Originally Posted by Earl of Bronze (Post 34974765)

Time, and past time to tell the EU to Foxtrot Oscar me thinks.... :dozey:

Originally Posted by Product 13 (Post 34974968)

The fine, if they get caught

Originally Posted by Derek S (Post 34974975)

£200 + 6 penalty points. Not exactly small change.

Plus if they get caught the car will probably be towed at a cost of about £120 + £20 a day storage.

Originally Posted by Earl of Bronze (Post 34974765)

Time, and past time to tell the EU to Foxtrot Oscar me thinks.... :dozey:

Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 34974879)

time to point our ballistic missiles at Brussels ,and press the big red button of freedom.

Originally Posted by Product 13 (Post 34974980)

Still, that's going to be peanuts compared to what they would have to pay for insurance.

Originally Posted by Hom3r (Post 34974985)

Agreed



Can I press the button, I lost my job to a Belgian.

Originally Posted by Derek S (Post 34975004)

I'm £140 a year for me and 2 other named drivers. :confused:

Fair enough it's a small car and I've got a whole bunch of things going in my favour for getting it cheaper but still well under the fine for no insurance and less chance of losing my license.

Originally Posted by Derek S (Post 34974752)

Thanks to the EU and the Lisbon treaty that wasn't a treaty so we didn't need a referendum even though we were promised one.....

Originally Posted by Osem (Post 34975451)

You're not suggesting we've been misled are you?... ;)

Originally Posted by Hom3r (Post 35020884)

Well with ant & dec running the country ":rofl:", there was talk on the TV that there will be a rise in VAT taking it from 17.5% to 20%, to pay off the deficiet.

But they were saying something about it NOT going on food so I guess among the target will be fuel.

So if this does happen, all those who voted for the current govenment CANNOT complain.

Originally Posted by foreverwar (Post 35020887)

Well, at least Mr Bean isn't running the country anymore.....;) (nice to see a happy Mirror reader).

If VAT does go up, I won't complain - we need to balance the books somehow to pay for the NHS, Education, Defence, etc etc - the money fairy doesn't really exist.

Originally Posted by Hom3r (Post 35020884)

So if this does happen, all those who voted for the current govenment CANNOT complain.

Originally Posted by Hom3r (Post 35020884)

Well with ant & dec running the country ":rofl:", there was talk on the TV that there will be a rise in VAT taking it from 17.5% to 20%, to pay off the deficiet.

But they were saying something about it NOT going on food so I guess among the target will be fuel.

So if this does happen, all those who voted for the current govenment CANNOT complain.

Originally Posted by foreverwar (Post 35020887)

Well, at least Mr Bean isn't running the country anymore.....;) (nice to see a happy Mirror reader).

If VAT does go up, I won't complain - we need to balance the books somehow to pay for the NHS, Education, Defence, etc etc - the money fairy doesn't really exist.

Originally Posted by Hom3r (Post 35020903)

So you don't obviously drive.

I nearly cried when I paid my diesl bill, £60:shocked::mad:,the most I have ever spent.

Originally Posted by haydnwalker (Post 35020977)

Me and a mate at work figured out,...

Originally Posted by haydnwalker (Post 35020977)

Me and a mate at work figured out, that if we half the amount of troops in Afghanistan (thereby saving lives...) and dropped public spending by 20%/year for 5 years they could just about pay off the deficit.

Afterall... WTF are we doing in Afghanistan anyway... not our war really. We were just bullied into going by the americans. how much does one round cost to fire from an SA80? Or an RPG from a launcher? Or even...how much does it cost to fly Close Air Support in a Tornado/Typhoon for 2 hours? ALOT I'm guessing, money that can be saved imho.

Increasing various taxes and costs just puts businesses out of work, thereby decreasing the amount of people paying tax and increasing the amount of people taking benefits

---------- Post added at 18:05 ---------- Previous post was at 18:03 ----------



You get off lightly Hom3r... My Audi costs me about £80 to fill up...its getting rediculous. And I'm spending £40/week on fuel as I have to use my car at work. I'm glad I get a mileage allowance really because I'd be skint if I didn't

Originally Posted by Taf (Post 35021000)

As we pay excise duty on the petrol then VAT on the cost PLUS the excise duty, a simple way would be to just dump the VAT and have the excise duty only (at a higher rate at first of course to prevent loss of tax).

