I'm quite confused.
Normally when there's a budget, a Scottish bloke whispers sweet nothings into my ear while stealing my wallet. This time some croaky posh bloke said "alright mate" and gave me a pint. What's going on??
Osborne said he was accepting Lord Hutton's pension recommendations as the basis for future discussion to reform complex rules and taxation. Personal tax and duties: Gift Aid will be made easier – charities will be able to file online. People will be able to hand over works of art in exchange for tax rebates. There will be …
Normally when there's a budget, a Scottish bloke whispers sweet nothings into my ear while stealing my wallet. This time some croaky posh bloke said "alright mate" and gave me a pint. What's going on??
You ARE confused
"He said he would introduce a "fair fuel stabiliser" by taxing oil companies to the tune of £2bn in tax."
And how the fuck does he expect oil companies will get that money back? He's a useless cnut with no idea of economics...
Aircraft, central heating systems, industry, farmers etc. all need fuel. If you slap a tax on the fuel provider they can spread the pain to their customers as they see fit in the prices they charge. I suppose it means that instead of motorists alone being hit with the full 2 billion of taxes, that the pain will be spread out amongst all oil customers.
If you are a farmer you get the pink petrol that is duty free.
Planes don't pay tax/duties on their fuel either. the per-passenger tax is the closest there is to a fuel duty on planes, but it penalises low budget airplanes (busy planes, short haul) for the benefit of half-empty long-haul planes run by BA and others.
Odd statement, given that he is chancellor of the exchequer, a post that *requires* a certain knowledge of economics, and you are, er, not.
I thought that was de rigeur for a Chancellor of the Exchequer?
Judging by the monumental screw-ups previous Chancellors have produced thanks to their sound grounding in economics, it might be better for the country if we excluded anyone who claimed to be an economist.
"given that he is chancellor of the exchequer, a post that *requires* a certain knowledge of economics, and you are, er, not"
A quick google would tell you that George (Gideon) got a 2:1 in Modern History. The only knowledge he has of economics is that his Daddy is f***ing minted.
However, your ignorance aside, the point still stands - the oil companies will pass the tax directly onto the UK garages and then the customer. All he's done is put the price of petrol up on the forecourt and made it look like someone else's fault.
That we can't blame the government for the fuel cost increases then... then it becomes the oil companies who are the baddies. Cue the fuel protests at the refineries :-)
A fucking penny?! And that's IF the franchise managers who run the petrol pumps actually take the penny off at all. Perhaps the useless cnut should think about regulating fuel charging so we all get a fair deal
@DrXym - Great point. So the fuel companies can pay the £2Bn to the government, and then put a penny back on everything, not just the fuel they sell on forecourts. And each of those pennies will be doubled by all the different taxes that the governement put on fuel. So Osbourne looks like he's doing something good, only to rake back even more into the HMRC. Perhaps he does have an idea of economics afterall, at least when it concerns double dealing. Doesn't make him any less of a cnut.
1p per litre, Great. It only went up about 3-5p last week thanks to going to war.
A lot of things have gone up in the last half year - food, fuel, energy...
Pay rises are at around 2%
RBS, Lloyds et. all were funded by the government and are still paying some staff enormous bonuses. The government should use the employees SIC code to determin the amount of tax - and these guys should pay a drastic price for inflicting an enormous amount of pain on the rest of the population...
The banks aren't "funded by the government"
The Government bought a share in the banks to provide capital, but when they sell the stake, the taxpayer gains substantial amounts of money (£900million for every 1p on the RBS share price). They aren't in a position to sell yet, but will be soon.
As for paying the bonuses - those employees will be paying tax on their bonus at 50%.
I'm not supporting the payment of the bonus - just suggesting you need a reality check.
When companies can't pay debts and require funds - i.e. require funding, they normally go to the stock market. Here they have gone to the government - the government has provided funding. Yes, it's in return for shares - either the government stepped in or the banks collapsed.
As for bonuses - well, as long as it's not the same people who led to the disaster then I'm OK with bonuses being paid. However, some of those irresponsible city twerps got bonuses in advance of the collapse - and I doubt the bonuses were recovered.
Reality check - that's what the bankers need - look how most people live, look at the average salary of an employee in the UK. Look at the impact reckless actions have on the population as a whole.
