Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>> Certes <none@nowhere.net> wrote:
>>> On 25/02/2022 08:27, Bob wrote:
>>>> On 2022-02-24 18:37:12 +0000, Certes said:
>>>>
>>>>> On 24/02/2022 12:15, Bob wrote:
>>>>>> On 2022-02-22 18:04:20 +0000, Roland Perry said:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In message <sv36as$eur$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:25:47 on Tue, 22 Feb
>>>>>>> 2022, Rolf Mantel <news@hartig-mantel.de> remarked:
>>>>>>>> Taxpayers subsidize road transport to the hilt,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In .CH? It's not the case in .UK
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Where does all the non-tax revenue come from that pays for the UK
>>>>>> riad network, then?  A bit comes from the Dartford river crossing, a
>>>>>> bit from the London Congestion charge.  I assume a few other bridges
>>>>>> have tolls?  Oh, the M6 toll.  I'm sure that covers all of the cost
>>>>>> of the UK road network.
>>>>>
>>>>> Mainly duties and taxes on fuel, with contributions from the initial and
>>>>> annual duty on the vehicles themselves.
>>>>
>>>> So roads are not subidised by the taxpayer because the money to pay for
>>>> them comes from taxes.  Got it.
>>>
>>> I was reading "taxpayer" as general taxation such as Income Tax and VAT.
>>> Extra taxes paid specifically for the privilege of driving don't count
>>> as subsidy.
>>
>> Which would make a kind of sense if those taxes were hypothecated to the
>> roads budget, but IIUC they aren’t, like NI doesn’t fund the state pension.
>>
>> Sam
>>
>
> Actually NI does fund the state pension
>
> https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-insurance-fund-accounts
>
> The National Insurance Scheme was established on 5 July 1948 to provide
> unemployment benefit, sickness benefit, retirement pensions and other
> benefits in cases where individuals meet the contribution and other
> qualifying conditions.
>
> The National Insurance Fund Accounts present the receipts and payments for
> the financial year, as well as the balance on the Fund at the end of the
> year.

Then I did not UC. I’m not sure where my faulty understanding came from,
but I apologise for spreading it.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

On 26/02/2022 09:49, Sam Wilson wrote:
> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>> Certes <none@nowhere.net> wrote:
>>>> On 25/02/2022 08:27, Bob wrote:
>>>>> On 2022-02-24 18:37:12 +0000, Certes said:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 24/02/2022 12:15, Bob wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2022-02-22 18:04:20 +0000, Roland Perry said:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In message <sv36as$eur$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:25:47 on Tue, 22 Feb
>>>>>>>> 2022, Rolf Mantel <news@hartig-mantel.de> remarked:
>>>>>>>>> Taxpayers subsidize road transport to the hilt,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In .CH? It's not the case in .UK
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Where does all the non-tax revenue come from that pays for the UK
>>>>>>> riad network, then?  A bit comes from the Dartford river crossing, a
>>>>>>> bit from the London Congestion charge.  I assume a few other bridges
>>>>>>> have tolls?  Oh, the M6 toll.  I'm sure that covers all of the cost
>>>>>>> of the UK road network.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mainly duties and taxes on fuel, with contributions from the initial and
>>>>>> annual duty on the vehicles themselves.
>>>>>
>>>>> So roads are not subidised by the taxpayer because the money to pay for
>>>>> them comes from taxes.  Got it.
>>>>
>>>> I was reading "taxpayer" as general taxation such as Income Tax and VAT.
>>>> Extra taxes paid specifically for the privilege of driving don't count
>>>> as subsidy.
>>>
>>> Which would make a kind of sense if those taxes were hypothecated to the
>>> roads budget, but IIUC they aren’t, like NI doesn’t fund the state pension.
>>>
>>> Sam
>>>
>>
>> Actually NI does fund the state pension
>>
>> https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-insurance-fund-accounts
>>
>> The National Insurance Scheme was established on 5 July 1948 to provide
>> unemployment benefit, sickness benefit, retirement pensions and other
>> benefits in cases where individuals meet the contribution and other
>> qualifying conditions.
>>
>> The National Insurance Fund Accounts present the receipts and payments for
>> the financial year, as well as the balance on the Fund at the end of the
>> year.
>
> Then I did not UC. I’m not sure where my faulty understanding came from,
> but I apologise for spreading it.
>

On the other hand the Road Fund Licence was originally instituted to pay
for road building and repairs. It has long since been subsumed into
general taxation.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

In message <svb567$qkq$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:55:19 on Fri, 25 Feb
2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:

>>> There are no hypothecated taxes for driving faciities, regardless of
>>>the names of some taxes.

>> True, but there are taxes I wouldn't be paying if I didn't have a
>>car.
>
>You still end up paying them indirectly even without a car. The dray
>that delivers the beer to your local pays road and fuel taxes which
>feeds through into the cost of your pint.

They do, yes, but for a car-less individual, the amount that trickles
down from such sources is orders of magnitude less than the money raised
by directly taxing personal motoring.