But I don't suppose our EU friends would like that....

Originally Posted by Hom3r (Post 35020884)

Well with ant & dec running the country ":rofl:", there was talk on the TV that there will be a rise in VAT taking it from 17.5% to 20%, to pay off the deficiet.

But they were saying something about it NOT going on food so I guess among the target will be fuel.

So if this does happen, all those who voted for the current govenment CANNOT complain.

Originally Posted by Xaccers (Post 35020902)

If it does, I'll be complaining about the mess Labour left us in, not the steps that need to be taken to get us out of it.

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35021025)

Second post you've made with that exact last paragraph in.

From what I can see people who voted the other way to you aren't complaining. Why? Because we understand, unlike most Labour supporters, that there isn't an endless pot of money to throw at public services and welfare and buy votes.
Snippedy snip snip

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35021025)

Second post you've made with that exact last paragraph in.

From what I can see people who voted the other way to you aren't complaining. Why? Because we understand, unlike most Labour supporters, that there isn't an endless pot of money to throw at public services and welfare and buy votes. We accept that the bills have to be paid and I'm sorry to inform you that we don't blame the new administration for it - we blame the previous administration that chalked up the deficit that needs paying.

The simple fact is that the economic woes were bad, however even without that Labour were happily chalking up ever increasing deficits that were not sustainable in the long term.

It's what they do, spend and spend and tax and tax and borrow and borrow if they don't feel it politically convenient to tax enough to pay for the spending. They were handed a prosperous economy in surplus and urinated that away throwing money at inefficiently run services, welfare and bribing and expanding their base.

We're not in the state Greece were, but the fact remains either we deal with the deficit as a country or the deficit deals with us by causing us to lose our AAA credit rating and our interest bill go up further increasing the amount of money being spent unproductively and on overheads instead of servicing us the people.

This won't be pleasant, but sadly those who are pragmatic enough to grasp it will accept the need. I appreciate this may well not include many who think that they can live off the state, that it should look after them and all their needs and don't grasp that the money for it has to come from somewhere and their relatively small or non-existent tax bill really doesn't come close to covering it.

Nice try :)

Originally Posted by RizzyKing (Post 35021083)

Funny isn't it to labour supporters their beloved party did nothing wrong for the thirteen years they held power but they are so happy to have a go at the poor sods that havn't been in for three weeks about this mess. Get real and take off those red tinted specs and see the complete mess that labour have left us all in and all of us are going to have to pay for it oneway or the other. But one consolation for you the majority of the public in this country are so damn short sighted come the next election they will forget who caused all this and will punish those who sorted it out letting the lunatics take over the asylum again.

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35021097)

Increasing taxes ,taking more of our wages will only create hardship that the state will pay for in the form of wellfair handouts .Other ways of reducing the deficit will have to be found other than taking it of the workers through increased taxes

Originally Posted by Hom3r (Post 35021102)

The point I'm trying to make is everytime extra cash is need they go "I know lets screw the motorist again".

I know taxes need to be raised, but they have said they cannot put food up as it will affect the poorest. but obviously the poorest don't own cars.

Well the way things are going there will come a point when motorists will snap, and no doubt fuel protest will raise there head and I will join them.

I have never said that Labour where perfect, and my glasses are very clear.

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35021114)

There has to be a balance of cuts to services and tax increases. Cut services too much it causes hardship through job cuts causing an influx on a job market that might not be able to take the strain, and reduction of services people have come to, right or wrong, rely on. Increase taxes too much it disincentivises work and deters investment.

The Tory plan had the balance shifted more towards cuts than tax increases, Labour's was skewed more towards tax increases, the Lib Dems' was in between the two.

