log in
register

“Road Tax” – Pay As You Go

  • Creator
    Topic
  • January 24, 2018 at 11:55 am #28067
    Canyon48

    Very interesting article here and I’m not 100% sure what I think about it.

    Eventually, I think we will all be driving electric vehicles, which produce 0 emissions (ignoring how the electricity was produced – but that’s not the point), this means we won’t pay VED, so the money must be raised somehow.

    I very much like the idea of charging more to those who drive more (particularly in congested areas and during peak hours), this should promote the use of public and active transport.

    However, there is a part of me that wonders if it is the right thing to do. Imagine the uproar if healthcare was charged on a pay as you go basis (charging those who need it the most – which I certainly don’t agree with). I suppose this raises a more philosophical question of whether we NEED to use roads at rush hour in congested areas or if we choose to use them.

    Personally, for me, it is would be a choice whether I sit in my car adding to the congestion or if I cycle.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42792813

  • Creator
    Topic
Viewing 11 replies - 16 through 26 (of 26 total)
1 2
  • Author
    Replies
  • January 25, 2018 at 6:10 pm #910709
    0
    atgni

    Both VED and simple 3rd party
    Both VED and simple 3rd party insurance should be on road fuel.

    January 25, 2018 at 4:49 pm #910707
    0
    Canyon48

    fenix wrote:

    fenix wrote:
    About 65% of the cost of petrol is tax anyway so the more miles you do in any type of petrol car the more tax you pay.

    Fair point. 

    fenix wrote:
    And yes BTBS does seem to be the resident Mr Angry round here.

    January 25, 2018 at 4:25 pm #910705
    0
    fenix

    About 65% of the cost of
    About 65% of the cost of petrol is tax anyway so the more miles you do in any type of petrol car the more tax you pay.

    And yes BTBS does seem to be the resident Mr Angry round here.

    January 25, 2018 at 11:36 am #910703
    0
    Anonymous

    I’m paying £305 on my car so

    I’m paying £305 on my car so I have more right to use the road than most of you.

     

    Joke.

    January 25, 2018 at 11:13 am #910701
    0
    Yrcm
    Duncann wrote:
    Yrcm wrote:
    the road (and possibly the civil liberties) lobby would squeal like stuck pigs if it was put forward as a serious proposal.

    It was – just over 10 years ago – and they did. Not just specific “lobbies” but large numbers of people:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_pricing_in_the_United_Kingdom#National_road_pricing_proposal_(2005-2007)

    That somehow passed me by, but its not surprising. The answer to congestion is always for someone else not to use their car, or to build more roads, neither of which work. We’ll have to wait until it all becomes so awful that people start to change their minds. Unless a good hard Brexit takes lots of traffic off the roads of course…

    January 25, 2018 at 10:58 am #910699
    0
    Dnnnnnn
    Yrcm wrote:
    the road (and possibly the civil liberties) lobby would squeal like stuck pigs if it was put forward as a serious proposal.

    It was – just over 10 years ago – and they did. Not just specific “lobbies” but large numbers of people:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_pricing_in_the_United_Kingdom#National_road_pricing_proposal_(2005-2007)

    January 25, 2018 at 10:45 am #910697
    0
    Yrcm

    The technology to make this

    The technology to make this happen already exists, and even if it was pitched so that it cost the average driver about the same as at present it would still have a powerful effect on behaviour. 10p is nothing but plastic bag use has plummeted.

    It would make people think more seriously about cycling and public transport, would make them more likely to combine multiple journeys into single ones where they could, and perhaps even not make unimportant journeys they might otherwise have made.

    The other thing it has the potential to do is monitor vehicle speed, so drivers would (shock horror) have to stick to speed limits everywhere.

    Certainly has the potential to make cycling safer and more normal / popular, but can imagine the road (and possibly the civil liberties) lobby would squeal like stuck pigs if it was put forward as a serious proposal.

    January 25, 2018 at 10:28 am #910695
    0
    Anonymous

    Leviathon, you utterly missed

    Leviathon, you utterly missed the point of the post, putting VED on the fuel would have been the fairest way for everyone and make people think to using their cars less often or even not hammering the accelerator pedal so much.

     I do/did very low miles hence I pollute less than someone in a zero rated combustion engined vehicle doing only circa 4500 miles a year based on my last 10 years, though haven’t driven at all since September.

    Average UK driver does roughly 9000 miles/year, even at 99gCO2/km that would mean they are producing twice the amount of pollution of a vehicle at 150g CO2/km doing 3000 miles yet paying zero emissions tax!

    With that system those who pollute the most pay the most, why is that so difficult for you to understand!

    January 24, 2018 at 6:12 pm #910693
    0
    Canyon48
    Leviathan wrote:
    BehindTheBikesheds wrote:
    The mistake was not changing to tax on the fuel to start with, so that even low emission vehicles get to pay.

    I found it massively angering that doing 3000 miles a year in my 151g /km co2s (officlal) meant I was paying a wedge for emissions tax yet some herbert in a 99g/km job who only had to drive about 4500 miles paid nowt and yet produced the same amount of pollution.

    This tax at fuel source could easily be passed onto electricty but oh no, it’ll be, you told us to go to Evs but now you’re taxing us again so there’d be an uproar, missing the point about gridlock and still the same number of knobbers crashing and killing/maiming.

