Terra

I've just clicked through the 300+ pages of the budget. Bit of a memory trip for me as I used to work for The Stationery Office (who publish the budget).

Anyway, initial calculations show that I may be around £200 better off taxwise although I'm not yet sure how the NIC works out. I think £400 for big cars is a joke giving how much the 4x4s cost.

But my main problem is that the longer I live in Britain, the less I understand politics. I thought Gordon was meant to be old labour?? which if I remember correctly has some vague notion about social justice and helping the less-well off. Oh well, at least the Tories are happy that Gordon almost delivered their budget.

Edith

__________________
Underground, Overground, Wombling Free!

mdp

Very disappointing budget and confirms my opinion that Brown would be a terrible PM. I hope he never gets the job!

red-defender

My Land Rover Defender cost me under £9,000 - and as I live in a very rural & hilly area and a third of my clients are farmers I can't manage without it. Nor can a lot of us who work in this sort of countryside. We have no choice but the city dwellers who buy Toyota Land Cruiser tanks just for show have. They probably can afford the extra tax, but we are being severely penalised - as usual people who live in rural areas are being sacrificed. The sooner we get rid of this b***** government the better.

__________________
Kelvyn,
Jenkin Hill Internet, Keswick in the North Lake District

percepts

so what will the tax on a defender hard top be?

__________________
An old dog learning new tricks

Tim

I thought the extra tax only applied to newer cars? Your Defender should be exempt I think.

Adam

My family have lived on farms for years.. years and years, deep in the countryside. Never, that Im aware of, have any of them "had no choice" but to get a 4wd. In fact they all drive 2wd. Living in the country doesnt mean that you have to have a 4wd and can't live without them. Just not true, and in my opinion used far too much as en excuse lol

Tim

But why should anyone need an excuse to drive a 4x4 if they want to? Or an equally gas-guzzling sports car? I drive both and never see a farm or a race track.

There are much greater ecological crimes going on in the world. Will (for instance) China and the US adhere to the Kyoto agreement if I buy supposedly more eco-friendly cars? Will people keep their cars longer rather than buying a new one every three years? My 4x4 is 15 years old. Building a new car isn't great for the environment.

I know lots of parents who prefer to drive their kids around in 4x4's because they feel (and statistically are) safer. Is this a crime?

Adam

Yes! No, of course i'ts not. Although entirely un-necessary for trips 10 minutes down the road in my opinion.

My point was that people hide behind the excuse.

There are far greater crimes, but everyone has to do their bit. Even if it is just recycling your bottles, etc.

I sound like a climate change warrior. I'm not at all!

Ross

There's a few variants of the "greater ecological problems in other countries" argument but it's pretty weak. Rape, murder, racism... they go relatively unpunished in some countries, does that mean we shouldn't be doing anything about them?

I realise that's not exactly a realistic comparison, but it makes a point, change has to start somewhere. Hiding behind excuses or pointing at the other guy gets us no-where.

Lots of kids carry knives because they feel safer... I've also encountered vast numbers of complete morons in 4x4's who feel quite comfortable using their vehicle to try and force me off the road (I drive a 1960 Mk1 Mini). On many occasions I would have been killed or severely injured if I hadn't avoided some twat who feels "safer" (read invulnerable) in his 4x4.

Personally I'd say the logic is flawed too. 4x4's fall into the highest tax bracket on engine size and CO2 emissions, neither of these factors make them "safer". Safer is an excuse... people drive them because they're a big, expensive status symbol. I very much doubt many urbanites go out and buy a 4x4 with safety at the top of their wish list. I've yet to meet anyone desperate to show everyone their shiny new fourbie and brag about how safe it is...

Don't get me wrong, I'm a petrol head. I have every respect for people who drive proper 4x4's for a purpose, be it work or play. Idiots in suits who drive them purely as a status symbol or to do the school run with little Tommy should be hung out to dry...

The ironic thing is my Mini is exempt from tax and emissions testing as a classic car... leaded petrol, race built engine that would fail the MOT on CO2 emissions... it almost definitely out pollutes any of the vehicles currently being battered by the highest tax bracket.

percepts

sounds to me like you are all victims of the govt social engineering and propaganda being spouted at you by the media via the govt.

