Gas Guzzlers
Posted by: jasons on 22 March 2006
So which of you unlucky people is in for a big road tax hike on your 4x4's?
Also, i know the answer will be no, but does anyone think that the budget was 'fair'?
Cheers
Jason
Also, i know the answer will be no, but does anyone think that the budget was 'fair'?
Cheers
Jason
Posted on: 24 March 2006 by Stephen B
Why single out 4x4s? A CLK500 is less economical than RAV4 surely.
Posted on: 24 March 2006 by jasons
No one is singling them out.
This new road tax thing i assume is all about the size etc and its apprent harm on the environment.
All im saying is that i always see loads on the school run when i live in the middle of a built up area/town.
Besides, id much prefer an AMG SLK55
This new road tax thing i assume is all about the size etc and its apprent harm on the environment.
All im saying is that i always see loads on the school run when i live in the middle of a built up area/town.
Besides, id much prefer an AMG SLK55
Posted on: 24 March 2006 by long-time-dead
quote:Originally posted by Stephen B:
Why single out 4x4s? A CLK500 is less economical than RAV4 surely.
Ok - call it "wanker tax" and tax people for having stupid looking vehicles.
RAV4 is a perfect example.
Posted on: 24 March 2006 by Steve Toy
LTD,
Agreed.
Agreed.
Posted on: 25 March 2006 by u5227470736789439
quote:Originally posted by Rico:
is two-jags hurting yet?
No! Joe Public is paying, just like we were with two Jag's Third Official residence, at least till he was rumbled. This gov't is rotten from top down.
Fredrik
Posted on: 26 March 2006 by Martin D
"4 x 4s are a waste of resources and are ill-adapted for their most common use. As such they should be taxed punitively"
Why?
They'll pay tons more in duty to the wanker Brown and Bliar. Also it needs saying that it would take about 40 modern cars that pass the new emissions regs to cause the same pollution as a mark 1 Cortina, so stop all the self righteous panicking.
Oh and BTW lets have a 50% tax on a system that uses 2 or more NAP500's its the same argument.
Martin
Why?
They'll pay tons more in duty to the wanker Brown and Bliar. Also it needs saying that it would take about 40 modern cars that pass the new emissions regs to cause the same pollution as a mark 1 Cortina, so stop all the self righteous panicking.
Oh and BTW lets have a 50% tax on a system that uses 2 or more NAP500's its the same argument.
Martin
Posted on: 26 March 2006 by Martin D
how about 10% tax on the above, and 78% tax on this:
its the same argument
Posted on: 26 March 2006 by HTK
Quite so. And how about a tax on cars that can travel at twice the maximum speed limit, or have three more seats that the owners use 90% of the time, etc etc....
The Urban Attack Vehicle brigade defy logic for the most part and are among the worst drivers on the roads. Prejudice is all well and good but beware of supporting measures to tax them just because you don’t like them. It’ll be your turn next.
Cheers
Harry
The Urban Attack Vehicle brigade defy logic for the most part and are among the worst drivers on the roads. Prejudice is all well and good but beware of supporting measures to tax them just because you don’t like them. It’ll be your turn next.
Cheers
Harry
Posted on: 26 March 2006 by joe90
I think we should tax those who are unable to use an apostrophe correctly.
You're likely to get most SUV owners and a few others besides...
You're likely to get most SUV owners and a few others besides...
Posted on: 27 March 2006 by BLT
Yes, but I've still got my rally car if I want to have fun!
Surprisingly the Prius can be coaxed into tail-out action (must be the weight of the batteries in the back)
I don't see the point of taxing ownership - a big 4 X 4 only pollutes when it is used, far better to keep the fuel tax high.
Surprisingly the Prius can be coaxed into tail-out action (must be the weight of the batteries in the back)
I don't see the point of taxing ownership - a big 4 X 4 only pollutes when it is used, far better to keep the fuel tax high.