From the economists’ point of view at least. Road pricing per mile – and per time of travel – is efficient. It prices both the costs of the roads and also congestion etc. Bonzer.
There are, to be polite, certain civil liberties conncerns. And we might imagine that it would be used to price off the roads, not to efficiently price.
But, to the economist, Bonzer Idea. Then there’s that politics:
Sadiq Khan plotted £2-per-mile charge to drive in London
An insane number.
The UK taxes derv and petrol correctly right now. That 50p per litre is, in fact, probably too high. Yes, including all the climate change bumph, too high. When we include congestion then it might be just about right. -Ish.
OK. But we’re talking of something like 5 to 10 miles per litre. On which the correct tax charge is that 50p. Khan is muttering about £10 to £20, not that 50p.
Which brings us back to hte politics of this, not the economics. For all the joy at per mile being efficient what happens when the rate is set by a cunt?
Which is rather the problem with schemes cooked up by economists and implemented by politicians…..
Yup. The point is to force everybody else off the roads so that the nomenklatura (for whom the charge will be covered by the taxpayer) can waft around in their Zils without getting held up by the proles.
Bundling up everything in higher fuel prices, to include road fund licences and universal third party insurance, seems worth considering.
No licence evaders, no uninsured drivers and a direct correlation between road usage, engine efficiency and payments to the revenue via the expanded excise duty. Any rational person wanting fully comprehensive insurance can of course continue to purchase it separately.
As a sop to the environmentalists maybe a one-off surcharge on the sale of higher polluting vehicles. After that it’s straightforward pay as you go.
Dealing with the present disproportionate vehicle excise duty for lorries will require some thought. Maybe an annual charge should continue for such vehicles albeit at a lower level initially to compensate for the higher cost of all-inclusive fuel?
Khan of course will hate it and persist with his ever increasing revenue grabs.
More broadly Tim – what happens when demographic changes and electoral corruption, partly through an alien electoral system
Mean a total cunt can be elected multiple times?
It’s a similar problem the Conservatives faced in the days of Ken Livingstone. I fear there will be no choice but to get rid of the office and along with it the office holder. Certainly Khan, who is very much ‘Muslim first’ needs to be kicked out and a ban on any left of centre candidates enacted post haste.
John: That might work for petrol/diesel as the taxation of the supply network is well established with very few loopholes and non-transport use. That isn’t the case for electric vehicles and it will be very hard to do because non-taxed electricity (bar VAT) is used for everything else.
That doesn’t matter, because the milk floats can’t go very far anyway
Pretty sure remaining car use in London is now incredibly inelastic , especially since they screwed the bus network (<7mph on *average* so almost half the time its quicker to walk) so this is maximising revenue. Many councils are keeping the most horrendous traffic schemes as they are now addicted to the additional revenue. The level of dodgy consultations, abuse of data and faux science (cheer leader is a sociologist cyclist in Westminster uni) is truly jaw dropping. Getting around London in areas without good tube connections is increasingly horrendous and time consuming – all nicely regressive. Vicious stuff.
How to introduce zil lane’s without actually calling them that. Get on yer collective bicycles and good luck with deliveries and workmen in white vans.
Certainly Khan, who is very much ‘Muslim first’ needs to be kicked out and a ban on any left of centre candidates enacted post haste.
Which is why the Test Act needs resurrecting.
Whilst I agree with the naming of the Kahnt I think a few additional adjectives are required to adequately describe his cuntishness…
Anyone who has listened to the left wingers over the past few decades would be familiar with the argument that taxes should be progressive, meaning that the rich pay most of the taxes. It also meant that we should avoid regressive taxes. This was the argument against the poll tax and why it was hated so much.
However, recently the left seem to have fallen in love with regressive taxes. A certain proportion of peoples electricity bills covers the political aspects of climate policy. It is a regressive tax as it applies at the same rate regardless of house hold income and the rich pay a smaller proportion of their income on electricity bills.
The same can be said about ULEZ and other types of road taxes that are being added to the cost of driving. Regardless of whether or not you are a rich or poor car owner, you will probably drive more or less the same amount. And yet the taxes will be applied equally.
I think this is why people above a certain income do not seem to mind the eco-taxes. The way the taxes are applied are regressive. Because of this the rich will barely notice the extra cost that they have to pay in order to drive, travel, heat and light their homes, etc. Below a certain income level, the eco-taxes hurt.
We have yet to see the 21st century equivalent of the poll tax riots.
Our local cuntcillors seem to have a scheme to increase congestion, presumably to justify a congestion charge. The trick is to block roads which allow you to travel peripherally from one radial road to another thus by-passing the city centre.
