Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London. |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
The effects of a road congestion tax
Ian Smith wrote:
"Dave Arquati" wrote in message ... Mark wrote: "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. Actually traffic increased by 15.1% from 1991 to 2001, from 411.6 - 473.7 bn vehicle kilometres (figure for all vehicles, source: DfT). Unfortunately comparative congestion figures are harder to find. On the other hand, the number of journeys made has not increased particularly; it's just that journeys are becoming longer and a number of journeys previously performed by foot or cycle have been transferred to the car, resulting in the increase in vehicle km. 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. Theoretically it would make more sense to tax based on what resources need to be limited, rather than you working harder and contributing more to the economy. I think that's what Frank was saying. '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 Taxing motorists in the right way would make things fairer. Usage-based taxation is a step in the right direction; environmental tax reform would probably be the right direction. (See http://www.green-innovations.asn.au/ecotax.htm) Such a system could naturally resolve congestion and restore some sense of balance in the transport system. -- Dave Arquati Imperial College, SW7 We don't need another tax to add to our vastly complicated tax system. The only fair tax is on income (single % rate for all, varied by annual public referendum). All other taxes should be abolished. Only then would all of us (rich and poor) see the true cost of government, and vote accordingly. The idea of ETR isn't to add a tax, it's to replace all of the existing ones with ones based around what causes unsustainable damage to the environment. If congestion is a problem, let the free market influence people to find alternative routes and modes of transport. If polluting the environment is a problem, then legislate targets for fuel economy and emissions at manufacture, like they do in the USA (albeit non-aggressively). A free market for transport is impossible under the current system where modes are treated separately by the government when proposing new schemes, and where the current cost-benefit analysis model is extremely flawed, since many of the values used in them are applied to things which are essentially "not for sale". The current market is biased in favour of car travel so naturally a modal shift is occurring in that direction. Targets are a rather blunt instrument to apply directly to the industry; rather by using taxation to achieve targets, the true cost of environmental damage can be compensated for. I would also venture that the USA is hardly the best model for an environmentally sound system. I just don't think all problems can or should always be solved by government intervention. Reforming the tax system to be fully environmentally-based would (theoretically of course) shift sustainability in the right direction by market forces alone, without any further government intervention. It's only sensible to tax the use of resources which affect everyone. -- Dave Arquati Imperial College, SW7 |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was:Tube strike] | London Transport | |||
Road Hog Road Tax Cartoon. | London Transport | |||
'Mares promise to Tax School run Mums | London Transport | |||
New Tax Discs | London Transport | |||
Big car owners face tax hike | London Transport |