The rising price of petrol, when will it end?
Comments
-
-
Really makes my 3.5 litre petrol engine seem a bit daft! thank god I cycle so much.
I was in the US the other week, petrol in Colorado was about 50p a liter, for them this was a lot, I was amazed how many adverts there were for car based on good MPG. Obviously prices are starting to kick in. That said a motorway MPG of 13 was a key selling point for a truck, very economical!If I know you, and I like you, you can borrow my bike box for £30 a week. PM for details.0 -
I completely understand where you are coming from with this. It's my justification as well. It's not impossible to survive without, it's just a real pain in the butt. I just keep the car use down to a minimum. The Mrs is job hunting and how she can get to work is quite a big deal as the extra time and money needed has quite a big impact on wether or not a job is viable. She was offered a temporary job in Guildford but with the low wage and the cost of petrol it just wasn't viable.DonDaddyD wrote:Why do people assume that I don't need a car. Or that my car is new or that it is impractical for the type of driving I do. Even with my Seat Ibiza I used to take the line that I won't drive on Sunday's through London because traffic is just that bad. I've had to relax as this as the lil'un deserves to see his Grandparents, 50% of which live in Essex, which isn't wholly practical to get to by public transport alone hence car. There are other reasons I have a car but the whole, "you can get public transport" isn't always as practical a solution as people make out.0 -
notsoblue wrote:W1 wrote:notsoblue wrote:The data also show that the poorest 20 per cent of households paid almost twice as much of their income in duties on fuel than the richest 20 per cent. In 2009/10, the poorest 20 per cent of households paid 3.5 per cent of their disposable income on duty, compared with only 1.8 per cent for the top 20 per cent. Overall, the average UK household spent 2.3 per cent of its disposable income on duties on fuel.
However, in cash terms, the richest 20 per cent of households paid almost three-times the amount paid by the bottom 20 per cent. In 2009/10 the richest 20 per cent of households spent £1,062 on petrol taxes, compared with £365 for the poorest 20 per cent of households. Overall, the average UK household spent £677 on duties on fuel in 2009/10.
Its only 2.3% of your disposable income. Man up and earn more or quit complaining
You mean of course, another 2.3%, after 40% income tax, NI, VAT on buying the car, Insurance tax on insuring it, road tax, parking permit (tax), VAT on maintaining the car etc etc etc.
We really should pay more tax.
Meh, its a bit of a luxury though isn't it. Its *still* cheaper to drive across country than it is to get the train. And if you feel you *need* a car because of children, well, thats part of the cost of having them and you should probably have taken that into account before you planned to have them. :?
So is a road bike - maybe we should tax that at 58%?
And any food that isn't tesco value - 58%.
Oh, and doing or buying anything that isn't necessary to survive - 58%.
Except, of course, that a car is a "luxury" that allows many people to work (practically). So really it's a necessity. But it's taxed at 58% plus all the other costs.0 -
Situations vary obviously but that message generally gets put out by people who live and work in the same city.DonDaddyD wrote:There are other reasons I have a car but the whole, "you can get public transport" isn't always as practical a solution as people make out.
When I was in that situation I never owned a car and simply rented one for the weekend when required.
It can work.
Where it doesn't work though is where people who are served by a top notch public transport network assume that everyone has the same level of service and should adhere to the same principles.
Generalisations fail, generally None of the above should be taken seriously, and certainly not personally.0 -
tis one of the reasons i bought a lil motorbike that is capable of 100mpg
we have gone down to one car now which can be a nightmare if "her in doors" needs it an so do iKeeping it classy since '830 -
I'm inclined to agree with W1. People need viable and afforable solutions to transportation and public transport isn't the one above all solution. It's OK if you are travelling around London, yes. Some of us need to get to places outside the M25 - for work and personal purposes - that trains and buses don't directly go to.
It also isn't practical to hire a Streetcar or some such. Firstly, you need the ready funds available. Secondly, are they Isofix and come with the particular Isofix base that fits my childs car seat? What about availability during emergencies? Again there are too many other scenarios to bring up, but fact is when you're sharing a life with someone what was once practical solutions for yourself, become largely impractical when taking into consideration another persons needs and wants.