"There will be discounts on inheritance tax for those who leave money to charity."
I'm sure the private schools are rubbing their hands together with glee...
...what? You didn't think rich Tories would donate to charities that help the needy, did you?
Given what I know about charities, private schools are a far better investment of your money.
What, do you think the money you give to a charity actually goes on the cause? ohohohoho oneeee-samaaaaaaa you're so naive.
A lot of it would go to bursaries for bright but not well off children.
Given what I know about private schools and that 'free schools' do not require quailfied teachers this is shitting on the people who are qualified.
It also concerns me a lot that these ' teachers' can teach anything they bloody like, don't have the same checks made aganst them and are a law unto themselves.
Don't mention OFSTED - they have had thier teeth pulled, they now will leave schools alone that are marked as 'satisfactory' as they don't have the staff anymore.
That the effect will be minimal unless you pay yourself enough dividends to take you over the 40% threshold, at which point you become liable for tax and NI on all amounts taken over the threshold as opposed to just tax as you are now.
Paris coz she knows what it's like to get shafted!!!
Here is a picture of a spider which my friend has valued at £720,375.79 I believe this settles my tax bill. Just a thought, how about telling them to sell the 'work of art' on the open market and pay their taxes with the proceeds (including any capital gains due on the sale) like everyone else?
...unpopular. I think fuel duty should rise and rise across Europe so we're paying closer to £3 a litre, and car tax should be scrapped. This way we'd all "pay as you drive" by default, kicking tw*ts with massive BMW 4x4s in the balls at the same time as a bonus. Price as many people off the roads as possible, including road haulage. Couple this with ploughing the extra tax revenue into a massive investment and expansion of the re-nationalised railways that will be carrying more freight. Then maybe it'll be cheaper and more comfortable to go by rail than by road.
As it stands, it's cheaper and more comfortable for me to go most places on my own in my car, and that's wrong. Feel free to flame me- but use reasoned arguments, don't just downvote. And "but I want to be able to drive what I like when I like wherever I like without the government stealing my hard earned cash" isn't a reasoned argument. That's a right-wing argument. My argument: Society is more important than you, so get over yourself.
Well, I personally prefer the carrot rather than the stick. But's that probably makes me a right-wing looney. Yeah, let's tax everything off the road and build railways to all Tescos.
I do agree with scrapping car tax and using fuel as the single point of taxation. Automatically takes into account those baby-eating 4x4 drivers. How about following South Africa and including car insurance in there?
But you seem to know about how society is so much more important than little me. I almost (as a right wing nutter) think I have I have right to consider myself part of society, and as I am in a democacy, I can have opinions.
It is my opinion that Lefties are incapable of critical thought.
Their input into society most certainly is not more important than mine thankyouverymuch. Also why because some people choose and are able to afford to drive massive BMW 4x4's do you think they are tw*ts? Jealous much?
Narrow, uninformed and plain wrong. I live in a small village, with a very infrequent bus service - nearest town is about ten miles away. In order to earn my living, I have to be able to visit customers in their homes and offices, anything up to 200 miles away - often collecting and delivering bulky, heavy computers and associated equipment, and carrying my tools.
Yes, a lot of work can be done remotely, and is... but much more can't be and requires physical access.
Your answer to my problem is... what? I cycle to customers and get them to post their stuff to me by rail freight if it needs off-site work? Much as I love cycling, I don't have that kind of time to spend in between jobs, and there's no railway station closer than 5 miles away anyhow (and never will be.)
I frequently wish that someone could batter into the thick skulls of the hordes of clueless deluded city-dwelling climate change doom-mongers that lots of people DON'T live under the same circumstances that they do :-(
I agree that society is more important... more important than following whatever pointless and unfounded "green" fad is currently fashionable.
I need my car to get to work to pay my income tax?
With rising prices there is no way I can afford a new car with less consumption. Actually with the rising cost of work to the employee I had to skimp on maintenance so if I'm behind you don't rely on my brakes working.
(actually - those are fixed but the mechanic said he didn't know why they were still working in that state. Don't know why he was all worked up - they didn't even screech.)
Artificially raising fuel prices is a typical "They don't have bread? So let them eat cake." proposition. It lacks insight and seems a pretty headless reaction.