Increasingly you have to take one radial road into the city centre and then leave on another.
Neat, eh?
Toll bridges and tunnels e.g. Mersey Gateway and tunnels, Tyne Tunnel seem to be of the order of £2 a go for a car. About a mile too. Dartford crossing is £2.50 but free at night. Khan appears to be considering charging the whole of London at bridge rates.
“However, recently the left seem to have fallen in love with regressive taxes. A certain proportion of peoples electricity bills covers the political aspects of climate policy. It is a regressive tax as it applies at the same rate regardless of house hold income and the rich pay a smaller proportion of their income on electricity bills.”
Ah, but the next thing is the ‘social tariff’ for utilities. That means the poor will have their services capped at a low level, and guess who will have to pay sky high tariffs to cover that?
@Jim
Maybe. However I wonder if the use of regressive taxes is intended. The left wing parties are no longer the parties of the working class and the poor. These parties are really concerned with the rich and the well to do middle class. Both of these groups have luxury beliefs and like to tell themselves that their climate policies are affordable. By using regressive taxes they can fool themselves that the policies are affordable. Of course the working class will complain but that just gives them the excuse to hate the working class even more, thinking that they are a bunch of climate change denying oiks.
On the radio this morning it was being pointed out that the climate targets that TTK has agreed to will mean lifestyle changes such as eating less meat. A meat tax would be another regressive tax that would not mean much for a rich person but would result in the working class from eating less meat.
It’ll be just like WWII rationing again, when my grandfather was hanging poultry up in my 8 year old mother’s wardrobe to avoid it being found by the meat inspectors.
The only difference is that it’ll be black market butchers. Probably halal only this time though. Uggh!
No wonder they’re making us register chickens.
@Joan Galt
I just googled “UK chicken registration”. I thought it was a joke…..
Guinea Pigs are easy to raise. Cheap to feed. Easy to breed. Tastes like chicken.
Road pricing is no better than the congestion charge. And one knows from experience what happened when that came in. The average value of the cars on the road rose. Particularly noticeable with the western extension. Never seen so many Mercs & Porches. The more money you have the less the charge is a deterrent.
The best thing to price congestion is congestion. The price an individual will suffer for their time caught in traffic. Since the value of people’s time to themselves differs, they are deciding which journeys are important to them.
One thing we did learn from the congestion charge. It doesn’t reduce congestion except for a very short period on introduction. It rises again to the point where again, the congestion prices the congestion. Just the average wealth of the people caught in it is higher.
‘No wonder they’re making us register chickens.’
I hang my head in humiliation. I never thought that any bureaucracy could be worse than ours!!
I absolutely guarantee that whatever ‘fair’ system of getting us to pay for using the roads they come up with, it will be more expensive than it is now.
I remember that Dartford Tunnel would be free to use after the costs had been paid back. That never happened.
It’ll be just like WWII rationing again
Indeed it would be. The only people who were subject to the meat rationing were the ordinary people. If you had the money you could always buy as much meat as you wanted. Along with everything else. Relation of mine made himself a multi-millionaire out of the wartime black market.
And don’t just think this was all “dodgy people”. It was just a matter of money & position. A blind eye was turned if you moved in the right circles. His preferred area of endeavour was Mayfair. You don’t make that sort of money out a half pound of mince or a couple of sausages.
Amazingly, the Severn bridges are free now. About the only useful thing Treason May ever did. Of course, they were toll bridges from 1966 (when the first opened) until the end of 2018.
50p/l tax seems low to me, Last time I checked it was closer to£1 than 50p (that’s including all taxes, not just fuel duty).
UK fuel pump prices typically consists of:
63.75p per litre : retail price
52.95p per litre : fuel tax
23.33p per litre : VAT
140p per litre price paid
About 55% of the price paid goes in taxes. Of course, the 63.75p includes the cost of corporation taxes paid by the wholesaler. I seem to remember from my time on Licensing that about 5p goes to the retailer themselves.
@jgh
You could add to that all the income tax & NIC of employees down the production & distribution chain. I know Tim likes to talk about incidences going onto employees but in fact they go on whoever owns the company. So you could add tax on shareholders’ dividends. I wonder what’s left? Pennies?
“I know Tim likes to talk about incidences going onto employees but in fact they go on whoever owns the company.” And yet the OBR reckons that 76% of the cost of the new NICs will be borne by employees.
After laughing at the spurious accuracy you might wonder why such a (presumably) leftish outfit would admit as much.
@dearieme
I could equally have said it all goes on the consumer. Has to be one or the other. Either whoever’s providing the good or service or whoever’s paying for it.