Re: April the 1st has come early : Tue Oct 30, 2012 8:07 pm  

DaveO wrote: Of course its a joke and by the way the idea was to include major trunk roads so your A49 route would not be allowed either. Know of any B road routes from Wigan to Runcorn? The A49 is not a trunk road. You are assuming all A roads are trunk roads, this is not the case. http://www.roadsuk.com/documents/trunk_road_map.pdf

DaveO wrote: Of course its a joke and by the way the idea was to include major trunk roads so your A49 route would not be allowed either. Know of any B road routes from Wigan to Runcorn? The A49 is not a trunk road. You are assuming all A roads are trunk roads, this is not the case. http://www.roadsuk.com/documents/trunk_road_map.pdf

Re: April the 1st has come early : Tue Oct 30, 2012 8:35 pm  

Him wrote:

Then they have several options. They can raise car tax across the board. They can raise fuel duty. Or they can raise income tax and corporation tax.
I know which I'd prefer and believe is fairest. But all 3 of those options are fairer than introducing a 2-tier system that penalises certain people and restricts others.

Simply avoiding the shortfall in VED isn't what's driving this proposal, I wish I knew what was but it certainly isn't that.

To mitigate the shortfall requires a simple raising of VED rates, taking into account the (fairly predictable) numbers of "cleaner" vehicles that will be in the vehicle parc. Keep the cleaner bands low and use the higher-polluting bands to make up the shortfall. It's not fooking rocket science.

The introduction of the proposed scheme would result in a dog's breakfast. How could anyone predict who would use what roads when? Commensurately, how would they then be able to predict future revenues?

It's a balls-up of a smokescreen to take everyone's eyes off just how much these chancers and fooking-up the nation

Re: April the 1st has come early : Tue Oct 30, 2012 11:17 pm  

Why not start taxing aviation fuel? You land here with empty tanks then you've got to pay to get anywhere else.

Re: April the 1st has come early : Wed Oct 31, 2012 3:54 am  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

The amount the Treasury rakes in from motor vehicles is obscene. Tax on fuel is just one part of it and that is bad enough but people seem to overllok they also then charge 20% VAT on top including VAT on tax! Us taxpaying mugs of course already paying this extrotion out of what is laughably called our "taxed income". Add in road tax, add in the tax and NI that they take from the people employed to stock and sell the stuff, why they even have the cheek to charge tax on my insurance premium

Why is it laughably called our taxed income?

It's our income, and it's taxed, so surely 'Our accurately named taxed income' would be more accurate.


And to whoever it was that commented on one of my scooter's lack of fuel economy - it's been tuned for high power and minimum reliability.

Re: April the 1st has come early : Wed Oct 31, 2012 8:37 am  

Scooter Nik wrote:

lack of fuel economy - it's been tuned for high power and minimum reliability.

It was me, sounds familiar, took the truck to get a remap ans told "we can do x and get you an extra 80 miles out of a tank of fuel, or do y and get you and extra 40bhp", no prizes for which one I went with.

Re: April the 1st has come early : Wed Oct 31, 2012 10:00 am  

Standee wrote:

It was me, sounds familiar, took the truck to get a remap ans told "we can do x and get you an extra 80 miles out of a tank of fuel, or do y and get you and extra 40bhp", no prizes for which one I went with.

A good remap should do both. Mine gave me an extra 35 ps, improved torque and improved fuel economy

Re: April the 1st has come early : Wed Oct 31, 2012 10:27 am  

Scooter Nik wrote:

Why is it laughably called our taxed income?

It's our income, and it's taxed, so surely 'Our accurately named taxed income' would be more accurate.

...

Well, as I obviously need to spell it out, it would be (especially if you want to use it to buy fuel) much more accurately described as "our already partially taxed but which is about to be taxed a shedload more" income.

You may say there's a distinction between the tax already paid on earnings, and the further tax paid when the net is spent on fuel, and as a matter of semantics of course there is, but in real life if the fuel purchaser earned (say) £200 gross and £150 ends up straight back in the Treasury, the fact he kept a bit of the tax in his pocket for seven minutes on his way home till he filled his motor up is not really of much financial help to him.

It's not just that, though, since governments have gone out of their way to impose hundreds of stealth taxes all over the place, in addition to the biggies on fuel, fags, booze, and continue to do so. Including tax on tax. And the not-so-stealth tax, council tax.

In reality, the tax you pay on your income is not the whole truth. It is little more than a weak starting point for "negotiations", where you have a bit of choice to a limited point, but no bargaining power.

If you wanted to call it "preliminarily taxed income" then I'd go along with that, but it is just the first instalment.

Re: April the 1st has come early : Wed Oct 31, 2012 1:15 pm  

cod'ead wrote:

A good remap should do both. Mine gave me an extra 35 ps, improved torque and improved fuel economy

On what vehicle though?

Re: April the 1st has come early : Wed Oct 31, 2012 5:43 pm  

Standee wrote:

On what vehicle though?

2.0l diesel Passat 4Motion.

It doesn't necessarily follow that an increase in power leads directly to a fuel penalty, although much is down to how the vehicle is driven and the prevailing conditions. If a driver decides to use the extra power available to get to his destination faster, there will be a fuel penalty. If however he uses the extra power to prevent the engine labouring, he'll get a smoother and (usually) more economic return. I rarely go above 2000rpm and have returned up to 54mpg on a run - not bad for a 4WD

Re: April the 1st has come early : Wed Oct 31, 2012 8:51 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

:?

Well, as I obviously need to spell it out, it would be (especially if you want to use it to buy fuel) much more accurately described as "our already partially taxed but which is about to be taxed a shedload more" income.

You may say there's a distinction between the tax already paid on earnings, and the further tax paid when the net is spent on fuel, and as a matter of semantics of course there is, but in real life if the fuel purchaser earned (say) £200 gross and £150 ends up straight back in the Treasury, the fact he kept a bit of the tax in his pocket for seven minutes on his way home till he filled his motor up is not really of much financial help to him.

It's not just that, though, since governments have gone out of their way to impose hundreds of stealth taxes all over the place, in addition to the biggies on fuel, fags, booze, and continue to do so. Including tax on tax. And the not-so-stealth tax, council tax.

In reality, the tax you pay on your income is not the whole truth. It is little more than a weak starting point for "negotiations", where you have a bit of choice to a limited point, but no bargaining power.

If you wanted to call it "preliminarily taxed income" then I'd go along with that, but it is just the first instalment.

Yes, you obviously do need to spell it out as you've failed so far...

It's not - as you strangely put it - 'laughably called'. It actually is called that as that's what it is; money that can (and will) be taxed further.

It's not difficult to understand.