[Archived] Privatised Roads

[AppleDroid]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/9152181/Privatised-roads-to-get-country-moving-again.html

My decision to never get a car seems to have been a right decision

[Al]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/9152181/Privatised-roads-to-get-country-moving-again.html

My decision to never get a car seems to have been a right decision

If they are going to privatise the roads let's do it and scrap the car tax. No chance is there. Road fund tax is just one more government rip off like tax and VAT on fuel.

[koi]

If they are going to privatise the roads let's do it and scrap the car tax. No chance is there. Road fund tax is just one more government rip off like tax and VAT on fuel.

Yup. £40bn or summat road users pay, a pathetic amount of that goes back into the road network. Then again, who is willing to pay the real amount of tax we should pay for all these things?

[braddock]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/mar/19/road-privatisation-david-cameron

[jim mk2]

Cameron invoking the "Victorian spirit" shows what a complete and utter gormless upper class twerp this man is. What next... children being sent up chimneys ?

[colin]

Evening All,

Road tax is a term that is somewhat misleading & out of date. It was originally a tax to drive on the road but was abolished in 1937 by Winston Churchill. It has been replaced by The Vehicle Exise Duty which currently varies due to the amount of CO2 emissions of a vehicle. Disabled drivers, police cars, the Royal family, and band A motorists pay £0. If cyclists were liable to pay Vehicle Exise Duty they would also be liable to nothing as they emit no CO2.

So if you're on a bike and some car driver tells you that you don't pay "road tax" then tell them that neither do they.

Privatising roads will be a Herculean task involving massive changes from moving the duty to maintain highways from both

The Highways Agencyand Local Highways Authorities such as BwD BC & Lancashire CC.

And, if reports are to be beleived, and the Chinese Government is involved, they would have carte blanche to charge tolls & carry out compulsory purchase orders to widen roads. CPOs are currently only available to public bodies. Won't it be great when some Chinese representative come a knocking on your door to tell you that your house is to CP-ed for a new road or a widening of an existing road.

Of course it's not just China. Rumanians, Koreans, Americans or even representatives from The Peoples' Autonomous Republic Of Azerbaijan may well take over control of the roads. Oh goody!

[jim mk2]

Private transport (cars and lorries) running on public roads makes as little sense as public transport (trains and buses) being in private hands while running on tracks owned by a quasi-private company (Network Rail) as is the situation at present. The roads should be privatised and sold off (though preferably not to the Chinese) and road charging introduced for all road journeys - it's about time motorists and haulage companies paid the true cost of the damage they cause to the planet - and railways renationalised and properly funded and modernised by central government.

[koi]

How much goes back in, Koi? Some information on how road tax money gets spent.

I think it's something like £9bn.

[Stuart]

I'm still a bit shocked that cyclists don't emit CO2.

[colin]

I'm still a bit shocked that cyclists don't emit CO2.

I do now and then, but that's not a matter up for discussion.

[LeChuck]

I do now and then, but that's not a matter up for discussion.

I think Stuart was on about respiration, in which case I hope you do it more often than "now and then" Colin!

[ABBEY]

Private transport (cars and lorries) running on public roads makes as little sense as public transport (trains and buses) being in private hands while running on tracks owned by a quasi-private company (Network Rail) as is the situation at present. The roads should be privatised and sold off (though preferably not to the Chinese) and road charging introduced for all road journeys - it's about time motorists and haulage companies paid the true cost of the damage they cause to the planet - and railways renationalised and properly funded and modernised by central government.

and if no wagons were on the road jim how would you food be delivered to tescos?

[Baz]

I understand it's for new roads / additional lanes only. Like the m6 toll which has made a loss every year since opening.

[colin]

I think Stuart was on about respiration, in which case I hope you do it more often than "now and then" Colin!

With apologies for my scientific internet fail. I, of course, do respirate during my juourney to work. For some reason I confused "respiration" with "farting like a flatutent buffalo on a bike."

I do offer my sincere apologies and hope to be repatriated amongst the good folk of brfs.com as soon as I have served my penance.

[jim mk2]

Today's Budget will see those earning more than £150,000 given a £10,000 tax cut while pensioners will see a raid on their meagre incomes with tax allowances of the over-65s frozen. This government is not only morally bankrupt, Osborne and Cameron are evil.