Why is it wrong that using the car is more comfortable and less time-consuming than public transport? Public transport cannot start where you are and does not go where you need to be because it has to cater to the needs of many people. Never mind that rising fuel prices make any kind of transport more expensive, unless you walk barefoot and in your shift.
Society is not a value in itself. Society brings value to individuals. Preferably a large number and with no too adverse effect to any individual. Let's see - beating people up is good for release of aggression, this is good for society. So - want to volunteer to be at the receiving end? For the good of society? Didn't think so. Society is only important where you benefit from it?
How about following South Africa and including car insurance in there?
not a bad Idea that.
Include all the cost of driving in the petrol. road tax, insurance, cost of your annual MOT...everything...
That way the more you drive the more you pay, the bigger the car, the more you pay.... if you wanted to keep young drivers off the roads, limit the amount of petrol they can buy....
the only downside to this would be the need for ultra secure petrol tanks for your car !
Unfortunately I choose to live in the country. I rent a small house with my better half who is a student in a city. Based on no scientific research other than my own logic, living in the country side will benefit me by allowing me to breath cleaner air and to buy produce from a nearby organic farm which is some way outside of any cities, hopefully leading to better health and less financial burden on the NHS. I currently drive to work which takes me 15 minutes at approx 50mpg. the nearest train station is 20 minutes away by car which is 20 minutes from my town of work, and then 20 minutes walk. 2 buses a day run through my village and not at the hours I work. Cycling would probably take 1.5 hours to get to the station, only to catch a train that is usually late.
I take my better half to the nearest train station each morning where she catches the train into the city for university. If we were to both use public transport our journey times would increase by 3-4 hours a day, this would fall if bus service was improved but living in a sparsely populated area, a frequent bus service would likely run mostly empty on most trips.
By arriving home at 5:50 rather than gone 7 allows for better free time to rest, and to study in free time to improve personally, this improvement allows for better performance at work and consequently more chance of a payrise/promotion which then leads to more taxes. Reducing downtime due to commuting would also increase tiredness and stress, leading to a decrease in health, causing more lost productivity for my company, leading to less taxes gained.
Of course this doesn't even touch upon the expected rise in cost of food as supplies for farms/supermarkets are not well served by bicycles, unless you are offering to transport 40 tons of food around for people by bike?
Got a fault with your internet, unfortunately fuel is too expensive for the BT van to use any more, so he is conducting repairs by bike now, the waiting list has risen due to only reaching 2 customers a day instead of 20 (hypothetical number, not based on BT tech support figures).
Unfortunately I am not a fan of horses either!
..(and some not so well-reasoned)- thank you for rising to the challenge. I thought it might stir up the hornets nest a bit.
Of course, I realise my views are idealistic, and people who live in remote areas would suffer. However, I stand by the re-nationalisation and expansion of the railways (including more freight), and heavy investment in, and subsidy of, public transport. A simple increase in fuel duty may not be the way to fund this, but it's an idea- perhaps it could be refined.
I also stand by the fact that drivers of BMW 4x4s are idiots. And I'm tempted to extend that to all BMW drivers after seeing this video, but that's probably a bit harsh:
The road tax is partly to pay for the mere presence of cars on the road, on which the majority of cars these days are parked when not moving.
A higher fuel cost would not get cars off the road. although it may make them drive less distance. Many residential streets are cluttered with one owner's second and third cars, such as camper vans and Transits, and abolishing road tax would encourage this more. As it is, the car tax must be about the cheapest way of renting land space in UK cities that there is.
I am all for your sentiment though. There should be huge tax penalties for moving bulk freight by road, and school bus services should be vastly improved - an "easy win" because each school car run is a double one in that, unlike a work commute, the parent drives home empty after the delivery.
My commute was 6 miles - it took about 12 minutes to drive To take train takes 5 minutes walk to station, 5 minutes on train then 30 minutes walk or 10 minutes wait & 15 minutes free bus in – and the train would cost £18 a week
Now I have a 22 mile commute (not my choice) and it'd takes 40 minutes by car two hours by train as no direct line
Putting the cost of fuel up so that people feel it worthwhile to use public transport – the only ones on the road will be those BMW 4x4 drivers and the like where fuel costs are small proportion of their income – if it hasn't totally wrecked the economy and they can still find a petrol station
Whilst funny the film really does demonstrate that our sense of society is decreasing. You see someone outside your house struggling. Traditionally you had two choices, pretend you did not see them or go and help them. Today, you have a third. Film them and humiliate them on the public Internet,
What the woman did was of course plain daft but the behaviour of the people filiming this is just anti-social. You have my friend weakened your srgument by posting this (which I by the way largely agreed with).