Bottomline: When I first got my car, work aside it was more of a luxury, with dependents it's become more or a necessity. Fuel prices need to come down to ease the pain. Something has to give including childcare costs.Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0 -
DonDaddyD wrote:roger merriman wrote:DonDaddyD wrote:£1.40 a litre is fooking steep though. I'm not sure how they (the Man) expects me to get around when cycling is simply not practical. We can't all ride the bus, take public transport which is in itself also expensive.
Should we just stay confined to our respective towns and never venture out unless by horse?
a) you live in london you can take the bus/train you may not want to but thats another matter. or if it's close ie only a few miles walk?
b) cars can be cheap, but people chose to use big expensive cars, so they pay for that running costs, be that fuel/loans and the reduction in value of a car.
all of these are wants not needs.
Ido own a car but it's old and cheap to run, i use it for going back to wales/MTBing seeing familly in the area.
all motorway journeys, the car spends most of it's time on the motorway.
Why do people assume that I don't need a car. Or that my car is new or that it is impractical for the type of driving I do. Even with my Seat Ibiza I used to take the line that I won't drive on Sunday's through London because traffic is just that bad. I've had to relax as this as the lil'un deserves to see his Grandparents, 50% of which live in Essex, which isn't wholly practical to get to by public transport alone hence car. There are other reasons I have a car but the whole, "you can get public transport" isn't always as practical a solution as people make out.
okay well my wifes familly almost all have no driving licence they get about with kids in tow.
plus my work most of the folks have free travel so thats what we use, and wheelchairs are lot more of a issue than a pushchair.
London has amazing public transport,it really does.
seeing his grandparents is a want not a need, we've just got used to it.
cars have got cheaper to run, they last for years and modern cars soak up massive millages. But people want newer and large.
a Mini is well over a ton, there are very few small cars now, look at the size of say the Golf over it's life time to see the size creaping up etc.
very few people can't afford cars, they really are very cheap to have but they can be very expensive if you make it so.0 -
W1 wrote:So is a road bike - maybe we should tax that at 58%?
And any food that isn't tesco value - 58%.
Oh, and doing or buying anything that isn't necessary to survive - 58%.
Except, of course, that a car is a "luxury" that allows many people to work (practically). So really it's a necessity. But it's taxed at 58% plus all the other costs.
So if its a necessity, you think it should be taxed the same amount as food and baby clothes?0 -
No, I'm saying that as a necessity, it shouldn't be taxed at 58%.notsoblue wrote:W1 wrote:So is a road bike - maybe we should tax that at 58%?
And any food that isn't tesco value - 58%.
Oh, and doing or buying anything that isn't necessary to survive - 58%.
Except, of course, that a car is a "luxury" that allows many people to work (practically). So really it's a necessity. But it's taxed at 58% plus all the other costs.
So if its a necessity, you think it should be taxed the same amount as food and baby clothes?
And that saying "it's a luxury" so should be highly taxed can be argued for (almost) anything.0 -
You see I think there is a very good basis for people to be priced out of childcare, if all those families with 2 people working dropped to one working, we would have no unemployment AT ALL, whatever level of unemployment we have now, the level of employment is far higher than any previous boom years due to the number of familys with 2 employees.DonDaddyD wrote:I think I may have to. The next big thing is nursery prices. I can really begin to see how people are priced out of working. It would be cheaper for me not to drive at all and if I earned £65,000 (rough estimate) it would make more sense for ms DDD not to work at all, even though that is less than our combined income.
What do we get out of both partners working, bigger mortgages and due to house prices being pushed up by the extra income, remove that income and house prices would be no more or less affordable for most families as the house prices would correct back down - of course rental prices reflect purchase price so would drop as well.
Radical, yes, painful, yes, true.... well think about it for a bit!
SimonCurrently riding a Whyte T130C, X0 drivetrain, Magura Trail brakes converted to mixed wheel size (homebuilt wheels) with 140mm Fox 34 Rhythm and RP23 suspension. 12.2Kg.0 -
W1 wrote:
No, I'm saying that as a necessity, it shouldn't be taxed at 58%.notsoblue wrote:W1 wrote:So is a road bike - maybe we should tax that at 58%?
And any food that isn't tesco value - 58%.
Oh, and doing or buying anything that isn't necessary to survive - 58%.
Except, of course, that a car is a "luxury" that allows many people to work (practically). So really it's a necessity. But it's taxed at 58% plus all the other costs.
So if its a necessity, you think it should be taxed the same amount as food and baby clothes?
