If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
"Pay as you Go" road use
BillieTheBot
Posts: 8,721 Bot
The Government have suggested that as a way to curb congestion, they may well consider bringing in PAYG road use, instead of a fuel duty. If you drive on congested roads you will pay a lot, if you drive on quiet rural roads you won't.
Story.
I personally think it is a stupid idea, for the reasons that this article spells out. It wouldn't sufficiently penalise gaz-guzzling cars, it would punish the urban poor, it would destroy city centres, it would make congestion more prolonged, and the "Big Brother" idea of tracking movements is something that scares me deeply.
10/10 for trying, 0/10 for thinking it through first.
Story.
I personally think it is a stupid idea, for the reasons that this article spells out. It wouldn't sufficiently penalise gaz-guzzling cars, it would punish the urban poor, it would destroy city centres, it would make congestion more prolonged, and the "Big Brother" idea of tracking movements is something that scares me deeply.
10/10 for trying, 0/10 for thinking it through first.
Beep boop. I'm a bot.
0
Comments
Rip out the black box (which by the way will be able to tell if you are speeding or not) and voila! no more road tax.
It's got fuck all to do with the environment and everything to do with screwing you lot over for a few more quid.
... and keeping tabs on where you go to. Doubtless they'll try and work it so that it can also tell every time you speed, commit a parking offence etc, and then they can send you an automatic fine.
I think this is a ridiculous idea. The car lobby won't much like it either - and in this instance they'll be absolutely right. Looking forward to mass non-compliance if this is ever put into practice, which I doubt it will be.
:yes:
And it will destroy our native tourism.
We want alternatives to oil, not alternatives to the car.
Therefore my verdict is that you should pay one flatrate cost per journey. All journeys should cost £3 - long or short. So if it's from Shropshire to Devon (which is about 190 miles), that will be well worth it for £3 + petrol. If you travel from door to desk, the £3 should disencourage you from using the car.
Yes, cars are great for longer journeys, but much too depended on for short journeys.
I live on a very busy road. When I walk out of my house, I have to cross the road to get to the other side. It's pretty difficult. I have to wait for about 8 cars until I see an opening. As I doing this in the rush hour, I think to myself "how many of these people are travelling less than 2 miles as per above statement?"
Such schemes do not solve the traffic problem, they simply move it from a place where it is more suited - ie motorways - to places where it is less suited such as city routes.
It wouldn't reduce road usage, because there is no alternative in place, it simply penalises those who have to use the roads.
Of course, it's fine for Londoners who have already abandoned the cars and use the tube for most of their travel, or for the uber-rich who wouldn't notice the charges, everyone else is left in the shit. Super.
As has been said it would hurt the poor, harm city centres badly and hurt businesses in the centre as the congestion charge has done according to some.
That'd be like having VAT twice on any shop product. It'll only make people poorer, they still need to use the bloody road.
They would be better just leaving the system as it is, or abolishing road tax and having a toll system like on the continent.
:no:. Bad idea.
If there was an integrated system of public transport (so you go into a booth, select your destination, and it tells you what buses / trains / planes there are etc. etc., prints off your tickets) that was heavily improved upon todays so it was no less convenient than driving, then I would be all for this idea.
As it stands, people do need to use their cars, and put simply, the alternatives aren't as good!
I don't think so, unless you have good cause (i.e. a criminal on probation). However, I think monitoring vehicles is slightly different, I'm not sure why, I can just justify it to myself - same with mobile phones. I think associating personal ifnormation with the tracking is dangerous though - but a car might be driven by more than one person.
That's why I look toward a time
Fuel duty is actually fairer- but having said that heavy discounts should be provided for haulers and other jobs where vehicle use is vital.
Much if not most of the bulk of traffic is created by commuters and the school run. That is the kind of traffic we ought to try to reduce as much as possible.
:yes:
Is it practical to fit 20-odd million black-boxes??
Will it not mean that people will use country/rural roads more - merely shifting the congestion?
What the country needs is cheaper alternatives to the car, not more expensive car use.
I don't see why they dont marginally diminish the charge per mile. As somene said something like 80% of all car journeys are under 2 miles so they should charge extortionatly for the first mile, a little bit less for the second, less for third and alot less for subsequent miles etc so people driving long journeys aren't penalised so badly. Also they should exclude haulage companys completely.
Of course this system is retarded but it looks like the government will get it's way.
i'm already paying shit loads of tax to use the friggin roads thankyou.
as someone said ...it's alternative fuels we should be looking at.
as for monitoring everyones movements as if they are criminals ...thats outragous but ...more and more people seem to think that having no privacy is perfectly ok!
how did that come about?>
However taxing people to death without offering an alternative mode of transportation is not going to solve anything. In any case, it's not the long-distance travellers that cause the most traffic.
Perhaps Congestion Charge is the way forward. Perhaps any mum insisting on driving her three-tonne 4 x 4 to take his child 2.5 miles to school instead of using public transport (or walking, which by all means children in this country are in desperate need of) should be made to pay £20, £30 a day for the privilege.
It wont though will it, why would anyone bother? If traffic gets really bad people wont bother.
I agree, in my opinion the car will be outdated sooner or later. Private transport will die out.
The issue I have with this is what about those who need a car. This also targets people who aren't earning as much and really we shouldn't be putting extra financial burden on them. We don't want a two tier society where rich people drive and poor peope take buses (I know that's the way it is, but it's not good for the country).
What do you do with disabled people who drive? They can't easily just say 'petrol is more expensive now, so I'll walk'. They will just be inconvenienced. Fuel duty is a nice idea in theory but it's too broad brush and effects everyone whereas it is the case that some people make more worthwhile journeys than others. (ambulance vs. healthy middle aged man driving to the local shop to get the newspaper, for example)
I actually had a small lecture on this subject exactly from a proffessor of economics who had been commisioned by the government to research into it. The bottom line from him was it was a good idea because then it's fairer for everyone. But me and my economics teacher discuessed afterwards and both agreed that there is not the public transport infrastructure to support the change from cars to public transport.
My view, as before, is that it's a good idea but we're not ready for it
the problem is you really a need a simple system otherwise it costs loads to stop fraudsters
theres omly problems with duty free fuel in northern ireland as theyre on the border with another country
my suggestion for upping fuel duty and removing road tax is there if you people want a pay as you use service
people who use the "we need better alternatives first" know that wont come about cause improvement will take decades to see and to improve public transport outside of london is the key, especially bus services, which are best for town to town journeys but i will not use when im out of london as theres so few routes and so few per day
in london you can live on bus and tube and its affordable even if prices are rising sharply at moment to 'fund improvements' ie ppp profits
If they're poor they can't afford unnecessary luxuries like cars.
you expect them to go to work right? and its relatively poor and in many cases a car is a necessity, even if lots of journeys are pointless
on the proposals themselves its compelte crap and designed to pander to the country areas
if you want pay as you go usage, you make the tax on the fuel which encourages people to buy more efficient cars or mopeds etc
persoanlyl i prefer a mix of this and flat rate like road tax is but heavily in favour of cars thast are deemed to be really efficient
I'd also like to drive my car as much as I like without government nannying.
a car for many people is the only thing that enables them to work.
it is not a luxury but an essential tool.