue about fuel duty etc.etc. but this is unbelievably crude
in terms of road pricing as to be ignored.


--
"Transport is the life blood of the economy."





Indeed one may so argue!. Road tax: £10 a month before I even go
anywhere. Fuel tax a lot more. And then there is however much of my
Council Tax my local authority spends on making the roads less
car-friendly. Crude it may be, but a hefty charge on road usage it is.
Free? Absolutely no way.

Of course, if these existing taxes taxes were scrapped, and road usage
was then charged by usage... But then fuel tax does that anyway.



--
Nick H (UK)

"Oliver Keating" wrote in message ...
...
But of course free market forces only work if people are charged for the
services (ie roads) that they use. Currently roads are free(1)

(1) So you may argue about fuel duty etc.etc. but this is unbelievably crude
in terms of road pricing as to be ignored.
...

Here here! Let's price the riff-raff in their mass-market hatchbacks
and super-minis off the roads. Let them use buses. Give the roads
back to the wealthy!

Matt B.
--

"Nick H (UK)" wrote in message
...
Indeed one may so argue!. Road tax: £10 a month before I even go
anywhere. Fuel tax a lot more. And then there is however much of my
Council Tax my local authority spends on making the roads less
car-friendly. Crude it may be, but a hefty charge on road usage it is.
Free? Absolutely no way.

Of course, if these existing taxes taxes were scrapped, and road usage
was then charged by usage... But then fuel tax does that anyway.


Yep, fuel tax is pretty sensible as it does tax usage, however it doesn't
charge for using congested roads at times of congestion. Hence someone
driving down a country road is charged the same as someone trying to use a
city road in the rush hour. Surely you can see the benefit of taxing the
rush hour traffic more? Particualarly if it makes the traffic move more
freely.

I also think people should distinguish between Labour raising additional
taxes (extra tax burden) and a government trying to redistribute how those
taxes are raised.

I mean is it fairer to tax someone extra for working hard and contributing
to the economy as opposed to taxing someone for using up a limited valuable
public resource?

It always amazes me how the public are willing to stomach taxes like income
tax and NI, but go mental at the things they actually have to pay like Poll
Tax, Fuel Tax and Congestion charging.










--
Nick H (UK)

"Oliver Keating" wrote in message ...
But of course free market forces only work if people are charged for the
services (ie roads) that they use.

But, of course, free market forces only work if there's competition,
not a gang of armed thugs charging motorists an arm and a leg to drive
while stealing large chunks of the roads for their cronies in the bus
industry.

I agree with you, though: all roads should be privatised and all
motoring taxes should be abolished. Let private companies run the
roads instead.

Mark

In article , Frank X
wrote:
Yep, fuel tax is pretty sensible as it does tax usage, however
it doesn't charge for using congested roads at times of
congestion.

It does, in that you use far more petrol when driving in congested
traffic: my Honda Jazz has a mpg meter which although not 100%
accurate shows that I am get around 50mpg driving back from the
all-night Tesco at past midnight when there is next to no traffic,
and only just over half that in stop-start traffic.

But I doubt whether anyone (except perhaps some hauliers) chooses
to travel at a less busy time to save money - time perhaps.

--
Tony Bryer

In article ,
says...

Here here! Let's price the riff-raff in their mass-market hatchbacks
and super-minis off the roads. Let them use buses. Give the roads
back to the wealthy!

You'll be driving those lorries yourself then as the drivers won't be
able to get to work?


--
Conor

Hi. This is my friend, Jack ****, and you don't know him.

Dan Holdsworth wrote:


Another golden oldie from Captain Clueless himself!

So, you price the car drivers off the road. Then the ex-car drivers get stung
a second time because the busses and trains can't cope, and the operators cannot
raise the millions needed to build more tracks.

Guess who cops the blame?

You probably didn't guess correctly, but the answer is: the politicians who
implemented the hare-brained plan in the first place.

Think before posting, please; you might shed the reputation as a bumbling
nitwit if you did.

I think you need some lessons in GCSE Economics

In a true market people pay the cost of the goods they use, including
the cost of environmental damage. I'm sure no body would dispute that,
for example, open cast mining should pay the cost of restoring the
landscape and not leave the mess that some 19th century stuff did.

Congestion is an environmental cost of too many cars, as is noise, and
air pollution.

Drivers should pay this cost. As an example, in Cambridge the DfT
estimate that the congestion cost of each extra 'across Cambridge' trip
in the morning peak is TEN POUNDS (so a 'Ken' charge would be cheap)

In London the 'congestion charge' has resulted in a 16% reduction in
trips, but a 30% reduction in congestion. I'd expect most 'White Van'
men who value their time would have saved much more than the 'congestion
charge' in a single day.
Buses and Taxis are also be much more efficient.

If you realy want to understand the issues 'Travel in Towns: Jam
Yesterday, Jam Today, and Jam Tomorrow', a book written in 1990 is what
you need.
see:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/...095893-7558213

Those people who still think we should 'invest' in roads rather than
'subsidies' public transport should be aware that at least in Urban
Areas every pound invested in Public Transport reduces car congestion
more than the same money invested in building new roads. How much
reduction in congestion did the one Billion Pounds spent on the roads
from the M11 into London save?
The increase in ability to move people quickly and safely with Public
Transport, is huge compared with demolishing houses and concreting green
spaces as required for roads. Create better quicker public transport and
many will desert their cars leaving much more space for the Jeremy
Clarksons of this world

Jim Chisholm

"Dan Holdsworth" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 17:28:28 -0000, Oliver Keating

was popularly supposed to have said:


You probably didn't guess correctly, but the answer is: the politicians
who
implemented the hare-brained plan in the first place.

Nah, the ex-motorists will be blamed -- again! For not living and working in
the correct places.

"Mark" wrote in message
om...
"Oliver Keating" wrote in message
...

But, of course, free market forces only work if there's competition,
not a gang of armed thugs charging motorists an arm and a leg to drive
while stealing large chunks of the roads for their cronies in the bus
industry.

I agree with you, though: all roads should be privatised and all
motoring taxes should be abolished. Let private companies run the
roads instead.

Well it' worked for the railways!!
/sarcasm

"Frank X" wrote in message ...
Surely you can see the benefit of taxing the
rush hour traffic more?

Why, when it won't do anything to reduce the congestion that the
government has deliberately created with bus lanes, retimed traffic
lights, etc?

Particualarly if it makes the traffic move more
freely.

Why would it, when the government won't spend money to improve roads,
but do spend money to make them worse? Congestion has increased
massively in the last ten years, while traffic has increased little...
it's not our fault, and 'congestion charges' are just another excuse
to levy another tax on us.

I mean is it fairer to tax someone extra for working hard and contributing
to the economy

No. So why do you want to tax tax-slaves who are merely trying to get
to work to pay our huge tax bills?

It always amazes me how the public are willing to stomach taxes like income
tax and NI, but go mental at the things they actually have to pay like Poll
Tax, Fuel Tax and Congestion charging.

We don't stomach them: but, as the government is aware, there's a big
difference between them stealing money from you through your employer,
and stealing money from you directly in this way. I never see the
income tax money in my bank account, so it's less directly annoying
than having to physically pay them money... and money that's already
been taxed at 40%, at that.

'Tax and spend' is all that Labour know how to do, and they'll use any
excuse to do that. The people who believe that taxing motorists will
actually reduce congestion are merely their 'useful idiots'.

Mark