[thenodrog]

Today's Budget will see those earning more than £150,000 given a £10,000 tax cut while pensioners will see a raid on their meagre incomes with tax allowances of the over-65s frozen. This government is not only morally bankrupt, Osborne and Cameron are evil.

Interesting to hear a dedicated Labour supporter commenting on pensions..... http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/pensions/article-1646128/Browns-17000-tax-raid-on-every-pension.html

btw.... How much income tax will a person earning that much money pay in a year Jim?

[BuckyRover]

It's odd that after thirteen years in power Labour came up with the 50p rate 57 days before they left Government and Darling described it as a temporary measure.

It's also the highest rate in the G20.

Saying that I do feel it's a bit odd to change it now. It's very easy to criticise this change.

[jim mk2]

It's odd that after thirteen years in power Labour came up with the 50p rate 57 days before they left Government and Darling described it as a temporary measure.

It's also the highest rate in the G20.

Saying that I do feel it's a bit odd to change it now. It's very easy to criticise this change.

The 50p rate was introduced to help combat the worst economic crisis since the 1920s, and Labour always said it was temporary. But by reducing it now and lining the pockets of the rich - a £1m-a-year fatcat is instantly £50,000 a year better off and the likes of Wayne Rooney and top investment bankers more than £200,000 a year better off - when the economy is clearly still struggling to recover is and when people are still losing their jobs because of the coalition's policies is not only wrong and unfair but morally repugnant. Miliband played a blinder in the Commons after the Budget speech challenging the Tory front bench to justify the huge pay increase they had awarded themselves and their public schoolboy right-wing friends - watching Cameron and Osborne squirm was a joy to watch.

[thenodrog]

It's odd that after thirteen years in power Labour came up with the 50p rate 57 days before they left Government and Darling described it as a temporary measure.

It's also the highest rate in the G20.

Saying that I do feel it's a bit odd to change it now. It's very easy to criticise this change.

Not if it's not bringing in any revenue and forcing big earners and by definition big spenders away from the country. Outdated Socialist principles / jealousy or whatever people must realise that the economy benefits from having the wealthy around and not forcing them away to countries who value them higher. We've seen the benefit in having the wealthy invest in our town and club so why did Jack Walker have to do all that froma position of tax exile (and by definition being forced by law to miss more matches than he watched)? Doesn't make economic sense for anybody, rich or poor.

[thenodrog]

The 50p rate was introduced to help combat the worst economic crisis since the 1920s, and Labour always said it was temporary.

So taking your inbred jealousy and resentment out of the equation whats your problem?

[jim mk2]

Read past the first sentence.

[jim mk2]

Not if it's not bringing in any revenue and forcing big earners and by definition big spenders away from the country. Outdated Socialist principles / jealousy or whatever people must realise that the economy benefits from having the wealthy around and not forcing them away to countries who value them higher. We've seen the benefit in having the wealthy invest in our town and club so why did Jack Walker have to do all that froma position of tax exile (and by definition being forced by law to miss more matches than he watched)? Doesn't make economic sense for anybody, rich or poor.

It didn't bring in much added rvenue in the first year because the rich with their clever accountants quickly converted the income into other tax evasion wheezes. The good news is tax avoidance by individuals and business is now a major issue and the subject of serious scrutiny from the Inland Revenue.

The notion that significant number people have left the country because of the higher tax rate has been shown to be complete nonsense. Another myth peddled by the right. A recent survey has showed that London continues to be the world's No 1 centre of finance ahead of New York and Hong Kong so there's no sign of the fatcats leaving this country there. The world's no 1 insurer is shortly to move its HQ from Chicago to the UK.

In hard times times and good times it is right that the rich pay more taxes and even Osborne has announced measures to crack down on allowances and tax avoidance schemes for the wealthy few. It's called fairness Gordon - a concept you don't understand.

[colin]

Not if it's not bringing in any revenue and forcing big earners and by definition big spenders away from the country. Outdated Socialist principles / jealousy or whatever people must realise that the economy benefits from having the wealthy around and not forcing them away to countries who value them higher. We've seen the benefit in having the wealthy invest in our town and club so why did Jack Walker have to do all that froma position of tax exile (and by definition being forced by law to miss more matches than he watched)? Doesn't make economic sense for anybody, rich or poor.