And that saying "it's a luxury" so should be highly taxed can be argued for (almost) anything.
How much duty should be paid on petrol?
In DDD's case it *is* a luxury. A man of his means should be able to afford a drive up to Essex a couple times a week with his son. Its not like he has to use his car to get to work.
If tax was 58% on carbon road bikes, I just probably wouldn't be able to have one. I wouldn't get one anyway and complain about it on an internet forum. Its like complaining about the price of red wine.
I used to live in rural Shropshire, and you really do *need* a car there. But you live within your means.0 -
Whilst I can kind of appreciate the sentiment that petrol costs "too much", I'm not sure reality bears that out. The cost of driving has fallen in real terms since the 70s ( http://waronthemotorist.wordpress.com/2 ... cost-more/ ) and is only starting to tick up again now the scarcity of oil has started to bite. To add to that, if you include the cost of the externalities of driving it is subsidised by the general population. ( http://ipayroadtax.com/itv-ignorance-ab ... tter-pubs/ )This may be sensible as the general population may derive benefits from goods and services being delivered, etc... but it's worth baring in mind asking for a reduction in fuel duty.
The real problem is that many people have adopted lifestyles that are predicated on driving to support them, living far away from work, visiting distant family regularly, etc... who now find that that it's not economic to do so. In the current situation the most sensible course of action would be to adopt a lifestyle that didn't make those assumptions as rapidly as possible, difficult though that may be.
TL;DR - MTFU and pay for petrol, or stop buying it.0 -
DonDaddyD wrote:£1.40 a litre is fooking steep though. I'm not sure how they (the Man) expects me to get around when cycling is simply not practical. We can't all ride the bus, take public transport which is in itself also expensive.
Should we just stay confined to our respective towns and never venture out unless by horse?
you ever kept a horse, they're stupidly expensive and you'd probably have to drive to get to it... keep tryingPurveyor of sonic doom
Very Hairy Roadie - FCN 4
Fixed Pista- FCN 5
Beared Bromptonite - FCN 140 -
The unfortunate truth.nameinuse wrote:The real problem is that many people have adopted lifestyles that are predicated on driving to support them, living far away from work, visiting distant family regularly, etc... who now find that that it's not economic to do so. In the current situation the most sensible course of action would be to adopt a lifestyle that didn't make those assumptions as rapidly as possible, difficult though that may be.
TL;DR - MTFU and pay for petrol, or stop buying it.0 -
I can drive to Edinburgh and back, a total distance of 440 miles on about £60 of diesel. My car can seat 5 adults in comfort.
I think £12 return per person on 440 miles is fantastic value. In other words, car fuel is cheap - too cheap, possibly.
Even £60 per person (single car occupant) is pretty good value when expressed against average income.0 -
dodgy wrote:I can drive to Edinburgh and back, a total distance of 440 miles on about £60 of diesel. My car can seat 5 adults in comfort.
I think £12 return per person on 440 miles is fantastic value. In other words, car fuel is cheap - too cheap, possibly.
Even £60 per person (single car occupant) is pretty good value when expressed against average income.
indeed a trip I do fairly often is drive to wales it's about £40 something in fuel and £5 to cross the bridge so about £50.
very difficult to get anywhere nr close by train in terms of cost.
not helped by a taxie at the end.0 -
dodgy wrote:I can drive to Edinburgh and back, a total distance of 440 miles on about £60 of diesel. My car can seat 5 adults in comfort.
I think £12 return per person on 440 miles is fantastic value. In other words, car fuel is cheap - too cheap, possibly.
Even £60 per person (single car occupant) is pretty good value when expressed against average income.
This.Sometimes parts break. Sometimes you crash. Sometimes it’s your fault.0 -
Its cheaper for my sisters and I to hire a car and drive it to the peak district to see our parents, than it is for us all to get the train.roger merriman wrote:dodgy wrote:I can drive to Edinburgh and back, a total distance of 440 miles on about £60 of diesel. My car can seat 5 adults in comfort.
I think £12 return per person on 440 miles is fantastic value. In other words, car fuel is cheap - too cheap, possibly.
Even £60 per person (single car occupant) is pretty good value when expressed against average income.
indeed a trip I do fairly often is drive to wales it's about £40 something in fuel and £5 to cross the bridge so about £50.
very difficult to get anywhere nr close by train in terms of cost.
not helped by a taxie at the end.0 -
It should be taxed at the usual VAT rate.notsoblue wrote:W1 wrote:
No, I'm saying that as a necessity, it shouldn't be taxed at 58%.notsoblue wrote:W1 wrote:So is a road bike - maybe we should tax that at 58%?
