| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| starmekitten |
Posted - 02/06/2007 : 09:51:12
quote:
Sarah Kennedy was talking about this proposed car tax scheme on Radio 2. Apparently there is only one month left to register your objection to the 'Pay As You Go' road tax.
The petition is on the 10 Downing St website but they didn't tell
anybody about it. Therefore at the time of Sarah's comments only 250,000 people had signed it and 750,000 signatures are required for the government to at least take any notice.
Once you've given your details (you don't have to give your full
address, just house number and postcode will do), they will send you an email with a link in it. Once you click on that link, you'll have signed the petition.
The government's proposal to introduce road pricing will mean you
having to purchase a tracking device for your car and paying a monthly bill to use it.
The tracking device will cost about £200 and in a recent study by
the BBC, the lowest monthly bill was £28 for a rural florist and £194 for a delivery driver. A non working mother who used the car to take the kids to school paid £86 in one month.
On top of this massive increase in tax, you will be tracked. Somebody will know where you are at all times. They will also know how fast you have been going, so even if you accidentally creep over a speed limit in time you can probably expect a Notice of Intended Prosecution with your monthly bill.
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/traveltax/
As a non driver even I don't like this
Idiot. |
| 20 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| starmekitten |
Posted - 02/07/2007 : 09:44:59
quote:
Originally posted by darwin
You had a strike and there was no gasoline?? I think in the US we would have the National Guard (those that aren't in Iraq) on the streets making sure the gasoline flowed.
Those prices do seem steep
We had a petrol strike in September 2000. People got fed up with the ever rising price of petrol and they let everyone know about it. It was all fairly dramatic.
Idiot. |
| Homers_pet_monkey |
Posted - 02/07/2007 : 09:28:45
quote:
Originally posted by Newo
man Earth is turning into a planet of squealers. I´m inclined to sympathise with William Burroughs when he said Orwell's 1984 was naive and optimistic.
Perhaps if the temperatures keep rising nobody in England will want to stay indoors spying and ratting on their neighbours, I'm all on for global warming to save the country.
Here in Barcelona we got bigger fish to fry - all the trashcans have been fitted with microchips, quiet all you defeatists, we got a War on Improperly Placed Refuse to win.
--
Gravy boat! Stay in the now!
I'll be sure to watch where I dump my various waste when I am there.
 I'd walk her everyday, into a shady place
|
| remig |
Posted - 02/07/2007 : 08:12:53
Maybe the one who send mail-bombs in england signed this petition too... |
| Cheeseman1000 |
Posted - 02/07/2007 : 07:48:01
Oooh, we have some of those too.
I just signed the petition. Screw erosion of liberties, they want to charge me more tax after the amount they put on fuel? Americans always think we're joking when we say we pay 95-99p per litre of fuel.
The tracking thing is already kind of in place: if you want to go into Central London (and soon, a little further out) then you have to be registered and you'll be followed and charged. It's a fairly good, public-minded scheme actually. I'm not really a conspiracy theorist at all, but I'm fairly sure this is the bottom rung in terms of surveillance that actually goes on...
 Numberwang? |
| Newo |
Posted - 02/07/2007 : 07:27:24
man Earth is turning into a planet of squealers. I´m inclined to sympathise with William Burroughs when he said Orwell's 1984 was naive and optimistic.
Perhaps if the temperatures keep rising nobody in England will want to stay indoors spying and ratting on their neighbours, I'm all on for global warming to save the country.
Here in Barcelona we got bigger fish to fry - all the trashcans have been fitted with microchips, quiet all you defeatists, we got a War on Improperly Placed Refuse to win.
--
Gravy boat! Stay in the now! |
| Llamadance |
Posted - 02/07/2007 : 06:38:22
now you're talking, with remote triggers so you can strafe them from the comfort of your own home.
Scratching the surface without a purpose won't accomplish anything new
Upload your Frank photos here - fb.net gallery
|
| Homers_pet_monkey |
Posted - 02/07/2007 : 04:24:55
quote:
Originally posted by Llamadance
If somebody could find a way of preventing dog owners letting their dogs shit outside and leave it in the middle of the pavement, I'm all for cameras streaming.
Scratching the surface without a purpose won't accomplish anything new
Upload your Frank photos here - fb.net gallery
Guns attached to those cameras?
I'd walk her everyday, into a shady place
|
| Llamadance |
Posted - 02/07/2007 : 02:00:49
If somebody could find a way of preventing dog owners letting their dogs shit outside and leave it in the middle of the pavement, I'm all for cameras streaming.
I signed the car petition thing a while back. The worry about all of this is that it's an erosion of our freedoms in babysteps. Eventually we become used to it and it's then a small step to start using it for other ends, which we don't mind so much because we're already partly used to it. Not to mention that proposals unfairly penalise rural areas where public transport isn't nearly as accessible. I dunno, it seems ironic that it's a Labour government introducing this.
