Miliband reveals 'green tax package' (1 Viewer)

[Tyke]

You can increase tax all you like on petrol and flights, it will make no difference - Double the prices of flights and in the first few months we will not go anywhere, but soon we'll be back in the air.

Sounds like you will-but some will find the price prohibitive if the tax is high enough. Has anyone suggested flying can be stopped? If the increase from "low cost" traffic ( & related pollution) can be mitigated by penal tax rates-and smoking rates in UK suggest it might- then whether you can afford to continue flying for pleasure may not be relevant. If you fly for business , then your customers will decide if they wish to pay for you to do it.

- I would not trust any of our political parties to allocate green taxes to green issues. It will go into the general treasury pot. Look at what happened with Lottery income that should have been allocated to "good causes".

That is a problem-but it would abate if the policy were tax neutral-ie tax those activities we wish to curb & tax relieve those we wish to encourage.

As for air taxes, if our wonderful Tony Blair / Gordon Brown decide to hike the price of air travel & freight unilaterally then it will not be long before our airports start shrinking in favour of continental airports such as Charles DeGaul, Brussels and Schipol. It might even be cheaper to drive to those airports than use our own.

Yes that's a problem-including air travel in the EU Carbon Trading scheme is a solution...but they can't agree on it!!

-Here's a good reason why I just can't trust that lot to get it right
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6092460.stm

If only this fiasco was simply untrustworthiness-the idea was flawed in principle on two counts- a) All carbon "offset" schemes are cop-outs-they are a licence for conscience free consumption-and therefore encourage consumption) b) All "top down" aid schemes get snaffled by the jobsworths & the corrupt officials. Aid works best" bottom up".

-All I am saying is that we need global co-operation to fight a global problem,

Absolutely-if only it were remotely possible!. If it were, a solution has been set out -we need look no further:-

http://www.theclimategroup.org/index.php?pid=549

http://www.princeton.edu/~cmi/resou..._files/Wedges_Concept_Game_Materials_2005.pdf

http://www.princeton.edu/~cmi/resources/CMI_Resources_new_files/Wedges ppr in Science.pdf


Colin

 

[Adey Baker]

so if birders can't give a toss, we're all up the creek then?

better get my world list moving then

no time to waste

Tim

Don't give up on your fellow humans just yet, Tim! Ingenuity has usually got us out of trouble in the past and at some stage some of your scientific friends will come up with the perfect fuel that's safe, non-polluting and cheaper (everything is down to price nowadays) - there's a fortune of Bill Gates-proportions awaiting!

Until then I've no doubt we'll all do our bit to save fuel where we can, but to be honest we're not very good at it in this country. At home we might make worthwhile savings, but at work, I reckon we could all point to areas of waste - I worked machinery in factories for about 35 years and despite the fact that they always produced heat at no stage was even one 'ounce' of that heat (heat=energy) ever used to save energy elsewhere. I bet everybody here could tell similar stories.

 

[colonelboris]

Really, there's only two ways round it.
1: Stop using energy
2: Stop breeding so many people.
Ebola may yet save the Earth...

 

[Karl J]

reading this from the perspective of a non car owning household but who both work full-time, some of the excuses for arguments here are astounding.

public transport - , ok so its not perfect and it does provide dramatic newspaper headlines when there's nothing better to be reported on but its actually not that bad- Really. Incidentally as for it being slow, how is sitting in stationary / slow moving traffic jams any quicker ? (might i suggest using a bicycle ?, you could even use it to get to the train station as most have cycle racks nowadays)

And as for the "what's china / India / (or whoever else i can think of) doing ?" - taking a lead from us in the west presumably. ,

And when all else fails lets come back to good old "i don't trust that lot in Govt"

For goodness sake stop making lame excuses. Or at least have the decency to actually say "i am too lazy / too important / just can't be bothered"

honestly, reading this thread, some of the attitudes on here really are a little selfish

 

[BGuy]

Really, there's only two ways round it.
1: Stop using energy
2: Stop breeding so many people.QUOTE]

Only two CB, that's a bit disappointing and not quite the way I see it. How about including: leading by example; educating other governments; looking at solutions; agreeing objectives; implimenting and monitoring initiatives; evaluating benefits; communicating successes, etc, etc, etc.

