Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Viral_Jim]

I'd agree. The days of partitioning off "pots" of tax revenue for specific purposes are long gone. The only arguable exception to this should be a funded state pension. But unless they discover diamonds under the Chilterns, we'll never afford that.

Motorists get very protective over "road tax" (myself included when bumping over potholes in my £400 car that costs £300 to tax). However there's no reason to treat it differently to taxes raised on alcohol, fags or income.

We all make choices around our taxable earnings and what we spend these earnings on. The government choose to tax some of those things to a greater or lesser degree. To distinguish one area of expenditure from another is arbitrary.

[Entwood]

Lizzie, I think you have missed the point. The NHS, Education and Security should be funded from GENERAL taxati9on, the honest way, instead of sneaky virement from motoring taxes. We were promised that the bulk of the motoring taxes, if not all, would be ring-fenced for transport issues - roads, bridges and repairs, etc. We never signed up for sneaky!
Motorists pay over £50,000,000,000 (NO, that ain't 50 billion - I'm English!) annually, so there is plenty of money available to build bridges, new roads
This is why people instinctively know that this and all the other things that they are not doing for us is WRONG and feel let down, apart from the expected broken promises of politicians.
Have you ever met an honest one?
Yes, it would obviously lead to an increase in general taxation, but at least it will be clear and transparent.....

Ron.

Vehicles cause pollution, which causes illness, so vehicles contribute to the cost of the NHS, longer health care for those seriously affected, and hospices for those who are dying from pollution related ilnesses.

One short answer to your "only for the roads" argument.

[Bigron]

Lizzie, it ISN'T being "spent where it is neede", hence the state of our roads and the need extort money from us to pay for bridges that we have already bought. That is why we feel cheated.
Nige, I have argued the case on here before about how non-polluting cars are nowadays, so I won't go into it again, but maybe one day over a beer?
Ron.

[Nick W]

I'd agree. The days of partitioning off "pots" of tax revenue for specific purposes are long gone. The only arguable exception to this should be a funded state pension. But unless they discover diamonds under the Chilterns, we'll never afford that.

Motorists get very protective over "road tax" (myself included when bumping over potholes in my £400 car that costs £300 to tax). However there's no reason to treat it differently to taxes raised on alcohol, fags or income.

We all make choices around our taxable earnings and what we spend these earnings on. The government choose to tax some of those things to a greater or lesser degree. To distinguish one area of expenditure from another is arbitrary.

Governments have never partitioned revenue for specific purposes: it all goes into one big pot, and whoever grabs first gets to spend it. That's why there are creatively named taxes like Road Fund Licence: in the mid twenties there was a sudden large increase in the number of cars on the roads, which was seen as another income stream - tax the cars, and make their drivers buy licences. Hint(or state/lie) that it's to improve the roads that you'll be driving your shiny new car on, and most people won't be quite so unhappy to pay the tax. Calling our sales-tax VAT is a similar scam.


Taxes are also used in half-witted attempts at social engineering, but let's not go there as I think we're already ranting!

[Mister Rog]

The promise to scrap the Severn Bridge toll's have forced me to have rethink over who to mark my cross over in a few days time.

                                                                              alfie

So you would base your whole Brexit management strategy decision on who is promising to scrap a toll over which they have no influence?

Astounding

Your policy voting should have been done at the May ballot. The current status quo cannot and will not be changed until the subsequent general election, 3.5 years AFTER we leave the EU. This is in order to ensure a solid foundation for an autonomous UK. Anyone who tries to tell you otherwise is simply blowing smoke up the arse of anyone who will listen...

  Major future course of action based on a relatively minor and unrelated issue.

[Viral_Jim]

Lizzie, it ISN'T being "spent where it is neede", hence the state of our roads and the need extort money from us to pay for bridges that we have already bought. That is why we feel cheated.

What do you mean pay for bridges that have already been paid for?

The government used some tax money to build a bridge. If you want to use that bridge, get your hand in your pocket. It's simple. Creating pots of money is arbitrary. Only the terminally gullible would believe we can spend 100% of VED on roads at the expense of other government expenditure. If you don't want to give the government additional revenue, don't drink, don't smoke and don't drive on toll roads, buy a £0 to tax diseasel fiesta and Put your money into a pension/ISA instead, the choice really is yours.