And any food that isn't tesco value - 58%.
Oh, and doing or buying anything that isn't necessary to survive - 58%.
Except, of course, that a car is a "luxury" that allows many people to work (practically). So really it's a necessity. But it's taxed at 58% plus all the other costs.
So if its a necessity, you think it should be taxed the same amount as food and baby clothes?
And that saying "it's a luxury" so should be highly taxed can be argued for (almost) anything.
How much duty should be paid on petrol?
In DDD's case it *is* a luxury. A man of his means should be able to afford a drive up to Essex a couple times a week with his son. Its not like he has to use his car to get to work.
If tax was 58% on carbon road bikes, I just probably wouldn't be able to have one. I wouldn't get one anyway and complain about it on an internet forum. Its like complaining about the price of red wine.
I used to live in rural Shropshire, and you really do *need* a car there. But you live within your means.
The fact that it can be taxed so highly in the first place is because people need it. But if there was 58% tax on food, there would be uproar. Quite how we have arrived at a situation whereby one necessary product is taxed at 58%, and another is taxed at 0% is beyond me.
A carbon road bike really is a lxury - and between it and petrol, it's the former that has a much higher justification for a 58% tax rate...0 -
roger merriman wrote:dodgy wrote:I can drive to Edinburgh and back, a total distance of 440 miles on about £60 of diesel. My car can seat 5 adults in comfort.
I think £12 return per person on 440 miles is fantastic value. In other words, car fuel is cheap - too cheap, possibly.
Even £60 per person (single car occupant) is pretty good value when expressed against average income.
indeed a trip I do fairly often is drive to wales it's about £40 something in fuel and £5 to cross the bridge so about £50.
very difficult to get anywhere nr close by train in terms of cost.
not helped by a taxie at the end.
Er, and the rest.
Running a car is at least 40p a mile.
That makes Edinburgh by car £176.0 -
DonDaddyD wrote:Why do people assume that I don't need a car. Or that my car is new or that it is impractical for the type of driving I do. Even with my Seat Ibiza I used to take the line that I won't drive on Sunday's through London because traffic is just that bad. I've had to relax as this as the lil'un deserves to see his Grandparents, 50% of which live in Essex, which isn't wholly practical to get to by public transport alone hence car. There are other reasons I have a car but the whole, "you can get public transport" isn't always as practical a solution as people make out.
My grandparents lived 100 miles away and 250 miles away. Three boys in the back of the car for 5 hours - it only happened 2 or 3 times a year. Both my parents and parents-in-law live 3hrs drive away in Bristol. PT with one baby and two adults is pretty easy. Of course a car is easier, but it's nowhere near as hard as you are making out.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
W1 wrote:roger merriman wrote:dodgy wrote:I can drive to Edinburgh and back, a total distance of 440 miles on about £60 of diesel. My car can seat 5 adults in comfort.
I think £12 return per person on 440 miles is fantastic value. In other words, car fuel is cheap - too cheap, possibly.
Even £60 per person (single car occupant) is pretty good value when expressed against average income.
indeed a trip I do fairly often is drive to wales it's about £40 something in fuel and £5 to cross the bridge so about £50.
very difficult to get anywhere nr close by train in terms of cost.
not helped by a taxie at the end.
Er, and the rest.
Running a car is at least 40p a mile.
That makes Edinburgh by car £176.
pedantry aside, the above doesn't take in to account car depreciation, taxes, insurance etc etc
and so it continues... *yawn*Purveyor of sonic doom
Very Hairy Roadie - FCN 4
Fixed Pista- FCN 5
Beared Bromptonite - FCN 140 -
roger merriman wrote:dodgy wrote:I can drive to Edinburgh and back, a total distance of 440 miles on about £60 of diesel. My car can seat 5 adults in comfort.
I think £12 return per person on 440 miles is fantastic value. In other words, car fuel is cheap - too cheap, possibly.
Even £60 per person (single car occupant) is pretty good value when expressed against average income.
indeed a trip I do fairly often is drive to wales it's about £40 something in fuel and £5 to cross the bridge so about £50.
very difficult to get anywhere nr close by train in terms of cost.
not helped by a taxie at the end.