Ok, at the end of the day it could be a very long, very time-consuming and very complicated chain with possibly a few vulnerable links. But there HAS to be a starting point otherwise nothing will be done at all - is that what everyone wants? More importantly, SOMEONE has to get off their arse and start the ball rolling and it needs to be done NOW. Realistically, it doesn't matter who takes the initiative, just so long as someone does.

Governments have a responsibility to educate and create awareness because, as far as I'm concerned, that is the key initiative in this instance. It's not just a case of them hiking up taxes, that's inevitable anyway. It's about getting the balance right between increasing certain taxes and reducing others. I don't give a jack sh*t about those people on here who can't look any further than their own wallets - that's a negitive and selfish view in my opinion. Most are lucky to have a wallet anyway - just ask 50%+ of the global population. Likewise, most have their 2.5 children (or whatever the average is these days), their house, their car; their hi-tec gadgets, their job . . . and you know what, they're very, very lucky indeed!

So, it's about time some of you started offering a balanced view, as well as taking a positive stance for Christ's sake!

 

[Reay_Bonxie]

Fuel in America costs a third of that in the UK because of the absence of road duty and VAT. However, the British do the same amount of driving as Americans, there's proof that taxation is useless at curbing behavior.

What the UK needs to do is investment in transport and provide tax breaks for UK holidays and home grown produce. Large substantial grants for insulation, heat source pumps and solar panels etc.

The green tax will just prop up an ever increasing welfare state and fund wars in foreign lands.

 

[Tyke]

Fuel in America costs a third of that in the UK because of the absence of road duty and VAT. However, the British do the same amount of driving as Americans, there's proof that taxation is useless at curbing behavior.

The green tax will just prop up an ever increasing welfare state and fund wars in foreign lands.

It seems to me that the figures suggest something different to your first paragraph conclusion:-

Cars per 1000 population:-
USA-759
EU-472
UK-433

Average fuel economy of cars :-
USA-29mpg
UK-43mpg

This would appear to suggest that fuel tax in UK may have influenced car ownership in UK to around half of that in USA-and encouraged fuel consumption to a level one third better than USA.
I accept that the relative per capita wealth of the two countries will be a factor too.

With regard to the use of new taxes-they should of course be self reducing if they do affect the consumption being taxed. And if the green tax regime is clearly tax neutral-ie offset by tax relief on ecologically desirable goods & services, the fear of misuse -which I share-will go.

Colin

 

[Reay_Bonxie]

It seems to me that the figures suggest something different to your first paragraph conclusion:-

Cars per 1000 population:-
USA-759
EU-472
UK-433

Average fuel economy of cars :-
USA-29mpg
UK-43mpg

This would appear to suggest that fuel tax in UK may have influenced car ownership in UK to around half of that in USA-and encouraged fuel consumption to a level one third better than USA.
I accept that the relative per capita wealth of the two countries will be a factor too.

With regard to the use of new taxes-they should of course be self reducing if they do affect the consumption being taxed. And if the green tax regime is clearly tax neutral-ie offset by tax relief on ecologically desirable goods & services, the fear of misuse -which I share-will go.

Colin

Tyke read again.

Cars per 1000 population has no bearing on how much driving people do and neither does mpg.

 

[turkish van]

Tyke read again.

Cars per 1000 population has no bearing on how much driving people do and neither does mpg.

No, but fewer cars suggests that the higher price of running them may be a factor, and the higher fuel efficiency has been driven up as a result of higher prices. People are more likely to buy more if they can get more for their money.

If you get my drift.

I hope that's what you meant Colin, sorry for jumping in...

 

[Reay_Bonxie]

No, but fewer cars suggests that the higher price of running them may be a factor, and the higher fuel efficiency has been driven up as a result of higher prices. People are more likely to buy more if they can get more for their money.

If you get my drift.

I hope that's what you meant Colin, sorry for jumping in...