As a nation we can only spend the money once.  Like it or not, our tax revenue gets spent on our population, much of it rapidly aging, in the form of benefits (an ever increasing state pension), social care and NHS spending, etc etc. Corporate welfare is also a vast bill, if you don't like it, vote for a party that will abolish it.

[Bigron]

Clarification, jimmy: to pay for bridges that have yet to be built elswhere, by tolls on existing ones - which we already own! Please note, the government do not have any money of their own; guess where it comes from?
And before Churchill vired it off in c1935, the Road Fund Licence was EXACTLY that - monies collected and ring-fenced for roads.....

Ron.

[Doctor Gollum]

Bridges are generally built and paid for privately. The tolls repay any loans and then the profit goes on ongoing maintenance and private shareholders.

Fact of life, get over it and move on

[alfie]

So,a few of us don't mind paying toll's for using bridges, don't let the government know that as they will take it to include the rest of the motorway network.
 My son use's the bridge,s 5 days a week,to get to work in Avonmouth, £65 a week.
                                                                    Alfie
 

[Doctor Gollum]

So,a few of us don't mind paying toll's for using bridges, don't let the government know that as they will take it to include the rest of the motorway network.
 My son use's the bridge,s 5 days a week,to get to work in Avonmouth, £65 a week.
                                                                    Alfie

That's presumably a conscious decision...

If the cost of the journey, ie tolls and fuel are prohibitive, which seems to be what you're suggesting, then perhaps he might be better off moving there or using a B+B

Toll roads and bridges are privately owned and run for profit. Sod all to do with the government. This concept dates back to Medieval times, if not before.

The only exception would be congestion or emission charges, and these get paid directly to the Local Authority, not central government

You'll be suggesting that people should vote Lib Dem because they want to legalise* cannabis

*Seeing as it is already decriminalised to a degree, this is a moot point full of hot air and nowt else, and certainly will do nothing for ensuring the stability of the future of the UK pre and post Brexit. That said, it's less damaging than Kapitan Corbyns' comedy sketch...

[alfie]

My travels to his depot in avonmouth to work as a HGV driver as the payrates OVER the bridge is much higher than one can expect to earn West of the crossing,and yes he did rent flat at Severn Beach,but lost that to redelopmemt.
                                                                                                   alfie

[Bigron]

We are never going to agree on this, DG; but that doesn't mean that I hate you!
However, I do object to the fact, as you rightly state, that bridges (and part of the M6) were funded by private enterprise instead of out of the exhorbitant taxes from motorists - it's what we paid for.

Ron.

[Kevin Wood]

Conclusion: Promises from politicians, regardless of party, are only useful if they are printed on loo roll.

[Mister Rog]

For anyone interested, take a read about the Rebecca Riots in Wales. In particular the last paragraph of the "History" section.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebecca_Riots

[Lizzie Zoom]

Conclusion: Promises from politicians, regardless of party, are only useful if they are printed on loo roll.

.....and I would add that is because the general public expect everything for nothing, or at least as cheap as possible.  The government can only use our money for running this great country of ours, but all of us have our "pet projects" , our favourite wishes of where the money is spent.  We all want this and that department / area / region to get special treatment and get the extra cash. But if project Y gets extra, X will get less. Some people are left highly satisfied, whilst others are left angry and moaning about the government.

Frankly, and this is when my Conservatism comes out, if it takes Privatiisation to build/ rebuild the roads and railways, so be it. I know many will not agree, but I do not care. If we can get private business to build our infrastructure as has been the case throughout history and develop it then great!  The roads, railways, and all industry was built with PRIVATE money and made worldwide success.  After British Railways came into being in 1948 those of us around just saw a decline in the railways as the government of the day found other ways to spend limited funds on more important projects (like the NHS).

So before too many people talk of renationisation of everything, spare a thought to what has happened in history.  Roads are in the same breath ; let private companies build the bridges, tunnels and roads as they do in the USA and let us pay tolls instead of Vehicle Excise Duty.  If that is what it takes to avoid ever increasing road congestion with pot holes everywhere, let's do it