^This is two different kettles of fish.
- Train travel is stupidely expensive in this country unless you book well in advance and want no flexibility
- why on earth do we have to pay to get into Wales - I resent that. They got the direction of toll thing all wrong. I'd happily pay double the toll to get out.
In general response to the thread - bring on higher petrol prices, it keeps the poor off the roads on the buses plus second hand V8's have never been so cheap, the saving can then be spent on the extra petrol needed to run them.
Bianchi Infinito CV
Bianchi Via Nirone 7 Ultegra
Brompton S Type
Carrera Vengeance Ultimate Ltd
Gary Fisher Aquila '98
Front half of a Viking Saratoga Tandem0 -
If you're taxing things purely on whether or not they're a luxury (and a large proportion of car journeys are over a very short journey, so for many people they are a luxury) then yeah. But don't we also consider the impact that buying and using the thing being taxed has on the rest of society?W1 wrote:It should be taxed at the usual VAT rate.
The fact that it can be taxed so highly in the first place is because people need it. But if there was 58% tax on food, there would be uproar. Quite how we have arrived at a situation whereby one necessary product is taxed at 58%, and another is taxed at 0% is beyond me.
A carbon road bike really is a lxury - and between it and petrol, it's the former that has a much higher justification for a 58% tax rate...0 -
Clever Pun wrote:W1 wrote:roger merriman wrote:dodgy wrote:I can drive to Edinburgh and back, a total distance of 440 miles on about £60 of diesel. My car can seat 5 adults in comfort.
I think £12 return per person on 440 miles is fantastic value. In other words, car fuel is cheap - too cheap, possibly.
Even £60 per person (single car occupant) is pretty good value when expressed against average income.
indeed a trip I do fairly often is drive to wales it's about £40 something in fuel and £5 to cross the bridge so about £50.
very difficult to get anywhere nr close by train in terms of cost.
not helped by a taxie at the end.
Er, and the rest.
Running a car is at least 40p a mile.
That makes Edinburgh by car £176.
pedantry aside, the above doesn't take in to account car depreciation, taxes, insurance etc etc
and so it continues... *yawn*
'xactly. Had a mate round to dinner on Sat. He drives aproperly bog standard newish Citroen and rarely ventures out of London. Still reckons his car costs him £2k a year to run. IMHO that's a massive waste of money. Mind you he's a lazy m*therf*cker.- 2023 Vielo V+1
- 2022 Canyon Aeroad CFR
- 2020 Canyon Ultimate CF SLX
- Strava
- On the Strand
- Crown Stables
0 -
bails87 wrote:
If you're taxing things purely on whether or not they're a luxury (and a large proportion of car journeys are over a very short journey, so for many people they are a luxury) then yeah. But don't we also consider the impact that buying and using the thing being taxed has on the rest of society?W1 wrote:It should be taxed at the usual VAT rate.
The fact that it can be taxed so highly in the first place is because people need it. But if there was 58% tax on food, there would be uproar. Quite how we have arrived at a situation whereby one necessary product is taxed at 58%, and another is taxed at 0% is beyond me.
A carbon road bike really is a lxury - and between it and petrol, it's the former that has a much higher justification for a 58% tax rate...
Sure - but I was taking particular issue with NSB's justification for petrol being taxed at 58% because it's a "luxury".
It's impossible to determine the actual impact of buying and using cars on "the rest of society" because it is impossible to put a price on the benefits (and in my view, bonkers to try a put a price on the "costs"). That won't stop some loon linking to all sorts of studies, but it's all rather back-of-fag-packet and by no means convincing.
Keeping a house warm is a "luxury" which uses power (and the associated "impact" on society that power generation has), yet is taxed at 5%.0 -
This thread isn't about the un-avoidable costs associated with motoring, such as insurance, VED, depreciation etc. It's about fuel costs, one of the only aspects you have control of, you drive less - you pay less.
So again, fuel is cheap, it certainly is if I can take a carload of people to Edinburgh and back for just over a tenner each.0 -
One day oil will start to run out and the price will increase, but I don't think this is what's happening now.
Some of it's extra tax, but the majority is monetary policy.
America have printed a load of new dollars. The value of oil hasn't risen, the value of the dollar has fallen.
Relatively, the UK have printed even more, so the pound is worth less dollars.
0