The point is due to the mess we can't have no cuts or no tax increases sadly, it's a balancing act. We'll see if the balance we get from ConLib is the right one.

?

Originally Posted by Hom3r (Post 35021102)

The point I'm trying to make is everytime extra cash is need they go "I know lets screw the motorist again".

I know taxes need to be raised, but they have said they cannot put food up as it will affect the poorest. but obviously the poorest don't own cars.

Well the way things are going there will come a point when motorists will snap, and no doubt fuel protest will raise there head and I will join them.

Originally Posted by PeteL (Post 35021141)

a fuel price stabiliser is a excellent idea i have been wondering why labour never did this... i dont drive but maybe they could go ahead and use some of this extortionate amount of tax and filling in the millions of potholes ?

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35021122)

I not sure I agree with all of that though. Speed cameras do seem to work, accidents overall down, accidents near troublespots where cameras are installed way down.

Also road tolls work well in Europe. Awesome roads there.

Originally Posted by Hom3r (Post 35021168)

Well IMHO speed camera are pointless, most sat navs have locations of them in, you can buy devices exclusively for them.

Originally Posted by Derek S (Post 35021173)

They still catch plenty of people going over the limit.

Originally Posted by Xaccers (Post 35021172)

Light up speed limit signs have been shown to be more effective in that people slow down and stay slowed down.

Originally Posted by Xaccers (Post 35021175)

Which shows that they're not doing their job as a deterrant, and if they're in accident blackspots, if they're not slowing people down, they're not saving lives, so something else needs to be done such as redesigning the road to be safer.

Originally Posted by Xaccers (Post 35021175)

Which shows that they're not doing their job as a deterrant, and if they're in accident blackspots, if they're not slowing people down, they're not saving lives, so something else needs to be done such as redesigning the road to be safer.

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35021178)

this also is true ,but are they meant as a deterrant or a way of dishing out the punishment more efficiently

Originally Posted by Derek S (Post 35021192)

They don't work 100% but very few things do. There is a time and a place for them, just as there is a time and a place for speed bumps etc.

Originally Posted by Xaccers (Post 35021202)

The honest answer would be "it depends where they are"
Average speed limit SPECS along road works are obviously a good safety device, although if the road conditions allow (ie only one lane closed, no traffic cone slaloms) the should be turned off when the workers aren't there.
Many cameras are placed where they should, but there many which are hidden/obvuscated/on straight flat roads simply designed to make money.

---------- Post added at 21:42 ---------- Previous post was at 21:37 ----------



What I mean is if they're placed somewhere and are bringing in a nice income, showing they're not deterring speeders, then that is a good signal that the road is still going to produce accidents, and as such, other measures should be taken to reduce them.
Something like rumble strips, or road narrowing markings, or straighten the nasty bend, or put up a barrier, chop down that tree etc :)
It is not acceptable for the "safety partnerships" to sit back and make money while road safety hasn't been increased, if you see what I mean.

Have more ANPR cameras instead :)

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35021178)

very true ,a gentel reminder of the limit is more effective than a good shouting at

Originally Posted by gazfan (Post 35021281)

Vehicle excise duty should be scrapped & the money raised by a levy on fuel used, instead. This would be directly proportional to the vehicle fuel efficiency & the distance travelled.

The 'tax disc' could be replaced by an 'insurance disc' , confirming the legality of the vehicle, including a yearly cross check of the VPN versus the registration to help deter cloning plates?

Originally Posted by Xaccers (Post 35021283)

I'd go for that, it'd save me over £200 per year :D

Originally Posted by gazfan (Post 35021314)

LOL - until a mileage check was built into the MOT, anyway :angel:

- and yes, a new car doesn't have an MOT until 3 years old - but would you risk voiding a warranty by running it on bio-diesel to avoid fuel tax ;)

Originally Posted by Xaccers (Post 35021321)

Wouldn't let biodiesel get anywhere near my cars.
2000L duty free limit is about 20000 miles on veg.

Originally Posted by Xaccers (Post 35021321)

2000L duty free limit is about 20000 miles on veg.