    Fuck em, should be a simple tax that equates to about £150 per car per year for EVs, still wondering where all this electricty is going to come from and how much it’s going to cost to produce it, oh wait, nuclear at at a fuck ton because some twat in government promised a ridiculous rate to the leccy company for the next billion years! It’s far too cheap at the moment IMHO for the electricty but the batteries are extortionate and one of the reasons I won’t buy an EV because I simply cannot justify the cost.

    Also the only journeys I’d need a car for (well mostly) are to drive up to see the folks which is a 155 mile each way drive. There simply are no cars that can do that comfortably (and no I don’t want to stop halfway on my journey for a 45 minute break!) and are even within reach cost wise. The trains with a bike are a fucking pain in the arse and costs no less not take less time door to door.

    BTBS you seem to be ‘massively angry’ about many things. You don’t see why it is fair that someone else bought a less polluting vehicle and therefore pays less? So you picked a figure for this strawman’s mileage that seems to justify you ire; however if everyone bought less polluting vehicles or drove less then we would all benefit. Mr Herbert would say, Hard Cheese, you chose your 4×4 polar bear.

    Taxation is and always will be a means of social manipulation as well as a source of revenue for the government. I think duty on fuel would accurately reflect just who does the damage to our roads (HGVs) but would have the haulage companies howling, even though they would pass it back to supermarkets, etc. Top this off with some city congestion charges to discourage the lazy commuters and Bob’s your Uncle. Eventually we all pay, somehow.

    I was thinking you could have just bought a less polluting car in the first place 😛

    It’s highly likely that we will see the cost of the batteries fall as the industry pursues new technologies. I, personally, can’t wait to have an electric car. I only drive about 100 miles a week and rarely do trips of more than 20 miles, at least half my driving is sat in Bristol city centre in first (maybe second at a push) gear, poisoning the residents.

    I certainly agree on taxing HGV’s, having seen just how destructive they are to the roads. I also agree with a congestion charge, I’d very much like to see that in Bristol.

    January 24, 2018 at 5:11 pm #910691
    0
    Leviathan
    BehindTheBikesheds wrote:
    The mistake was not changing to tax on the fuel to start with, so that even low emission vehicles get to pay.

    I found it massively angering that doing 3000 miles a year in my 151g /km co2s (officlal) meant I was paying a wedge for emissions tax yet some herbert in a 99g/km job who only had to drive about 4500 miles paid nowt and yet produced the same amount of pollution.

    This tax at fuel source could easily be passed onto electricty but oh no, it’ll be, you told us to go to Evs but now you’re taxing us again so there’d be an uproar, missing the point about gridlock and still the same number of knobbers crashing and killing/maiming.

    Fuck em, should be a simple tax that equates to about £150 per car per year for EVs, still wondering where all this electricty is going to come from and how much it’s going to cost to produce it, oh wait, nuclear at at a fuck ton because some twat in government promised a ridiculous rate to the leccy company for the next billion years! It’s far too cheap at the moment IMHO for the electricty but the batteries are extortionate and one of the reasons I won’t buy an EV because I simply cannot justify the cost.

    Also the only journeys I’d need a car for (well mostly) are to drive up to see the folks which is a 155 mile each way drive. There simply are no cars that can do that comfortably (and no I don’t want to stop halfway on my journey for a 45 minute break!) and are even within reach cost wise. The trains with a bike are a fucking pain in the arse and costs no less not take less time door to door.

    BTBS you seem to be ‘massively angry’ about many things. You don’t see why it is fair that someone else bought a less polluting vehicle and therefore pays less? So you picked a figure for this strawman’s mileage that seems to justify you ire; however if everyone bought less polluting vehicles or drove less then we would all benefit. Mr Herbert would say, Hard Cheese, you chose your 4×4 polar bear.

    Taxation is and always will be a means of social manipulation as well as a source of revenue for the government. I think duty on fuel would accurately reflect just who does the damage to our roads (HGVs) but would have the haulage companies howling, even though they would pass it back to supermarkets, etc. Top this off with some city congestion charges to discourage the lazy commuters and Bob’s your Uncle. Eventually we all pay, somehow.

    January 24, 2018 at 4:20 pm #910689
    0
    Anonymous

    The mistake was not changing

    The mistake was not changing to tax on the fuel to start with, so that even low emission vehicles get to pay.

    I found it massively angering that doing 3000 miles a year in my 151g /km co2s (officlal) meant I was paying a wedge for emissions tax yet some herbert in a 99g/km job who only had to drive about 4500 miles paid nowt and yet produced the same amount of pollution.

    This tax at fuel source could easily be passed onto electricty but oh no, it’ll be, you told us to go to Evs but now you’re taxing us again so there’d be an uproar, missing the point about gridlock and still the same number of knobbers crashing and killing/maiming.

    Fuck em, should be a simple tax that equates to about £150 per car per year for EVs, still wondering where all this electricty is going to come from and how much it’s going to cost to produce it, oh wait, nuclear at at a fuck ton because some twat in government promised a ridiculous rate to the leccy company for the next billion years! It’s far too cheap at the moment IMHO for the electricty but the batteries are extortionate and one of the reasons I won’t buy an EV because I simply cannot justify the cost.

    Also the only journeys I’d need a car for (well mostly) are to drive up to see the folks which is a 155 mile each way drive. There simply are no cars that can do that comfortably (and no I don’t want to stop halfway on my journey for a 45 minute break!) and are even within reach cost wise. The trains with a bike are a fucking pain in the arse and costs no less not take less time door to door.

  • Author
    Replies
Viewing 11 replies - 16 through 26 (of 26 total)
1 2
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.