Go ask the govt for the projections of car sales over the next 20 years and the proposed new airports and the proposed new air routes world wide and see whether they actually intend stopping any of this. When you wake up and realise that NO they are not actually going to stop any of this, then it might dawn on you that you are being had by the govt who are cashing in on the Green Fear. The only thing green about most of the greenies is the bits behind their ears.

If you really care then take a look at the UN figures for world population growth over the next 50 years. Currently it shows a 30% increase. Thats 30% increase in Consumption world wide of food, fish stocks, forestry, raw materials, etc etc. And what about the 50 years following that and the 50 years following that and on and on. Any damn fool can see this is not sustainable but which western govt is doing anything about population growth which the is the real cancer of the world. Absolutely none of them so don't be fooled by the current "Your a criminal if you drive a 4x4 campaign" because if you were the govt would stop it but they don't. They just use it to raise money to pay for a war for which the only justification was to maintain the oil supply to keep all those 4x4's running.

If you think that washing out your bottles before taking them to the bottle bank is going to save the world then I think there is little hope when that is the level to which people are prepared to go to save themselves.

The human race is not nearly as intelligent as it likes to think.

__________________
An old dog learning new tricks

Patch

I'm going to take this opportunity to be smarmy, and tell y'all what the road tax is for my 3.2 litre ..... zero

..... that's right, zero, nothing, zip .....

.... no road tax in France

__________________
Whoever undertakes to set himself up as judge in the field of truth and knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the Gods.

Tim

Statistically 4x4's are safer. Carrying a knife doesn't make you safer.

So everyone who drives a 4x4 is a complete moron on the road and all mini drivers are saints? I have a 4x4 now and have had a mini in the past and I'm not a moronic driver. You're over-generalising.

Totally wrong. Not all 4x4's fall into the higher tax bracket at all.

A massive over-generalisation. My 4x4 cost £3500 and looks crap - certainly not expensive or a status symbol. People might suspect you're jealous of expensive car owners...

And I know several people who have bought them for no other reason than wanting to feel safer.

Why are they idiots and why should they be hung out to dry? Surely it's everyone's choice to drive whatever they want, for whatever reason. Who are you to make that choice for them?

So some people (not me) would suggest you are an idiot and you should be hung out to dry for driving an old banger that runs on leaded and wouldn't pass a test for emissions. Interesting argument you've got there.

Ross

I'll try to emphasis my over generalisations further in future to make it clearer that I'm well aware they're gross over generalisations.

The point, entirely, is that much of the anti-4x4 feeling in the country is focused on the perception of people in suits or school runners with expensive BMW/Merc 4x4's that'll probably never leave the city or motorways.

The safer argument remains complete tosh though. An over-generalisation, if you like, to suggest that anything more than a fraction of people buy them because they're safer.

Source?

I'll take exception to this one, I'm not over-generalising at all because I never said either of those things.

I'm not making a choice for anyone, I'm expressing an opinion. Why abolish slavery? Why equal rights? Why ban smoking? They were all resisted at first, argued against by many, would you argue in favour of them now (with the exception of smoking, still in the transitional stage).

Hence me calling it ironic. Although incidentally, it's far from being an old banger and given the restoration costs you were off suggesting I'm jealous of people with expensive cars too.

Tim

And my point is, what is wrong with driving an expensive 4x4 if you never go off-road in it? What law is being broken? What's wrong morally?

Ross

The point is that change has to start somewhere and people won't like it, same as it's always been, some people will get their fingers burned along the way. 4x4's and "gas guzzlers" just happen to be the thin end of this particular wedge.

Doing nothing isn't an option, doing something will upset someone, somewhere, somehow. Some will say it isn't enough, some will say it's too much... some will see conspiracies to leech money from the masses.

I'm not terribly passionate about the car tax thing either way to be honest, I see pros and cons, I'm just making observations.

UH-Matt

Group G car tax is a joke... up to £400 ? No need for the road charging now then eh! Oh no that will come too!

Its not an environment thing, its a money thing.

__________________
.
Matt
UnitedHosting Staff

For official support please use our helpdesk at UnitedSupport.co.uk

UnitedHosting proudly hosting more than 20,000 sites since 1998.

ngray

I'm with Ross, we have to start doing something about the amount of ore, oil, gas, minerals, and other supplies that have taken literally millions of years to produce, that we are taking away from our planet on a daily basis. And add to that the amount of plastic, metal, glass, and other junk that is filling landfills that will take another however many years to break down.

