Some Car Dealers Will Never Change
in [Motorcycles]
|
From: don (Calgary) on 13 Mar 2010 14:28 On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 18:46:42 +0000, totallydeadmailbox(a)yahoo.co.uk (The Older Gentleman) wrote: >don (Calgary) <hd.flhr(a)telus.net> wrote: > >> On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 18:07:10 +0000, totallydeadmailbox(a)yahoo.co.uk >> (The Older Gentleman) wrote: >> >> >don (Calgary) <hd.flhr(a)telus.net> wrote: >> > >> >> On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 07:59:24 +0000, totallydeadmailbox(a)yahoo.co.uk >> >> (The Older Gentleman) wrote: >> >> >> >> > >> >> >Do they really do this? On this side of the water, the used price is the >> >> >used price. You *might* have to pay extra for the road tax if this has >> >> >expired, but that's it. >> >> >> >> Just out of curiosity, what does your road tax cost? >> > >> >For cars, it varies according to CO2 emissions. Electric and gas - zero. >> >Gas guzzlers, lots. >> > >> >Motorcycles - flat fee in four bands according to capacity. >> > >> >Everything's here:- >> > >> >http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/ >> >DG_10012524 >> >> Ouch!!! > >Well, quite. >> >> And that is annually? > >Yes. Double ouch! >> >> We pay a fraction of that for cars and half of that for motorcycles. >> >> Hell I pay less for insurance than the highest rate for your auto road >> tax. > >So do I, actually. A lot less. >> >> It appears to be based on CO2 emissions. Is that how they justify it? > >Erm, the clue is in my last posting. Well it appears to be based on CO2 emission (g/km) the vehicle is capable of, not actual fuel consumption or the actual volume of CO2 emissions created. Seems to me if your goal is to tax CO2 emissions the tax would be better placed on the fuel, not the vehicle. After all you need to burn the fuel before you generate GG emissions and some people, like myself use very little fuel for transportation. What kind of tax do you folks pay on fuels? Has the UK built in a GG factor to your fuel taxes too? And why exclude electric vehicles? Is it not true the UK still uses coal to generate electricity? Last I heard coal generated somewhere near one third of your electricity. My sense is if you have bought into using GG emissions as a way to create new revenue for the government, even the electric vehicles should carry their fair share of the burden. I just received my annual vehicle registration renewals and I can renew all four of ny vehicles for significantly less than your road tax would cost for my compact pick up truck.
From: The Older Gentleman on 13 Mar 2010 14:42 don (Calgary) <hd.flhr(a)telus.net> wrote: > >> It appears to be based on CO2 emissions. Is that how they justify it? > > > >Erm, the clue is in my last posting. > > Well it appears to be based on CO2 emission (g/km) the vehicle is > capable of, not actual fuel consumption or the actual volume of CO2 > emissions created. Fuel consumption and CO2 emissions are inextricably linked. But the government relies on manufacturers' figures (as ested and audited). > > Seems to me if your goal is to tax CO2 emissions the tax would be > better placed on the fuel, not the vehicle. Absolutely. This argument has been going on for ages. VED (Vehicle Excise Duty) used to be known as the Road Fund Licence, the idea being that the money raised from it would be used to build and maintain roads. Of course, successive governments found it far too useful a tax to adhere to the original ideal of hypothecation. > After all you need to burn > the fuel before you generate GG emissions and some people, like myself > use very little fuel for transportation. > > What kind of tax do you folks pay on fuels? Has the UK built in a GG > factor to your fuel taxes too? We pay massive tax on road fuel. An imperial gallon (4.54 litres) of unleaded currently costs almost exactly �5. > > And why exclude electric vehicles? Is it not true the UK still uses > coal to generate electricity? Not much, but yes, and we'll be using it again but with carbon capture technology. Someone once (and quite accurately) described Britain as an island of coal, floating in a sea of oil. > Last I heard coal generated somewhere > near one third of your electricity. Could be. Might be less. It's certainly a lot less