So the car-less individuals' benefits from the infrastructure which that
dray is utilising, are highly subsidised by others.
--
Roland Perry

In message <svb3fo$fg7$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:26:16 on Fri, 25 Feb
2022, Bob <email@domain.com> remarked:
>On 2022-02-25 14:42:44 +0000, Roland Perry said:
>
>> In message <sv7ssg$c7s$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:15:12 on Thu, 24 Feb
>>2022, Bob <email@domain.com> remarked:
>>>>>>> I have long envied the ticket prices you pay in Germany.  Some
>>>>>>>years ago on holiday there I discovered that for about the same
>>>>>>>as I for a standard class annual ticket in the UK just to
>>>>>>>commute to work I could have bought a ticket valid on any
>>>>>>>train in Germany for a year - and 1st Class too.
>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, if the taxpayers are prepared to subsidise it to the hilt
>>>>>>(80% in .CH I think) anything is possible.

>>>>> Taxpayers subsidize road transport to the hilt,

>>>> In .CH? It's not the case in .UK

>>> Where does all the non-tax revenue come from that pays for the UK
>>>riad network, then? A bit comes from the Dartford river crossing, a
>>>bit from the London Congestion charge. I assume a few other bridges
>>>have tolls? Oh, the M6 toll. I'm sure that covers all of the cost
>>>of the UK road network.

>> Fuel duty £28bn a year, for starters. Then there's VAT on anything
>>to do with operating vehicles (including on top of the fuel duty).
>
>Those are both taxes. The government collects taxes on things (income,
>import duties, duties on the sale of certain goods, VAT etc), and
>spends money on some things. That's the very definition of things
>being taxpayer funded. That is how the (vast majority of) the UK road
>network is paid for. Out of taxes.

Indeed, but the taxes generated *by* personal motoring vastly exceed the
costs of providing the roads. So it's false to accuse the general
taxpayer of *subsidising* the roads for the benefit of those personal
motorists.
--
Roland Perry

On 26/02/2022 12:44, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <svb567$qkq$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:55:19 on Fri, 25 Feb
> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>
>>>> There are no hypothecated taxes for driving faciities, regardless of
>>>> the names of some taxes.
>
>>>  True, but there are taxes I wouldn't be paying if I didn't have a car.
>>
>> You still end up paying them indirectly even without a car. The dray
>> that delivers the beer to your local pays road and fuel taxes which
>> feeds through into the cost of your pint.
>
> They do, yes, but for a car-less individual, the amount that trickles
> down from such sources is orders of magnitude less than the money raised
> by directly taxing personal motoring.
>
> So the car-less individuals' benefits from the infrastructure which that
> dray is utilising, are highly subsidised by others.

I am quite happy for you to subsidise my beer, thanks.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 26/02/2022 12:44, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <svb567$qkq$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:55:19 on Fri, 25 Feb
> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>
>>>> There are no hypothecated taxes for driving faciities, regardless of
>>>> the names of some taxes.
>
>>>  True, but there are taxes I wouldn't be paying if I didn't have a car.
>>
>> You still end up paying them indirectly even without a car. The dray
>> that delivers the beer to your local pays road and fuel taxes which
>> feeds through into the cost of your pint.
>
> They do, yes, but for a car-less individual, the amount that trickles
> down from such sources is orders of magnitude less than the money raised
> by directly taxing personal motoring.
>
> So the car-less individuals' benefits from the infrastructure which that
> dray is utilising, are highly subsidised by others.

Like the motorist mentioned earlier, the brewery has decided that paying
tax and duty on a lorry in exchange for access to the road network is
more practical and economical than alternative delivery methods such as
rail, hand cart or helicopter. The government provides capacity for one
more lorry and receives those payments in exchange, a deal fair to both.

In message <svdq8v$rej$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:07:26 on Sat, 26 Feb
2022, Certes <none@nowhere.net> remarked:
>On 26/02/2022 12:44, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <svb567$qkq$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:55:19 on Fri, 25 Feb
>>2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>
>>>>> There are no hypothecated taxes for driving faciities, regardless
>>>>>of the names of some taxes.
>>
>>>>  True, but there are taxes I wouldn't be paying if I didn't have a
>>>>car.
>>>
>>> You still end up paying them indirectly even without a car. The dray
>>>that delivers the beer to your local pays road and fuel taxes which
>>>feeds through into the cost of your pint.

>> They do, yes, but for a car-less individual, the amount that
>>trickles down from such sources is orders of magnitude less than the
>>money raised by directly taxing personal motoring.

>> So the car-less individuals' benefits from the infrastructure which
>>that dray is utilising, are highly subsidised by others.
>
>Like the motorist mentioned earlier, the brewery has decided that paying
>tax and duty on a lorry in exchange for access to the road network is
>more practical and economical than alternative delivery methods such as
>rail, hand cart or helicopter. The government provides capacity for one
>more lorry and receives those payments in exchange, a deal fair to both.

But the amount that trickles down to the individual consumer is
minuscule.

I'm also far from convinced that the HGVs pay their fair share, given
the far greater wear and tear they inflict on the infrastructure, while
not paying, relatively, greater taxes.
--
Roland Perry