A higher figure of car ownership will probably indicate that the investment in public transport is poor and possibly that prices for cars are much lower due to consumer demand/availability.

In Japan, public transport is great, gas prices are ~50% of those in the UK and yet car mileage per capita is ~half that of the UK's. That suggests to me that investment in public transport is more effective in tackling climate change than raising taxes. In the US, public transport is attrocious so that will account for higher car useage, little to do with the price of fuel to the consumer. If people want to go somewhere for a necessity then they will pay what ever the price.

 

[Tyke]

No, but fewer cars suggests that the higher price of running them may be a factor, and the higher fuel efficiency has been driven up as a result of higher prices. People are more likely to buy more if they can get more for their money.

If you get my drift.

I hope that's what you meant Colin, sorry for jumping in...

It is Laura-thanks

Colin

 

[Vectis Birder]

reading this from the perspective of a non car owning household but who both work full-time, some of the excuses for arguments here are astounding.

public transport - , ok so its not perfect and it does provide dramatic newspaper headlines when there's nothing better to be reported on but its actually not that bad- Really. Incidentally as for it being slow, how is sitting in stationary / slow moving traffic jams any quicker ? (might i suggest using a bicycle ?, you could even use it to get to the train station as most have cycle racks nowadays)

And as for the "what's china / India / (or whoever else i can think of) doing ?" - taking a lead from us in the west presumably. ,

And when all else fails lets come back to good old "i don't trust that lot in Govt"

For goodness sake stop making lame excuses. Or at least have the decency to actually say "i am too lazy / too important / just can't be bothered"

honestly, reading this thread, some of the attitudes on here really are a little selfish

Selfish? Or realistic? I don't think people on here are being selfish, lazy or idle, just because they have a different viewpoint.

Ok, let's leave developing countries out of this for now, and as long as we, Europe, the US, etc get the ball rolling (I think we may have to wait until the next US administration before getting anywhere there) others may, eventually, follow suit.

 

[Edward woodwood]

Hi Karl

you'll be pleased to know that thanks to some encouragement from you last year, I'll be birding by bike when i move to Sea Palling shortly. Waxham, Horsey, Hickling, Winterton etc all easily reachable. The car will only be for odd journies to work and we car share there too.

Doubtless you'll spot me before long and will be able to laugh at my bike

Tim

 

[Vectis Birder]

I bought a bicycle back in August. I'm gradually getting there, but with a sore arse...

 

[Collster]

Hi Karl

you'll be pleased to know that thanks to some encouragement from you last year, I'll be birding by bike when i move to Sea Palling shortly. Waxham, Horsey, Hickling, Winterton etc all easily reachable. The car will only be for odd journies to work and we car share there too.

Doubtless you'll spot me before long and will be able to laugh at my bike

Tim

good man

 

[Collster]

I bought a bicycle back in August. I'm gradually getting there, but with a sore arse...

padded shorts make all the difference :-O

 

[Gordon]

"just another means of fleecing the people, why didnt the government take action sooner, didnt they heed the warnings? Now, as ever they expect us to pay for their mistakes" - because the govt, among other reasons, being politicians want to be re-elected. But trying to differentiate between govt and the rest of us makes no difference if we are destroying a fragile environment that we need to survive.

"Telling Americans they need to get out of their cars is political suicide." - destroying the environment is suicide anyway!

"Not bad some might say but imagine the loss of jobs" - if the environment is destroyed the whole issue of jobs as we understand it now will be gone anyway.

Even mega-rich corporate CEO's will have nowhere to run.

Gordon

 

[jedku]

..."Telling Americans they need to get out of their cars is political suicide." - destroying the environment is suicide anyway!....Gordon

Read the rest of my post before engaging in simple-minded sloganeering. I explain how we can reduce emmisions dramatically in the USA even given the fact that most Americans have no other option but to drive. Its not my idea, CAFE was developed by politicians, activists, scientists and industry. It's a practical idea.
Gordon, you're just playing PC rhetorical games and alienating allies and opponents alike with these one-liners. Maybe you should use your energy to help find and publicize practical solutions instead?