Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 40

Thread: The war on the motorist continues

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Rutland
    Posts
    603
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Angry The war on the motorist continues

    The country’s first “workplace parking levy” will come into force in Nottingham in 2012 and is likely to be adopted by other councils.

    Under the scheme, any firm with 11 or more staff parking spaces will be charged £250 a year for each. That cost could rise to £350 within two years....

    Motorists to pay £250 tax for parking at work - Telegraph


    I fail to be surprised at the 'imaginative ideas' to raise tax! - What ever next? A tax on the air we breathe?
    Don't we pay too much tax as it is, like rising tax on fuel and rising year by year road tax?
    Vote BNP

  2. #2
    Major Sinic Guest

    Re: The war on the motorist continues

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicholas View Post
    The country’s first “workplace parking levy” will come into force in Nottingham in 2012 and is likely to be adopted by other councils.

    Under the scheme, any firm with 11 or more staff parking spaces will be charged £250 a year for each. That cost could rise to £350 within two years....

    Motorists to pay £250 tax for parking at work - Telegraph


    I fail to be surprised at the 'imaginative ideas' to raise tax! - What ever next? A tax on the air we breathe?
    Don't we pay too much tax as it is, like rising tax on fuel and rising year by year road tax?
    It may have passed you by, but for eight of the last thirteen years the Labour government ran a substantial budget deficit resulting in a national state debt of around £8b. Our international credit lines are all but exhausted and the interest we pay on our debt can only increase. For every four pounds the state spends, it borrows one. As a nation we are living beyond our means and it does not take a brilliant economist to realise that this is not sustainable.

    The only way the present government has any hope of achieving economic recovery is to stop borrowing and start repaying state debt, whilst endeavouring to contribute to an economic environment in which the private sector can increase wealth creation to the ultimate benefit of all. To do this it must both reduce public expenditure and increase the cash it receives in taxes. Neither measure is ever going to be popular with those who are going to be worse off as a result. Unpopularity of the essential measures does not alter the fact that there is no viable alternative. Whichever political party or movement is in power and whatever method we use to elect the government this is the unavoidable truth facing us.

  3. #3
    Midas Guest

    Re: The war on the motorist continues

    Whilst what Major Sinic says is quite right, I can see that there will be a huge number of challenges to this scheme, both verbal and I suspect legal, from businesses and from motoring associations based on a mix of it being yet another unfair tax and an infringement of a landowner's rights to do what he wishes on his own property. It's a move which might well also have unintended consequences if businesses cut down on staff parking places, driving more cars out to park in already overcrowded streets.

  4. #4
    soloman Guest

    Re: The war on the motorist continues

    Quote Originally Posted by Midas View Post
    Whilst what Major Sinic says is quite right, I can see that there will be a huge number of challenges to this scheme, both verbal and I suspect legal, from businesses and from motoring associations based on a mix of it being yet another unfair tax and an infringement of a landowner's rights to do what he wishes on his own property. It's a move which might well also have unintended consequences if businesses cut down on staff parking places, driving more cars out to park in already overcrowded streets.
    I hear what you say Midas and have some sympathy with the view expressed. However the other side of the coin is that the town in which my district council resides provides free parking spaces for staff. I don't consider that fair or reasonable at all, especially when the county council will only permit employees to park cars on site for 3 days each week to encourage the use of public transport. Even that doesn't work as with inadequate bus services from the village I live in a neighbour drives the 30 mile round trip twice a day (on her non=parking days), to take his wife to work at the council offices and collect her later!

  5. #5
    Major Sinic Guest

    Re: The war on the motorist continues

    Quote Originally Posted by Midas View Post
    Whilst what Major Sinic says is quite right, I can see that there will be a huge number of challenges to this scheme, both verbal and I suspect legal, from businesses and from motoring associations based on a mix of it being yet another unfair tax and an infringement of a landowner's rights to do what he wishes on his own property. It's a move which might well also have unintended consequences if businesses cut down on staff parking places, driving more cars out to park in already overcrowded streets.
    You do raise some valid points, and I suspect you are quite correct in that there will be some energetic challenges to these proposals. That said there are energetic challenges to virtually every proposed tax increase and any reduction in public services. These will not alter the fact that we no longer have any alternative but to implement both.

    To play devil's advocate for a moment. Free car parking at your place of work when otherwise you may have to pay for it in a public facility, should surely be treated as a 'benefit in kind' for the employee. As a principle 'benefit in kind' has long been enshrined in tax law. Secondly it could be considered a progressive tax in that it creates greater fairness between those who work for smaller organisations, which are unable to offer free car parking and larger organisations who can. Thirdly it should encourage those who travel to work by car to reappraise and perhaps switch to public transport, thus reducing congestion.

    As a regular visitor to my nearby city of Oxford where city centre public car parking shrinks annually in inverse proportion to the parking charges (up to £12 per day now) the swathes of City Council and University staff parking remain available, numerous, unaffected and free. I have to confess to a frisson of pleasure, even schadenfreude, that these public sector employees already earning over 7% per annum on average more than their private sector cousins, may for once actually have to make a contribution towards their privileges. Unless of course their employers pay it for them from public funds!!!

  6. #6
    Soma Sengupta Guest

    Re: The war on the motorist continues

    Perhaps, but to penalise employers? What happens in areas where there isn't much public transportation? Why should those workers suffer this disproportionate impact? Why should this happen before CG taxes are raised to equal taxes on pay?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    582
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The war on the motorist continues

    Public or council land = perfectly reasonable
    Private land = It's private land, and this is a tax grab which actually seems to infringe property rights.