I heard somewhere that a large tanker is being lost at sea at least one a week, and those things are carrying millions of tonnes of iron ore, mined from under our soil, and manufactured products, and they're getting left there on the seabed because it's "more expensive" to salvage them and their cargo rather than leave them there. More expensive in what, short term or long term?

We are destroying our world day by day and need to change our way of thinking. How the government decides to do that is up to them, and we have to live by their decisions in general, or start a movement against it. We could always move to the States or China and look at their attitudes towards it, like someone previously mentioned.

</rant>

__________________
Splattt there goes the 8:15 pie right on time. I hate mondays (Garfield)

If you drive you should be Smart Driving

Paranormal ghost map of the UK Thames Valley Paranormal Group

Tim

I'm not with Ross, as he's not arguing in favour of anything to do with saving the planet. He simply dislikes people in expensive cars and still hasn't justified statements he made similar to this:

I'm wearing a suit in my 4x4 this morning as I go about earning a living and this afternoon I'll be doing the school run. Perhaps I should feel guilty? Or perhaps I'm too idiotic to realise my 'crime'?

If the government really had any teeth they would ban all cars over a certain engine size, but of course they won't. Or indeed they could ban cars completely and improve public transport. Their answer (like any other government) is to introduce a new or higher tax. But please, let's not suggest that 4x4's are the sole cause of the world's ecological problems.

Terra

About 4x4s being safer - maybe for the driver. But for others being involved in accidents with 4x4s they are worse, especially for people / kids walking as 4x4s often have bars across the front which are lethal in collisions.

Anyway - I'm not really bothered about 4x4s and who needs / wants one. But it makes sense to me that we are living on one planet with finite resources and unless we do something the next generations will put us in the history books "as the idiots who wrecked the planet".

Gas, oil etc are all finite - once used up they won't come back for a few million years. And our atmosphere is pretty enclosed as well - we only have one.

Changing stuff will be painful - especially as we're used to having what we want, when we want. So governments will have to use stick & carrots - higher taxes on "bad" stuff and incentives for "good" stuff. And realistically, the question is not which car to drive but not to drive. But for that we will need decent public transport .. like buses which actually turn up and trains which don't go into hiding ever time there's a snowflake / leaf / wrong kind of day. So no easy answers here but unless we start making changes somewhere nothing will happen.

__________________
Underground, Overground, Wombling Free!

Ross

I'm arguing against the people I hear on the radio phoning up to rant about how changes to vehicle taxes infringes their human rights to drive whatever they want, however they want, whenever they want. "Idiots" who continue to insist that climate change doesn't exist, pollution isn't a problem, we shouldn't change because others aren't and a dozen other half baked arguments against doing anything at all because it represents a piffling little inconvenience to them, personally.

I didn't say all people who drive 4x4's and wear suits are idiots, I used a popular stereotype to express a point. As I believe I already justified by acknowledging it was an intentional over generalisation...
I'm arguing that change has to start somewhere. I'm arguing several things... you've just chosen to focus on one aspect of what I said that you've taken particular exception to.

Suggesting I "dislike people in expensive cars" is frankly ludicrous, unfounded and... well... plain wrong. As I stated, I'm a petrol head, my daily driver of choice doesn't qualify as cheap and I spend my weekends at drag strips, race tracks or touring with friends who drive all sorts of cars are most definitely excessively expensive. Despite all that, it doesn't mean I'm ignorant of that fact that things need to change.

By all means, disagree with my opinion, but there's no need for personal attacks.

How would you suggest we go about banning cars over a certain engine size or, indeed, completely? Might I suggest that a change like that would be impossible to achieve without some kind of long term phased approach... like for example a sliding scale of yearly expense (for example, road tax) based on engine size to persuade/coerce consumers (and manufacturers) to shift towards smaller engines, or ideally less/none polluting alternatives.

Something as simple and comparably inexpensive as phasing out analogue TV/Radio has taken a long term plan over several years and still represents a significant financial and logistical problem. To suggest we could make sweeping overnight changes to the transport infrastructure is simply unrealistic. Hitting people in the pocket is the first step down a long road to achieving that, consumer patterns will shift, manufacturers will adapt and the needed change will happen.