I remember Jeremy Clarkson - more than once - wondering why anyone would buy a BMW 4X4 as they were useless at everything and drank petrol in order to do it.
But I don't expect BMW 4X4 owners to beleive that Clarkson could offer such blasphemies (Clarkson regularly mentions how much fuel there things consume and he's not praising them)
While he can make good enterainment (often by being an idiot ;-) ) he seems to lack the ability to understand that other people have different views and objectives to him!
And let's be honest who is going to take him seriously when he talks about looks when he turns up on set dressed like that :s
He said he would introduce a "fair fuel stabiliser" by taxing oil companies to the tune of £2bn in tax.
is this guy a fucking retard or is it just me.
Im guessing from this the oil companies are just gonna fuck off the end user with a rise in prices.
**really gonna need a rage icon soon
If the price of oil was actually market driven, rather than calculated by an oil consortium to wring the maximum profits from the world economy without actually causing it to collapse.
Really? It's not market driven? Howcome then, all petrol stations don't charge the same amount? Petrolprices.com shows a differences of 20p in the price of a litre! It's not a regulated price, it is just affected by the price of oil.
Which the Governement is happy with cos they get all that additional tax, which is a percentage, not a set rate, as far as I can work out from the website.
I said nothing about the price of petrol, bur rather the price of oil, lets at least compare apples with apples here.
Secondly 20p is approximately 15% of the current cost of a litre of petrol, compare with say a can of coke, which may cost you 25p down aldi, and 80p from a service station. A 15% price variation across would seem to indicate that petrol is sold at broadly the same price everywhere.
OPEC countries limiting oil production to maintain an artificially high price for oil is pretty much a cast iron fact, I really don't see how I've managed to piss people off by mentioning this (unless arab oil moguls read the reg)
I could quite happily use public transport. Unfortunately down here in Cornwall public transport is near non-existent. I’m always amazed when I go to London village that they have this brilliant underground train thing where you can get anywhere, and lots of buses they come along every 10 minutes! I always wonder is it the same bus… or different ones? It’s more than my poor bumpkin brain can handle :(
Cornwall however… well I “could” theoretically travel to work via bus. If I didn’t mind the bus dropping me off half an hour late for work, 5 miles away. This is of course a problem, especially when the bus then does its return journey 45 minutes before I finish work… 5 miles away.
It also only runs during term time.
Now this could just be me being really awkward but I’m not sure my boss would be too happy with me taking an hour and a half off everyday to commute, and also I’m not sure how I would go about only working during term times either… that could be tricky to get him to go with…
However with 1p off petroleum now my problems are solved! My only concern now is what to spend all this money I’m going to save on, maybe I’ll build a new wing upon my house or maybe a full-sized gold statue of myself for others to marvel at. The possibilities are literally limitless.
after all my bean counting for last years income/expenditure i can state that my car cost me £0.23p per mile to run last year.
I drive my daughter to school each day,(just under two miles each way.) five days a week. so that cost me the grand total of £4.60.
each round trip day takes me around 20min door to door. we leave at around 8.30 each morning.
A bus pass for her to get to school each day will cost me just over £5. she would have to leave at around 7.45am (in the dark for a lot of the school year) to get to school on time, via two buses, possibly getting soaked wet through at each of them. and getting home from school at around 4.15pm (again, in the dark for a lot of the school year).
So, its cheaper,more convenient, more comfortable,safer for my child to go to school in my car each day.
In my experience, public transport is a total mess. and needs sorting out. It should be a cheaper alternative to driving but fails in this most fundamental portion of the principles of public transport and should be the first point to fix if any government has any realistic plans in getting people to use public transport..... then clean the damn things....
And its not just local journeys. My and my other half run a hotel and for some of our guests it is by far cheaper for them to pay me for the petrol and my time to come and fetch them and take them back home than it is to get a coach or a train. for a family of 3, it costs well in excess of £130 to get a train from Wolverhampton to Blackpool. Take into account a taxi to and from the train station (cheaper than the bus) at both ends, then to pay me £100 for a door to door service is well worth it for them!