    Now perhaps if we assume that the aim is cut down on congestion, then perhaps they could put a tax on businesses whose car parks exit or enter onto/from major roads, thereby encouraging any new developers to favour backstreet entrances and the like.

  8. #8
    crazylilting Guest

    Re: The war on the motorist continues

    Who can or will pay for our over spending? Business doesn't want to, the working class don't want to, those on welfare do not want to or cannot contribute so where is it it going to come from?

    The fact is our level of services provided for the British public and or how they are provided is not sustainable. While we may try to raise more taxes to pay for it all I doubt anyone will want to pay for it. We are all ready taxed to heavily. So the only solution to this is to reduce services and the size of government and promote a more industrialized nation with the emphasis on exported goods.

    We all know that Government is a company who's main purpose is to generate a bottom line. What that bottom line looks like is in some ways dictated by the needs and wants of the population. Why there isn't more outcry of people wanting our government to bring us back to self sufficiency is beyond me. It is one thing to make decisions for our personal well being and using credit cards to create a life style but it is another thing to enslave a nation to the same concept.

    We complain when our freedoms are being taken away but we are selling off our freedom in the guise of a national life style that is not affordable or sustainable, shouldn't that be our number one priority? Cuts are unpopular because they benefit someone and it is time we stop listening to those who are whinning about what they are losing and start cheering about going in a direction of self sustainability and accountability for our own nation.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Devon
    Posts
    5,935
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 7 Times in 6 Posts
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: The war on the motorist continues

    Quote Originally Posted by crazylilting View Post
    Who can or will pay for our over spending? Business doesn't want to, the working class don't want to, those on welfare do not want to or cannot contribute so where is it it going to come from?

    The fact is our level of services provided for the British public and or how they are provided is not sustainable. While we may try to raise more taxes to pay for it all I doubt anyone will want to pay for it. We are all ready taxed to heavily. So the only solution to this is to reduce services and the size of government and promote a more industrialized nation with the emphasis on exported goods.

    We all know that Government is a company who's main purpose is to generate a bottom line. What that bottom line looks like is in some ways dictated by the needs and wants of the population. Why there isn't more outcry of people wanting our government to bring us back to self sufficiency is beyond me. It is one thing to make decisions for our personal well being and using credit cards to create a life style but it is another thing to enslave a nation to the same concept.

    We complain when our freedoms are being taken away but we are selling off our freedom in the guise of a national life style that is not affordable or sustainable, shouldn't that be our number one priority? Cuts are unpopular because they benefit someone and it is time we stop listening to those who are whinning about what they are losing and start cheering about going in a direction of self sustainability and accountability for our own nation.
    I agree with most of what you say here. I think it should be a question of who should pay for the financial mess this country is in, rather than who wants to. As you rightly point out, no one wants to, least of all those responsible for it.
    It seems to me a large part of the problem would be solved by renationalising some of our profit making utilities and services. Some of them are making vast profits, and passing on further increases to the consumer.
    The size of the NHS should be reduced, and returned to it's initial principle, of being free to all at the point of need.
    I think the word need should be highlited here. There's a vast ammount of money spent in the NHS on all sorts of none essential treatments. There's also a whole generation of parents who don't seem to have any discretional abilities, or are too afraid to use for fear of atracting attention from social services. A child with a cut or a bruise does not need to go to casualty, which is time consuming and costly. A child with a tummy bug or a cold does not need to see a doctor. When I was a kid, you stayed in bed with a bottle of Lukazade for a couple of days, and that was it. If you bashed your legs or arms up, you put plasters on them.
    There are other more contriversial treatments that the NHS provide that should be tackled. Problem is, our PC politicians don't have the gutts to confront these issues. Such as, IVF, none essential cosmetic surgery, sex change opps, tatoo removals etc.

    I think there are more effective and ethical ways of raising revenue than basing motorists who already have a heavy tax burden.
    "I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours ." Steven Roberts

    The likelyhood of you being observed is directly proportionate to the stupidity of your actions.

    Barack Hussein Obama, the president that got Bin Laden!

  10. #10
    crazylilting Guest

    Re: The war on the motorist continues

    Quote Originally Posted by DaveUK View Post
    I agree with most of what you say here. I think it should be a question of who should pay for the financial mess this country is in, rather than who wants to. As you rightly point out, no one wants to, least of all those responsible for it.
    It seems to me a large part of the problem would be solved by renationalising some of our profit making utilities and services. Some of them are making vast profits, and passing on further increases to the consumer.
    The size of the NHS should be reduced, and returned to it's initial principle, of being free to all at the point of need.
    I think the word need should be highlited here. There's a vast ammount of money spent in the NHS on all sorts of none essential treatments. There's also a whole generation of parents who don't seem to have any discretional abilities, or are too afraid to use for fear of atracting attention from social services. A child with a cut or a bruise does not need to go to casualty, which is time consuming and costly. A child with a tummy bug or a cold does not need to see a doctor. When I was a kid, you stayed in bed with a bottle of Lukazade for a couple of days, and that was it. If you bashed your legs or arms up, you put plasters on them.
    There are other more contriversial treatments that the NHS provide that should be tackled. Problem is, our PC politicians don't have the gutts to confront these issues. Such as, IVF, none essential cosmetic surgery, sex change opps, tatoo removals etc.

    I think there are more effective and ethical ways of raising revenue than basing motorists who already have a heavy tax burden.
    I absolutely agree, however because the government is doing this is proof of how much opposition there is to cuts. This is probably the worst time for anyone to be in the drivers seat because no matter what you do you will loose support.

Similar Threads

  1. NHS wastage continues!
    By Major Sinic in forum United Kingdom Politics & Political Forum
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 20-06-2011, 07:06 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •