h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

They will still nuke you in the wallet.

Witness recent improvements on the East Coast line. Trains improved, better punctuality, passenger numbers increase enormously.

The result? Higher fares. Make absolutely no mistake, the government is ONLY out to nail everyone at every opportunity when they attempt to travel by any means. Everyone WILL pay through the nose by whatever form of transport thay try and use.

"This "Scheme" is nothing more than a naked and rabid attack on car users to extort cash from them."

So you say. I dont see it that way at all, I see this as being a radical idea to look at the problems caused by our own personal vehicular transportation.

It ias pretty much the only radical policy idea to have come out of new Labour in the last 10 years. And I applaud it.

I am a driver and I use my car a fair bit, even though I know it is a "bad" thing to do so. The truth is even if fuel duty and prices doubled I probably owuld not use my car any less, I am much more likely to cut down on other things. The only things that are going to make me use my car less is massivly improved public transport or it becoming prohibitivly expensive.

I agree that it is important to improve public transport, and the system in the UK is awful. But the answer is nationalisation and regulation. "SWL" and "Doctor is In" surely these kind of leftest policies are things you detest in government?

Like it or lump it all of us in the developed world are gonna have to use our cars less if we want to have any chance of doing anything aobut global warming. And unless the likes of me, SWL and the Doc are suddenly going to change our tunes and willingly give up our cars then the truth is we are going to have to be forced.

Whether or not this scheme will do the trick I dunno, but the truth is that it will take this or something like it to make us use our cars less.

Also the idea is soo in its infancy that it is crazy to pick wholes in a "generalised" idea on the basic of specifics that we dont know how they will be effected.

For example, Who is to say that disabled people wont get a full or partial exemption? That business on legitimate business will not be able to have a claw back scheme etc, etc....

And is the idea that you pay according to your usage of the road system actually that unfair? Lets just say (and I know this is a bit pie in the sky, but run with me) this ended up being entirely revenue neutral, and the exact same amount of vehicle duty ended up being paid as currently is but the distribution changed. I cannot see how that would actually be inherantly unfair.

Surely those driving the most, and on the busiest road ought to pay more than someone who uses their car once a week to go to the local LIDL?

Doesn't fuel duty tax those that use their cars the most?

"Doesn't fuel duty tax those that use their cars the most?"

My thought exactly - if you want to gather taxes to help develop transport systems by taxing those who use the roads the most (and co-incidentally - those who pollute the most) why bother going to all the expense of setting up a _major_ IT system to track every single vehicle in the country, calculate their mileage, bill them, collect the money, deal with non-payments, register changes in vehicle ownership, etc. when all you _really_ need to do is bung an extra 10p on a litre of petrol.

"I am a driver and I use my car a fair bit, even though I know it is a "bad" thing to do so"

Oh, for gods sake it is NOT a "Bad" thing to do to drive your car. Since when have you been brainwashed into that idea? Yes Yes, we all know about "Global Warming", and we all know that we are evil for even thinking of using energy. Suitable punishment will of course be meted out to people who dare to think of the old days when you could go for a drive down to the coast without being blamed for global destruction.

Using a car is NOT bad - it never was and never will be. What IS bad, is the way we are all being conned into thinking it IS bad by a morally bankrupt government who is only using the "Green" ruse to bleed the population of cash.

Yes, measures will need to be taken to do something about emissions on a GLOBAL basis by all countries - but what we are talking about here on road usage charges is a naked attempt to simply empty your wallet by any means possible.

So *you* say once again Doc.

Ok Doc, let me re prase that. Polluting is a "bad" thing. One of the biggest polluting things most of us do is using our cars. If we dont start polluting less then very bad things are going to happen.

Or do you think it is just a big bad conspiracy to pretend global warning is happening to wring some cash out of you? My god man you are deluded.

And to think you claim you were once a union rep. I feel for whoever your members were, must of been bad having such a me, me ,me attitude from you.

I dont want to use my car less, but I recognise I probably should. And only action that pretty well forces me to do so is gonna work. I reckon there are loads of people in similar boats.

Answer is try to force us simple as that.

Will this policy do this? I dont know, but it seems to me that it is an attempt.

I'm against polluting cars on the basis that pollution is just unnecessary. Same with energy efficiency and conservation. Trying to tie them in with Global Warming is a joke though. GW is coming and there's SFA we can do about it.

What is truly cynical is watching govt ministers who didn't give a flying fig about "green issues" ten years ago, suddenly start running around filling their gussets at the opportunity to get more tax.

Cars cause pollution? Tax them
Carrier bags are bad? Tax them
CFCs are bad? Tax them. No, ban them. No,tax them. No, ban them.
Smoking is bad? Tax them. Ban them. Tax them and ban them.
Cars cause congestion? Ban them Hold on, can't do that. Tax them again.
There's a water shortage 'cos of leaky pipes? Tax them.
Holidaymakers cause air pollution? Tax them

There's a certain pattern developing. Is the only way to change behaviour to tax people? Is living in the UK to be a preserve of the rich?

As the Doc pointed out earlier, they finally got their fingers out with the trains and usage shot through the roof. The response to increased demand isn't to increase supply but to increase cost, specifically at peak times when people need to travel. So that forces everyone back into their cars. But the example is there for all to see. If decent train services are available, people will use them. But as the trains are a commercial concern, the operators will set the price as high as the market can bear whilst spending the barest minimum and preserving shareholder dividends.

So yes, re-nationalise the trains and buses. They are an essential part of the infrastructure upon which the entire economy depends. I'd be uncomfortable throwing billions at commercial companies whose first instinct is to spend as little as possible and pocket the rest.

>Is the only way to change behaviour to tax people?

Yup, I think so. How else will you force people to reconsider options when they've been happily doing something for the last twenty years? Appeal to their better natures?

Why not offer a better, more convenient alternative?

This govt doesn't seem to care a whit about creation of services. Far easier to make the alternatives to the one they want us to choose unpalatable and unaffordable.

It's all stick and no carrot.

Public transport is such rubbish! I've used public transport all of my working life (that's 22 years) and this month I'm sitting my driving test. If I pass, you can bet your bottom dollar the trains won't see me for dust, I'm going to drive to work.

I'm so sick of standing on cold platforms (only a small shelter full of smokers) waiting for a late train that's so overcrowded the conductor can't get round (nowherre to buy a ticket on several stations on my local line) so then having to stand in a queue to buy a ticket from another conductor when I get to Birmingham. I only get a seat cos I use one of the first stations on the route.

I've been using my current line for ten years now and the service is much worse than it used to be. Funnily enough the tickets are substantially more expensive.

So I don't care if they charge me through the roof - I'll still drive to work. At least my employer provides free parking.

But I agree (with someone, sorry, I'm already in mid-flow here and I can't remember who said it) that adding to fuel costs would spread increased costs more fairly - the less you use the less you pay. My car is a 1.4L so should be fairly economical.

Deb

"And to think you claim you were once a union rep. I feel for whoever your members were, must of been bad having such a me, me ,me attitude from you"

You sad little man.

Yes, I was a union rep and an extemely good one for several years, and an area rep and I served my members to the best of my ability - that is to say, I managed to get our way without having once to resort to taking my members out of the door.

Personal insults from somebody who knows nothing about me simply bounce off. But I ask you again to think for yourself if you are capable. You, and the population are being played. Like a violin. You are being told what to think, and you are buying it. For bobs sake, think man - for yourself if you can and you will see the glaring truth. It is MONEY. The government want ours and your money, and they will stop at nothing until they convince you they are correct.

Governments seem to be dazzled by high-tech solutions. I can just see them at the PowerPoint presentations by slick salesmen using laser pointers convincing them that this is "cutting edge", "innovatory" "world-leading".

"Buy this Air Traffic Control system, it's so advanced we've not taken it out of the box yet. Why not buy this whizz-bang computer system for the NHS. For only the cost of several hospitals you'll be able to sit in your executive chair and see how Mrs Smiths colostomy operation is going. Don't settle for ordinary ID cards, buy our spiffing shiny plastic ones, biometric and by-the-billion."

"New, for the control-freak minister who has everything, a CCTV on every street corner with advanced state-of-the-art facial recognition programmes that can spot Socialists going into a Swingers Club in 3 seconds"

And now we've got this pay-per-mile nonsense. A black box in every car and horrendously, ludicrously complex tracking and billing systems.

Re black boxes in cars - we all know if we are honest that as soon as they are introduced. some geezer will find a way to circumvent them. I for one, will be first in nthe queue.

What's the chances of this going to a referendum?

Edinburgh cooncillers got a nasty fleg when they planned congestion charges. They had the money spent before they had it and had began blocking off roads in readiness. Then there was a "No" vote. That pi$$ed on their cornflakes. I think the changes recently made to Princes St were an act of revenge.

Referendum? Is that a delegated anal probing?

I'll be gone now.

Actually, that's quite an apt description.

This is quite interesting and gets beyond the tabloid bad science.

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006/05/spy-in-euro-sky.html

>This is quite interesting and gets beyond the tabloid bad science.<

It is interesting. Just out of curiosoty, have you heard about anyone proposing anything along these lines in the US? I'm not aware of it if they have, but that doen't mean much. I'm making inquiries of a friend who might be more up on such things. At the moment, I'm hoping you'll keep it all over on your side of the bloody pond. Seems as though bit by bit we just keep inching closer and closer to 1984 and Big Brother. How long will it be before tracking chips are implanted in everyone at birth?

I *really* can't see this getting any airplay in the States. Well, maybe California . You've got a healthy disregard for overbearing government and this idea drives a horse & cart (tax exempt) through the notion of civil liberties.

Give it a week or so and they'll shift tack and say there's a counter-terrorism angle and it's *essential* in the "War on Terror".