US ambassador won't pay the congestion charge

Former Member

I'm with Klintock on this: no matter how you dress the congestion charge up, it is an involuntary tax on people.

The issue is whether you agree with it or not. I can't comment on the London one, because I don't live in that smog-infested hellhole, but I am very much in favour of the congestion charge in Durham, because it has taken cars out of a mediaeval city centre and allowed pedestrians to enjoy it largely unhindered.

Former Member

Man Of Kent wrote:

No it isn't. It's a tax, but it doesn't restrict your travel at all.

It's all about choices, you can choose to drive through London and pay the charge, or you can go by Tube and pay a charge or you can take one of those private bus thingies and pay a charge.

And as an aside, it actually penalises the poor if anyone. The rich can just have the roads to themselves as they can afford the charge easier...



And I'm sure you would support the use of diplomatic immunity for other crimes as well then, non?

but theyre raising travelcard prices as well

so its a bit pointless really

Former Member

wheresmyplacebo wrote:

but theyre raising travelcard prices as well

The bastards! :mad:

Former Member

klintock wrote:

The actions which cause the charge are voluntary

.. and thus the tax itself is voluntary. You are not forced into the action, that is free will.

You see this is where you lose me. What have my actions as regards driving my car around different areas or spending my money on a TV got to do with anybody else?

You mean apart from pollution?

Simple question - can the charge be negotiated or refused?

Yes. This case proves it.

Former Member

and thus the tax itself is voluntary.

What the fuck?

You are not forced into the action, that is free will.

But you are forced to pay if you decide to do that action. You do not have the option of deciding to not deal with Red Ken and his little mafia. That isn't free will. Are you being deliberately obtuse or something?

You mean apart from pollution?

My TV pollutes? And my car pollutes no matter where it is, so that's bollocks too.

Yes. This case proves it.

Voluntary -

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&lr=&oi=defmore&defl=en&q=define:voluntary

Tax-

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=define%3Atax&meta=

Don't normally do this - but you are just wrong.

Former Member

klintock wrote:

What the fuck?

If you know the consequences of any action then you cannot claim that those consequences were not of your making if you follow through with the action.

I have never paid the congestion charge because I voluntarily take an alternate method of transport.

Involuntary taxation would mean that I pay regardless of my chosen action.

But you are forced to pay if you decide to do that action. You do not have the option of deciding to not deal with Red Ken and his little mafia. That isn't free will. Are you being deliberately obtuse or something?

I think I covered this. Free will happens when you make the conscious decision to act in a way that will mean that the charge is levied. You do have the option of not dealing with red Ken.

And my car pollutes no matter where it is, so that's bollocks too.

Not to the same degree though, non?

I was being pedantic. The US Embassy will not pay. Therefore it is possible to refuse without penalty.

All you need do now is get your diplomatic status recognised

Former Member

If you know the consequences of any action then you cannot claim that those consequences were not of your making if you follow through with the action.

Bollocks. Utter bollocks. The "consequences of your actions" have to include offering up money to someone you have no choice in dealing with. You have already agreed that it;s tax, and tax is defined as involuntary trade. This makes you look silly.

Involuntary taxation would mean that I pay regardless of my chosen action.

All taxation is involuntary. It's more or less what the word means. :banghead:

You do have the option of not dealing with red Ken.

No, you don't. the only person deciding who trades with who is Ken. You cannot refuse, you do not have that option. You do have the option to make many choices. On one of those choices Red Ken has decided to use violence to rob people. If you decide to do the action that Red Ken robs you for, then you get robbed. Simple.

To then say that that robbery has been volunteered for is ridiculous, and you know it.

Not to the same degree though, non?

Do the laws of physics work differently in London? You missed the point about the TV too.

All you need do now is get your diplomatic status recognised

Working on it already.

Will almost certainly be dismissed as a crank though.

Former Member

I agree with the Man of Kent. It cannot be classed as a tax as you have options to avoid it e.g use another mode of transport to get into the city, or travel at a different time. Therefore, it can be classed as voluntary because you can achieve the same ends (getting into Central London) without paying the charge.

But if you absolutely insist on calling it a tax, it would be classed as an indirect tax, which is not covered by the convention.

Incidentally, I don't agree with the charge, and voted against it happening here in Edinburgh, which was a bad idea as the city promptly began all their roadworks and re-phased the lights to cause maximum trouble. You know there must be something up when traffic flows more smoothly through the city when the largest junction in the city's lights are out of action and the wee wifie traffic warden is directing traffic!

But if our diplomats pay tolls abroad, then their diplomats should pay it here.



btw - Alladin - loved the Ferrero Rocher thing. I snorted coffee all over my monitor at that one!!