Friday 9 March 2007

Reduce Fuel Tax

The petition is entitled Reduce the tax we motorists pay on fuel, and to have a maximum cap on fuel tax and the explanatory notes say
"When the recent petrol prices hit over £ per litre and over £1.10 per litre of diesel, the government were earning more in tax, the real price per litre if tax was capped would have been closer to 94pence approximately, but even this is TOO high, we pay the highest fuel duty in the world, and we need to stop paying extortionate amounts of money for fuel, These motorists are doctors, nurses, teachers, and so on. Without these people the country will stop."

My mother is a practice nurse who does home visits to her patients, so I am reasonably aware of the need for nurses, doctors, etc., to drive professionally.

That does not in any way, shape or form justify cutting fuel tax. If a person is required to drive for their job and considers that their pay shouldn't be covering the fuel costs, they should be coming to some arrangement with their employers to claim back the fuel costs incurred in their work. (My mother's mileage situation has changed since I actually lived in a house with her and I'm not 100% sure what arrangement she has currently. But some arrangement exists, certainly.)

To cut taxes for vast quantities of people in order to spare merely a few, when those few could easily be re-compensated in some other way, is ludicrous beyond belief.

I'm prepared to think it's possible that this petitioner is a well-meaning person to whom this idea (claiming costs back) hasn't occurred. But it seems to me equally likely that he's someone who objects to paying tax on his fuel as it is and thinks that this emotive argument might help him. He is, I sincerely trust, wrong, if this is his aim.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

I've now wasted an hour reading numerous blogs you have written in the last two months. You undoubtedly were raised here in England, and are undoubtedly young, based on the factors that you believe that just because you are "entitled to an opinion" that your opinion is valuable. It is most often, in most cases I read, not. Just asking questions, or expressing skepticism, is a curious exercise in self-psychotherapy but it is not by itself of value to others. Please spend more time evaluating each issue on the basis of what it may mean to society, not you. That you put words behind your opinions does not garner respect for you... nor does it enhance anything except your own listings. Please think twice. In Frank Herbert's Dune an important principle was to "speak only the deepest truth you can sense". Please. Thanks. Anonymous only because I like most others have litle time and now I won't waste further time reading your rantings. But good luck anyway. Cheers, a real person

Anonymous said...

A couple of points about the above comment.

To begin with, if the author disliked this blog so much then why did he spend a whole hour reading it? And why (after telling us that he has 'little time and ... won't waste further time') does he then spend even longer copying his comment (over a dozen times) and distributing it throughout the two months?

He seems unsure as to Jenny's details, and yet if had taken the time to read the 'About Me' section (written on each page of the blog) he would have been in less doubt. But I digress.

The main point of his comment is that, in his opinion, Jenny's opinion is worthless. In my opinion (and that of others who I know have also read her posts) this is far from the case. While I don't agree with all of her comments, the majority of them are very apt and I have greatly enjoyed reading the blog. Many of her points are based solely on logical fact, and most of her opinions take the side of society as a whole in a fair and sensible manner.

Even if her opinions were of less importance, this is, after all, a personal blog. Does he comment on every blog that he finds, telling the author that their opinion doesn't matter and should not be heard? I believed that was the point of blogs...

What annoys me most, however, and the reason why I felt moved to write this refutation, is his rudeness - on top of which, he even lacks the conviction to give his name. He consistently tells us how little time he has - but does it really take him less time to write four lines explaining his anonymity than it would have taken for him to write a couple of words and give his name?

Keep up the good work,

Anon
(Because I don't wish to give my name, but don't mind admitting to that fact)

uber said...

Cor, it's all been going on round here, hasn't it!

There's no shortage of selfish people who think they should get everything for free and without conditions - my opinion is that as long as our transatlantic friends are paying UK litre prices for nearer to a gallon, in terms of global progress we are not necessarily going to get very far from a unilateral basis, but that's no reason why we shouldn't do what we can.

And saying that, if petrol is too highly taxed in the UK, how come our roads are all too often practically full to bursting with gridlock-seekers? It can't possibly be that they are all transporting kidneys to waiting transplant patients, or rushing to ease the passage of difficult births.

As for anonymous1, cobblers to you!