Thread
:
Higher congestion charge for thirsty cars
View Single Post
#
5
July 16th 06, 10:35 PM posted to uk.transport.london
[email protected]
external usenet poster
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Dec 2004
Posts: 28
Higher congestion charge for thirsty cars
wrote:
Neil Williams wrote:
John B wrote:
True. However, the fact that they'll contribute an extra £650-ish each
a year to TfL coffers is no bad thing - it partially addresses the
outrageous anomaly that Council Tax stops at Band H...
Why is that an outrageous anomaly? Such people don't throw away
substantially more rubbish, or use more other council services, than
those in lower bands.
If you want a local income tax you may as well do it properly, that
said.
Neil
Neil, your argument against banding is intellectually correct: a Band A
property does not inherently require less Council services than a Band
H property. That being so, why should there be any distinction based on
property value?
Moreover, why should there be a distinction based upon earnings either?
Does a high-earner necessarily use more Council services than a
low-earner?
I suppose the solution is to have a flat tax per person to represent
their use of council services. Now where have we heard that one?
Reply With Quote
[email protected]
View Public Profile
Find all posts by
[email protected]