Jack Walker invested in Rovers because it was his hobby and interest. Rovers were incredibly lucky that he did that. What he did was not a reflection of what rich individuals & corporations do. He was a benefactor.

What the rich usually do is to shift their money around to avoid UK tax. When Alistair darling introduced the 50p tax rate HMRC estimated that £16 billion was shifted into the previous tax year. No doubt another £15 billion will be shifted into next year's tax year.

But that detracts from bigger problems: tax havens. Billionaires, banks and big business avoid tax through them, pushing up taxes for everyone else. Nicholas Shaxson's book Treasure Islands estimates that $12 trillion, a quarter of global wealth, goes untaxed in them. Banks and companies have even more. Every FTSE 100 company from Tesco to RBS avoids tax through subsidiaries or partners in havens. Tax haven secrecy allowed BCCI, Enron and fraudulent "financial derivatives" like CDOs (collateralised debt obligations), causing the financial crisis.

High taxes don't force "big earners and by definition big spenders away from the country." They've gone already. The money is in The Cayman Islands; Bermuda; Luxembourg; & The Channel Islands. The latter is where Jack Walker went to to avoid tax. Let's not kid ourselves, Jack Walker went there to avoid tax. He came back to the UK just enough days to avoid UK taxes (otherwise why would he have gone to Jersey?) So the rest of us had to pay more. Just the same as Lewis Hamilton has decamped to Switzerland to avoid paying tax. We all have to pay more to make up the loss.

Just think of all the rich people in the world and just imagine how much tax they pay when they can shift their money off-shore.

As the infamous Leona Helmsley said "Only the little people pay taxes." That's you and me Thenodrog. And probably most people who post on here

[jim mk2]

why did Jack Walker have to do all that froma position of tax exile (and by definition being forced by law to miss more matches than he watched)?

Jack Walker wasn't "forced" to miss Rovers matches - he took the conscious decision to become a tax exile. The conclusion is, Jack Walker loved money more than he loved Rovers.

[thenodrog]

Jack Walker wasn't "forced" to miss Rovers matches - he took the conscious decision to become a tax exile. The conclusion is, Jack Walker loved money more than he loved Rovers.

You make that sound a crime. Who on earth doesn't?

I don't really get this selfish green eyed attitude which you have and I never will. Anybody who starts with nothing and does well to whatever degree will inevitably pay more tax than the average person. Why should they not be allowed to earn the fruits of their efforts? What is the incentive to kids to study hard, work hard and pass all those exams if by doing so you are exploited through the rest of your working life? Thats what all this soak the achievers is, it's just a form of exploitation. 'Doing well' is treated as a crime by those that haven't the wit, intellect or balls to do anything other than sit on sofa's watching sky tv and existing on microwaved slop, duty free samson roll ups and super strong lager. Incredibly the workings of our democracy allow each member of this rapidly expanding underclass as much say in the political direction of this country as any true Captain of industry. I've an effin massive corporation tax bill to pay this month, much of which will end up indirectly buying the above products and then funding the health dept to patch up the obesity, lung cancer and liver failure

It's likely if not probable that the Walkers directly or indirectly paid more tax than that paid by everybody who has ever posted on here, more even than the entire combined population of Little Harwood where they were born. Not only that by hard work and 'getting on' in life they provided income for thousands of their workers who all paid tax on their earnings. Have they not contributed enough to the coffers of this country? Did Jack or Fred retire at 65? Did they hell. Yet on the other hand they attract criticism from idlers who can't wait to take early retirement and who sit on their arses and contribute sweet FA to the country’s economy.

Tell you what Jim (and Colin) stop acting like parasitical tapeworms and if you feel so strongly about people who can afford paying more tax why doen’t you two contact the HMRC and volunteer to pay the 40% rate on ALL your earnings? Alternatively why not instruct them to dispense with the tax threshold and offer to pay tax on all your earnings? You can afford to I'm sure and it would be a magnificent gesture to the citizens of this country.

Btw it appears today that the Beckhams are selling up and taking themselves and their £165m fortune off to the States. Good eh? That’s a great indictment of our tax laws I don’t think. I bet US immigration and the IRS will welcome them and their loot with absolutely open arms.

btw print this and pin it to the mirror ....http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/parasite?q=parasite