In message , Roland
Perry writes

In message , at 15:26:22 on Tue, 30 Aug
2005, Paul Terry remarked:

My thoughts exactly. The OP was clutching at straws.

Eh? I have no idea whether the cost of car ownership is higher here
than the USA or not - I have no axe to grind either way!

I was merely pointing out, in the context of setting motoring expenses
against tax, that we have the MOT here, just as the American poster
said he has an annual auto inspection (the latter is generally only a
fraction of the cost of an MOT, incidentally).

Is the MOT a "tax", though?

I wouldn't have said so. It is, however an expense that can be set
against tax under certain circumstances (returning to the context of the
original point, once again).

--
Paul Terry

In message , at 17:00:20 on Tue, 30 Aug
2005, Paul Terry remarked:
Is the MOT a "tax", though?

I wouldn't have said so. It is, however an expense that can be set
against tax under certain circumstances (returning to the context of
the original point, once again).

The *original* point was the cost of motoring vs public transport.
--
Roland Perry

In message , Roland
Perry writes

In message , at 17:00:20 on Tue, 30 Aug
2005, Paul Terry remarked:

Is the MOT a "tax", though?

I wouldn't have said so. It is, however an expense that can be set
against tax under certain circumstances (returning to the context of
the original point, once again).

The *original* point was the cost of motoring vs public transport.

So neither the American who mentioned US vehicle inspections, or I who
mentioned MOTs, were right to think that these are related to the cost
of motoring?

Forgive me if I choose no longer to participate in this mind-numbing
pedantry, which appears to have lost the whole thrust of the point and
which has totally ignored what I wrote about the reasons for increased
use of public transport in London.

--
Paul Terry

In message , at 19:37:09 on Tue, 30 Aug
2005, Paul Terry remarked:
The *original* point was the cost of motoring vs public transport.

So neither the American who mentioned US vehicle inspections, or I who
mentioned MOTs, were right to think that these are related to the cost
of motoring?

They relate to the cost of motoring, but it was wrong for you to include
it in a list of "taxes imposed in the UK".
--
Roland Perry

"Paul Terry" wrote in message
...

So neither the American who mentioned US vehicle inspections, or I who
mentioned MOTs, were right to think that these are related to the cost
of motoring?

Forgive me if I choose no longer to participate in this mind-numbing
pedantry, which appears to have lost the whole thrust of the point and
which has totally ignored what I wrote about the reasons for increased
use of public transport in London.

Jeez, guys, take a deep breath, please. I'm almost sorry I posted this
thread.........................I didn't meant to start a war..........

In message , David Spiro
writes
Jeez, guys, take a deep breath, please. I'm almost sorry I posted this
thread.........................I didn't meant to start a war..........
Your name can't be George W. then.
--
Clive

"Clive" wrote in message
news
In message , David Spiro
writes
Jeez, guys, take a deep breath, please. I'm almost sorry I posted this
thread.........................I didn't meant to start a war..........
Your name can't be George W. then.

You know, immediately after I hit the "send" button, I felt the cold hand of
"Somebody is going to jump on this comment." grip me................;-)

In message , Paul Terry
writes
I was merely pointing out, in the context of setting motoring
expenses against tax, that we have the MOT here, just as the American
poster said he has an annual auto inspection (the latter is generally
fraction of the cost of an MOT, incidentally).
The last time I was in Merka, I asked about the MOT and was told that
cars were only checked for emissions, hence the lower cost?
--
Clive