Scratching the surface without a purpose won't accomplish anything new
Upload your Frank photos here - fb.net gallery
|
| vilainde |
Posted - 02/07/2007 : 01:03:02
I didn't know people in the UK had a problem with getting their cars tracked. You already live in an Orwellian country anyway. The other day they showed on the news how you could pay a small monthly fee to get access to every video camera in your neighbourhood (I think it was in London), complete with an anonymous phone line to call if you witnessed your neighbour selling drugs or something. There, I found it:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/05/09/ncctv09.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/05/09/ixuknewsnew.html
<<In return for a package that includes footage from 12 security cameras, a police advice channel and an array of standard cable fare, the residents of Haberdasher Estate are expected to shop any yobs that they catch on camera.
They can alert the council and police through a CCTV hotline and an anonymous e-mail tip-off service. Or they can just watch the world go by.>>
That sounds way more fucked up to me than a tracking device on your car.
Denis
"Can you hear me? I aint got shit to say." |
| Steak n Sabre |
Posted - 02/06/2007 : 23:09:52
Just think of all the jobs created since you would need thousands of Techs to set-up, operate, monitor, and maintain all those devices. The Government isn't just going to trust the guys down at the tranny shop to fill out reports on your whereabouts, are they? Not to mention multiple layers of Administrators and Managers to oversee the project. It would suck all the fees and taxes collected back into itself like a black hole. What happens if you're driving along and their device fails? Do you just pull over and wait for the Geek Squad to install a new one straight away?
IIRC, every auto on the planet already has such a device installed when it's built. That would be the odometer. If all they want to do is collect tax on mileage, they can just read the odo. Why create such a monster instead of just adding a line on your yearly renewal 'Mileage Tax Due - $$$'
Tracking Device????
 What?... Me Worry???  |
| coastline |
Posted - 02/06/2007 : 17:01:56
With George Bush as our president, the gas will always flow. I'll give him that.
 Please pardon me, for these my wrongs. |
| darwin |
Posted - 02/06/2007 : 14:14:24
You had a strike and there was no gasoline?? I think in the US we would have the National Guard (those that aren't in Iraq) on the streets making sure the gasoline flowed.
Those prices do seem steep |
| starmekitten |
Posted - 02/06/2007 : 12:18:21
quote:
Originally posted by darwin
I would alright with it. Nothing wrong with people that use the roads paying for the rides. However, I would be concerned about the Big Brother aspects and it would be a regressive tax on lower income people. I would also want to be certain that companies are paying as well.
That's a lot of money though. The reason they're trying to do it this way I'd guess is because of the petrol strikes from a few years back. There was mayhem at the time, I wasn't too badly affected because I don't drive but I had to move from the south(ish) of England to north Wales on the train because there was no certainty that my dad could get petrol in Wales, even as a NHS worker. I used to go with friends so they could get petrol because I had NHS ID and key workers could get the little petrol that was allowed out of the depots.
This, however, is way too much money and a little creepy. It doesn't look at all well thought out.
Idiot. |
| Carl |
Posted - 02/06/2007 : 11:33:20
Dangerous driving is a serious problem, but this is a bit of a creepy measure to take. |
| Crispy Water |
Posted - 02/06/2007 : 11:20:47
Back on topic though, this sounds terrible to me. The comments of Erebus don't exactly sum up my opinion, but they're pretty close.
Nothing is ever something. |
| Crispy Water |
Posted - 02/06/2007 : 11:17:41
If they taxed gas to the point where it would pay for road repairs nobody would drive and all the palaces would quickly burn.
Nothing is ever something. |
| floop |
Posted - 02/06/2007 : 11:16:02
i do think that people who don't drive (starmekitten, carl) should have to pay the people who give them rides everywhere. at least chip in a dollar for gas every now and then |
| coastline |
Posted - 02/06/2007 : 11:08:00
Whatever happened to using gas taxes to charge drivers for exactly how much they drive?
Please pardon me, for these my wrongs. |
| Erebus |
Posted - 02/06/2007 : 10:52:01
quote:
Originally posted by darwin
I would also want to be certain that companies are paying as well.
Me too. Given how much more sturdily roads have to be built to accommodate large trucks than they would need to be for just four-wheelers, transport companies should pay for most of road construction costs. I realize that would just increase their cost of doing business and that those costs would be passed on to the consumers, but I would rather have taxes and costs be assigned directly according to their causes. That way the reassignment of costs would be done within the private sector, which I cannot help thinking would be more efficient than as it is done, by governmental agencies with little direct stake in doing it in a cost-effective manner. As it is, those who do less damage to roads, and even those who don't drive at all, subsidize road construction for the benefit of the heavy users. Pay as you go, I say.
|
| darwin |
Posted - 02/06/2007 : 10:01:45
I would alright with it. Nothing wrong with people that use the roads paying for the rides. However, I would be concerned about the Big Brother aspects and it would be a regressive tax on lower income people. I would also want to be certain that companies are paying as well. |