Mines the one with the car keys in the pocket!
And the reason being public transport is a mess is you end up getting all these idjiots who insist on using there cars for the silliest of reasons, things like ew I might get a raindrop on my head when it rains waiting for a bus or worst still, oh no I can't catch public transport in the dark; Down to the downright selfish who go - why must I catch two bus's when I can take one bottle into the shower.
Now if you can get those people to use it instead of covering the problem up by using a car then moaning about the car costs, then my friend we might actualy get somewere. But thats what I found - tackling a problem head-on instead of ignoring any direct approach and silently moaning about it at a scale that achieves nothing.
But hey education is meant to ease you into real-life not dump you into the whole aspect of paying to travel to work, going out when the sun-gods down and realising that public transport isn't a door to door service and as such I might have to catch more than one bus. Shameful I tell you, utterly shameful/
On your car running costs, are you also adding in the Time costs? 5x20 minute round trips a week is about £10/week at minimum wage, which by my reckoning would make it £14.60/week. Of course, you're a voluntary worker in this case, but it's still a number that shouldn't be omitted for a true comparison of costs.
Weather, Discomfort and The Dark? They're just prissy things that most people refer to as Life. There's nothing wrong with getting accustomed to getting up earlier, dressing for the conditions and how to look after yourself at dawn/dusk. If your voluntary work will extend to a lifetime ferrying your offspring to work and back, I'd be surprised.
As far as public transport goes, I did a test of the "Family of 3 from Wolves to Blackpool" problem. For the record, my test was done from Sat 4th-Sat 11th June, with 2 adults 1 child using a Family and Friends Railcard, with one change of trains at Preston. Total cost between £50-55, simply by planning ahead and doing 5 minutes of research - with some of the best fares already gone!
Of course, any sap who walks up to the ticket machine/ booking office uninformed will get stung (Although many booking clerks will endeavour to get you the best price if there isn't a queue), but taking the time to PLAN a holiday, rather than walk-up-and-buy can yield great savings.
You have obviously never lived in a slightly dodgy area. I would not want to be wating for a bus at night in the center of Chatham off New Road.
To the idiot falling into the usual 4x4 gas guzzling cliche mindset. You do realise of course that "massive 4x4's" don't all put out lots of co2 and that many put out less than the 7 seater family buses that many drive around in?
And as an owner of a slightly less massive 4x4 (FL2) I'm the one who was smiling when I got home each time over the Christmas period when there was snow down here and everyone else was left stranded on the roads and at the foot of hills. I pay the inflated road tax and pay the same for my diesel as everyone else - I also use no more than most average 2x4's.
You being the Dick in a 4X4 no wonder you have gone Anon.
anyway your smarmy comments about driving around in the snow all winter long i was just as able as any 4x4 to drive around as well and often go driving with the kids when it snow's because i enjoy it. and there are no other cars about, apart from silly pricks in 4x4's charging along at 50Mph thinking that its perfectly fine to drive that fast because they have a 4x4, Little do they realise they still have the same stopping distance as me (worse actually due to a higher mass) I drive a 2cv i have 2 kids 1 more on the way. Yes i enjoy the fact it costs me a grand total of £24 currently for a full tank, I smirk at your tossers in your block of flats on wheels costing over £100.
RE: your comment on 7 seater's, My uncle has one now, he used to have a SUV (wannabe 4x4) and found it completely useless for transporting more than 4 people (no luggage or bags).
I would love to see you fit 3 kids and paraphanalia in your dick extension wait sorry i mean car wait no i actually mean what i said.
Man up and untick that anon box
...I was quite specific in stating "massive _BMW_ 4x4s". The one's I'm talking about get <20mpg on average in real-world driving (e.g. the BMW X3). I also object strongly to the massive minibuses that parents feel the need to cart their precious ones to pony club in. Despite having twins, I drive a very modestly-sized diesel hatchback that gets >50mpg on average (and that's by my own calcs, not the wildly inaccurate readout of the in-car mpg meter).
Working in the automotive engineering industry, I am more aware than you might imagine of which cars (or "light trucks") have poor fuel economy. I'd also point out that Prius drivers should wipe the smug smile of their faces too.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017