No it isn't it is to raise revenue.
So why don't they tax the use of fats high in polyunsaturates in the same way?
reflected in the tax scale.
Yes, that's what I was talking about "alcohol duty" not "drink duty". Everyone who buys alcohol pays duty.
A very twisted analogy. Defending taxation of road use in motor vehicles but not for other users is more analagous to taxing alcoholic drinks bought in a bottle but not bought in a cardboard carton.
Why, as a responsible alcohol user, should I pay duty on it because others throw up in public places after using it? Do you also support the idea of taxing chewing gum?
i.e. you're beginning to see my point :-)
Yes, but taxing one user of a public service but not another takes some beating in the "unfairness" stakes doesn't it.
Only if it is not at the same flat rate for everyone.
So that proves it is right does it?
But of the other ones that do?
VAT is fairish as indirect taxes go. It is, on the whole, applied equally on all products at the same rate. It's glaring anomolies are the reduced rate for gas and electricity and the fact that some items are exempt.
Lucky, yes, for the following reasons. All the places you mention have railway stations. You don't need to take small children with you if you can go by bike. You never need to buy more than you can comfortably carry. Your health-stamina is reasonable. You have time on your hands...
Frequently.
In the few places I've seen it it worked admirably.
The opposite is true in the small town I lived near. A town with no railway station, whose centre was thriving and whose car parks (free) were always full was transformed into a ghost, town within a couple of years of a charge being introduced in the car park, and yellow lines being aplied to the kerbsides. Congestion increased because of the constant stream of traffic circulating on the off-chance that one of the reduced and now time restricted spaces would become free, and nearby residents had the nightmare of solid parking in their streets. The car parks are now never more than 20% full.
And why should they? Do the libraries, swimming baths, public gardens, pedestrian crossings, bus services, cycle racks, footpaths, playgrounds, floral displays all cover their costs? They are civil amenitiies which should be paid out of the public purse!!!
Please describe in what way it has been subsidised for the sceptics amongst us.
Like a lot of other things (TVs, computers, cameras, washing machines, etc.) where healthy compebreastion is involved.
Because it has failed to compete? It is not attreactive enough to attract mbutt use any more.
Yes it is. I, and most people I know fell a lot better driving in our own cars, at our own pace, via where we want to go, listening to music of our choice, sharing space with people we want to be with, at a temperature that we want to be at, leaving at a time that is convenient to us, and getting to our destination when we want to be there than we ever do when subject to the discomfort and unpredictability of PT.
We could probably provide a free chauffeur and car to each and every one of them for a fraction o amount that is thrown at PT today :-)
He is not. VED is a road tax full stop. It may be called "Vehicle Excise Duty" but it is still a road tax in the same way that a terrier is also a dog.
Would you also claim that VAT isn't a purchase tax?
-- Matt B
