Safe Speed Forums

Read that line in my post again...

EVEN THEN... If the guy on £120k doesn't have a car and the bloke on £30k does, and drives a lot of miles, the answer is "probably"!

That's not "the same man", though, is it?

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

Har har.

I know you need to believe that the fuel duty, VAT and VED you pay goes towards maintaining YOUR roads because otherwise you can't claim they're YOUR roads, but they don't, they just go into a general taxation pot.

Motoring related taxes in the UK aren't hypothecated for road spending in any way shape or form.

You might as well argue because you pay VED that you should get your own lane to swim in in the local taxpayer funded swimming pool and because you pay fuel duty that you should be able to jump to queue your local A&E.

Utter nonsense as you can see.

Er, it could be, man has a job earning £30k a year, then get's a better job and decided to ditch the car and cycle to work.

I know this is a line that you particularly enjoy trotting-out, but it has absolutely nothing to do with my post! Still, since you mentioned it, it's even WORSE than that! I absolutely agree that VED fuel duty, VAT on fuel duty etc etc are not hypothecated and go into the general taxation pot. Unfortunately, only SOME of it gets spent on our (sorry, "my" ) roads. MOST of it gets spent elsewhere! (cycle paths and the like...)

...no need to thank me...

Some of my VED/fuel duty etc... gets spent on supporting people like Mick Philpott (in and out of prison) so sorry guv, we're all in this together as it were.

You say you understand it's not hypothecated , but then moan abut where tax raised via motoring taxes is spent?

You're not quite getting this are you.

I think maybe what you saying is that not enough money is being spent on the roads for motorised traffic.

Fair enough.

But if you try and link that to how much tax we're paying on motoring taxes you're on a hiding to nothing I'm afraid.

If private motoring is indeed subsidised (I strongly suspect it is) then I don't have an issue with that.

And I do think that somebody without a car should in part pay for the road network, just like every body else does.

What I strongly object to is the "they're my roads cos I pay for them through my road tax" lot, who not only are soundly wrong, cos roads are paid for by everybody, but also , it's just morally repugnant.

dangerously close to agreeing with weepej .... help.

I also think speed limits should be strictly enforced, NSL should be 50mph max, 20mph blanket limits across urban areas (uppable if there is good reason) and support the use of automated enforcement.

Does that help?

yeh much better, don't push your luck!

Has that "cured" you now Ed?!

Exactly! We're closer to agreeing than you think on this!

No, if I may be so bold, I think it's YOU that didn't understand. I was being sarcastic there. The thing is, I've never felt that I "own" the roads, and to be honest, I don't think many other people on this forum do either. You just seem to have ASSUMED that we do because we belong that most despised group of citizens, the spawn of Satan himself (AKA "motorists"). I'm not particularly bothered that the excess that isn't spent on the roads is spent elsewhere, but it does then rather get up my nose when people try to tell me that despite the taxes I pay by virtue of being a motorist going into the "general taxation pot", AND despite only a fraction of them getting spent on the roads, the rest of society is somehow "subsidising" me!

...and MOST especially, when that assertion is based on a bit of research commissioned by the Green party, which even then admits to "deliberately do not offsetting motoring-connected taxes unless they are specifically ringfenced for car use, for example a motorway toll where the money is set aside for highway maintenance." So unless I've misunderstood it:

Motorists pay more tax than gets spent on the roads;
The remainder goes towards "general tax revenue";
The report then doesn't count anything that isn't specifically ringfenced for use on the roads (i.e. most of it, in this country!);
...and somehow that equates to the rest of the populus subsidising the motorist?!

Aye, right... on yer bike! (Oh, but that's probably your preferred form of transport anyway)!

The topic in this thread is a UKIP member that clearly thinks car drivers own the roads because they pay "road tax" and that everybody else on the road is a scrounger (and then without a hint of irony says he walks on pavements for which he certainly doesn't pay a pavement tax for).

Did you forget that?

We belong to the most despised group of citizens, motorists? I'd hardly say so, you appear to be taking it all to much to heart (or reading the Daily Mail too much).

As a motorist I certainly don't feel despised.

You want to see despised, try getting on a cycle!

That's a good example of what I was saying earlier. I don't think anyone on here actually DOES believe they own the roads. That's something you appear to have decided we do.

No, motorists pay motoring taxes which go into general tax revenue, end of. No connection to roads whatsoever.

Road spending comes from a mixture of general taxation and local taxes such as council tax (check your council tax bill).

Cor blimey. We're talking about this UKIP member here who clearly does think motorists pay for the roads though taxes on motoring.

As I said, bunkum.

Yes thanks.

It tells me that you obviously think the German and French people are a bunch of uncaring homicidal fools for setting their speed limits as high as they have. Hmmm.. I need to consider who has this about right; them damn foreigners or Weepej. This is a tough one

I have always said that people should drive within their own ability. If you don’t have the skill set or confidence to drive in France at a legal 82mph or Germany at a legal 100mph - then don’t! I’m not asking you or anyone else to go faster than what they are comfortable doing; ever! If it’s really too fast for you and you perceive danger around every corner, (even though there’s three lanes in a straight line), then fair enough.

But you shouldn’t expect or demand that everyone else be dumbed down to your level of driving in the false claim that it’s dangerous to go faster than some arbitrary limit you perceive to be safe. I repeat, I am not asking, and have never expected, anyone to drive as fast as me if they are not entirely comfortable.

Showing my age now.. I imagine you to be like Blubber Bear from Wacky Races; if you were a passenger in my car you’d be constantly gnashing your teeth and blubbering. (And then I’d start the engine).

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

There you go again! You're reading more into it than is there! I didn't interpret it as that. I took it as him saying not so much that "car drivers own the roads because they DO pay for them", as saying that "cyclists don't own cycle paths because they DON'T pay for them"! It's just the same issue from the opposite end of the telescope.



Perhaps you should ask yourself why???

It's odd isn't it. We both seem to feel despised and yet neither of us have any justification for doing so! (apparently).