than of yore (gas-fired power stations were built in great numbers in the 1980s). Cba to Google. > My sense is if you have bought > into using GG emissions as a way to create new revenue for the > government, even the electric vehicles should carry their fair share > of the burden. Agree 100%. If the electricity to power them is generated with GG power, as it is, then yes. > > I just received my annual vehicle registration renewals and I can > renew all four of ny vehicles for significantly less than your road > tax would cost for my compact pick up truck. *Shrug*. Got to pay for the National Health Service and the rest of the (by and large, enviable) social programme somehow. -- BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F Triumph Street Triple Suzuki TS250ER GN250 Damn, back to six bikes! Try Googling before asking a damn silly question. chateau dot murray at idnet dot com
From: don (Calgary) on 13 Mar 2010 18:42 On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 19:42:57 +0000, totallydeadmailbox(a)yahoo.co.uk (The Older Gentleman) wrote: >don (Calgary) <hd.flhr(a)telus.net> wrote: > > <snip> >> >> I just received my annual vehicle registration renewals and I can >> renew all four of ny vehicles for significantly less than your road >> tax would cost for my compact pick up truck. > >*Shrug*. Got to pay for the National Health Service and the rest of the >(by and large, enviable) social programme somehow. Some countries manage to enjoy universal health coverage along with very generous social programs, without having their citizens pay an onerous and punitive road tax. I think the UK road tax is as clear of an example as I have seen, of a government using the global warming hysteria as a cash grab. What would be more disturbing is if the funds raised in the name of GW are used to fund social programs and not to reduce GGE. If we go down a similar road in North America I hope we find a better way to do it than the UK has demonstrated.
From: tomorrow on 13 Mar 2010 22:05 On Mar 13, 2:59 am, totallydeadmail...(a)yahoo.co.uk (The Older Gentleman) wrote: > don (Calgary) <hd.f...(a)telus.net> wrote: > > My problem with dealers, even the good ones are the BS fees they add > > to the purchase price, such as prep fees, inspections, document fees > > and any other BS they can add to the negotiated selling price. > > Do they really do this? On this side of the water, the used price is the > used price. You *might* have to pay extra for the road tax if this has > expired, but that's it. Here in Virginia, when buying used from a dealer, it is not unusual for them to tack on a "documentation fee" after you've negotiated a price, but they will immediately remove it if you balk; but enough people just meekly accept it to make it worth their time to try it. If you let them title and register the vehicle, they will add a premium onto the DMV fees for such legal niceties, but they do are at least providing a service in that case.
From: tomorrow on 13 Mar 2010 22:17
On Mar 13, 2:42 pm, totallydeadmail...(a)yahoo.co.uk (The Older Gentleman) wrote: > don (Calgary) <hd.f...(a)telus.net> wrote: > > >> It appears to be based on CO2 emissions. Is that how they justify it? > > > >Erm, the clue is in my last posting. > > > Well it appears to be based on CO2 emission (g/km) the vehicle is > > capable of, not actual fuel consumption or the actual volume of CO2 > > emissions created. > > Fuel consumption and CO2 emissions are inextricably linked. But the > government relies on manufacturers' figures (as ested and audited). Except I drive my 12mpg truck 5,000 miles a year and my 26mpg Miata 20,000 miles a year, so why should registering the truck cost more? This reminds me of the guy at work who insisted that his commute was twice as efficient as mine because he drives a 36mpg Honda and I (at the time) drove an 18mpg pick-up truck. Except he drove from Orange, VA to Reston, VA each day, a round trip of 156 miles, while I drove 9.8 miles round trip. He finally got it after I pointed out that I burned a half gallon of gas a day while he burned over four gallons a day. (Of course I burned a quarter of a gallon on the days I rode one of the bikes!) His car was twice as efficient as my truck per mile, but only if the truck was driven the same number of miles. |