Petrol Prices :angst:

[usxhe190]

deleted

[kopite]

I live in a small village and without a car I`d be screwed for everything. The public transport is dire.
ATM it takes me maybe 20 minutes to get to work. If I had to use public transport it would take closer to 2 hours.

I have no choice but to use my car but its getting more and more expensive to run with the price of fuel.

THe increases in fuel tax and car tax would be a bit more palletable if the roads I drive on every day got better but the only road works Ive seen lately seem to be to put bollards by the side of the road not to improve surfaces etc.

[kalniel]

I'm in the same situation as you kopite, only it takes me an hour by car each way.

[switchmode]

I think that its just any government is taking as much as they can, for anything and they know we as a population can do nothing about it.

If we can buy cars that are run on any other fule electric, renuable bio fules whatever they are going to switch to road pricing and if they can use fule tax, road fund, road priceing and VAT and any other thing they can dream up you will pay that as well.

When any government is spending more of our income than we can have are they working for our benefit or we working for thiers ?

[SilentDeath]

Im still trying to work out how buses... my local bus service can charge £3 for a journey into town and back... its not even 4 miles!
also considering that they dont pay VAT on fuel. The same journey would cost me and my 1.5tonne, 18mpg car only £1.30 (where it would cost most people 80p or so...?)


So why should I sit on a crowded bus full of dirty chavs..?

[switchmode]

Im still trying to work out how buses... my local bus service can charge £3 for a journey into town and back... its not even 4 miles!
also considering that they dont pay VAT on fuel. The same journey would cost me and my 1.5tonne, 18mpg car only £1.30 (where it would cost most people 80p or so...?)


So why should I sit on a crowded bus full of dirty chavs..?

Only 18 MPG ? you need to change your motor

Bus co has a driver, office admin, capital costs another exes plus a profit to make so like everything its going to be expensive. Your costs are more than just fule are they not ?

But if a lot of people on the bus it sounds a lot if you have 30 people all paying £3 thats £90 for the round trip.

[schmunk]

switchmode - FUEL

[dangel]

Perhaps with a bit more money (raised by fuel duty) the rail network can be expanded to provide greater capacity for both freight and passengers

I've never claimed it was a bullet proof fix everything solution - that doesn't exist and it'd be wrong to expect one. But likewise it's wrong to dismiss things that could make a small difference only on the grounds they aren't 100% perfect.

Dimissed because it doesn't work - period. It doesn't matter how expensive you make it - people have no choice but to drive (unless overnight our government has suddenly decided to invest all that cash in transport and I missed it). I do car share - but there's no incentive to do so in reality (e.g. park and ride charge per person not per car). The reality is there are no alternatives for those outside cities, the rail network is crumbling and there really isn't any investment in transport to speak of. We are (to quote the technical term) "in the ****".

[Nickg]

damn i paid £1.179 per litre the other day at texaco, doesnt help that i have to run 97 Ron Super petrol:/ but i felt dirty handing the cash over1

[switchmode]

[QUOTE=schmunk;1374511]switchmode - FUEL[/QUOTE

Spelling police I realised it was wrong but I don't care about spelling anymore I think most people got the idea so I DONT CARE , I DONT CARE I sticking to that.

[kalniel]

Dimissed because it doesn't work - period. It doesn't matter how expensive you make it - people have no choice but to drive

If people have no choice but to drive then how come our passenger trains are so full as you say? There is clearly demand for increasing rail capacity, and if that demand were fulfilled there would be less people travelling by car.

And what's wrong with lowering the tax people pay every year just for owning a car that they drive when needs must and instead putting some of that onto fuel duty? If one can clearly show that everyone in the countryside is suddenly going to starve to death because of their increased costs even after they use more fuel economic cars/car share etc. then just subsidise fuel sold at rural pumps and add a premium to city ones.

[schmunk]

switchmode - FUEL

Spelling police I realised it was wrong but I don't care about spelling anymore I think most people got the idea so I DONT CARE , I DONT CARE I sticking to that.

Then you are a fule.

[dangel]

If people have no choice but to drive then how come our passenger trains are so full as you say? There is clearly demand for increasing rail capacity, and if that demand were fulfilled there would be less people travelling by car. .

Thought you'd nodded off I'm sorry but you're missing the point - you need to think bigger than taxation as a solution: provide alternatives, invest in transport and (lord above) integrate transport systems. There's clearly a demand for increasing transport capacity full stop - or would you argue that the demand for road capacity hasn't increased by the same or larger rate? Of course not - so what's the debate here? I don't disagree with taxation if the money is used well, but i'd argue that the opposite is true when it comes to fuel duty which is (in the main) used to fund anything but any form of transport.

Are we actually going anywhere here? Doesn't feel like it!

[Nickg]

or tax someone else more to make up the deficit.

For example, the employers who are choosing to locate in city centers, or worse, /industrial parks that do not have public transport links in place?

[switchmode]

Then you are a fule.

Very good point taken

[kalniel]

Thought you'd nodded off I'm sorry but you're missing the point - you need to think bigger than taxation as a solution: provide alternatives, invest in transport and (lord above) integrate transport systems. There's clearly a demand for increasing transport capacity full stop - or would you argue that the demand for road capacity hasn't increased by the same or larger rate? Of course not - so what's the debate here? I don't disagree with taxation if the money is used well, but i'd argue that the opposite is true when it comes to fuel duty which is (in the main) used to fund anything but any form of transport.

Are we actually going anywhere here? Doesn't feel like it!

I agree with you that there is a demand for increasing transport capacity in general, and I'm glad you agree that taxation is ok if used well.

So, we agree that money needs to be found to increase transport capacity (in all it's forms) - I'm suggesting that it's much better to raise that money through fuel duty than through an increase in static taxes that everyone pays regardless of usage. Alternatives and so on are great, but they still need to be funded.

Are we going somewhere.. well hopefully - I've identified that we're in agreement in several areas. I guess my next question should be: If you don't think fuel duty should be used to fund increasing transport capacity, what should, and why?