Tarmac_Terrorist Posted March 30, 2008 Report Share Posted March 30, 2008 I can't understand why the haulage drivers aren't protesting more regarding the ever rising fuel costs. The situation is far worse than it was several years ago when protests took place. This got me thinking; are hauliers getting some kind of rebate / government subsidy which is keeping them quiet for the time being? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xaddiction Posted March 30, 2008 Report Share Posted March 30, 2008 [ QUOTE ] are hauliers getting some kind of rebate / government subsidy which is keeping them quiet for the time being? [/ QUOTE ] Nope. We have to pay the normal price, although when bought 10000 litres at a time its a few pence a litre cheaper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHIZZER Posted March 30, 2008 Report Share Posted March 30, 2008 nope as above , on bulk buys you get a slightly better price , we use 60,00litres a week ..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Botang Posted March 30, 2008 Report Share Posted March 30, 2008 The problem is the law has changed significantly over the last few years. These guys can't afford to have a criminal record and if they protested in the same way as before they might well end up with one. That coupled to gether with the fact that most of the increase is down to a higher oil price makes it a no win situation, I can't see the general public backing a campaign once the government spin machine swings into action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelwind101 Posted March 31, 2008 Report Share Posted March 31, 2008 [ QUOTE ] That coupled to gether with the fact that most of the increase is down to a higher oil price makes it a no win situation. [/ QUOTE ] IMO, the goverment should be there to serve us and keep petrol at price at we want. If the price of the raw good goes up then it should reduce its taxation to keep it the same price so we can continue to enjoy life with out the increased cost. I also think that they should complain, everyone should. They wont give everyone a criminal record and i personally think everything will come down around gordie if it did. Even if the people at home got angry. I think everyone is being taken as complete joke. Even now they want you to use less energy at home. But you can bet once the new nuclear power stations are built they will be exporting power abroad rather then securing a lower price and increased quality of living for the UK tax payer/stakeholder. I think the current goverment has sat around for the last 10 yrs knowing this was going to happen. However, it made little attempt to secure new oil resources even though it decided to commit the British tax payer to mutiple conflicts when it could have exported oil for British intreasts. If the commerical system was no longer working for the British citizen i think the goverment would be in right boots to supply it to retailers. Further more, where were the dedicated teams developing alternative fuels at our universities etc? Why dident the goverment consider the implementaion of hydrogen fuel engines and making and building them here. Forcing forecourts/fuel companies to put them on there forecourts, creating a market and demand. Or any other source of fuels etc. but simply reducing supplies and increasing taxation can never be an exceptable answer to a problem, accept that you have allowed it to be. And still, here we are today and we have non developmental goverment and systems which is still pushing around the same game pieces on the same gameboard it was using at in 1985 and the problems continue to mount. The system doesnt solve them and yet you all look on and do nothing! Ugh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patently Posted March 31, 2008 Report Share Posted March 31, 2008 [ QUOTE ] IMO, the goverment should be there to serve us and keep petrol at price at we want. If the price of the raw good goes up then it should reduce its taxation to keep it the same price so we can continue to enjoy life with out the increased cost. [/ QUOTE ] In theory, if you are taxing fuel for environmental reasons, your logic is that the free market price for fuel is too low and will result in a higher level of consumption than is desirable. Therefore, the tax acts so as to artificially raise the price to the level necessary to discourage excessive use. On this basis, it is the final price that it important, not the level of tax. Therefore, if the underlying price rises faster than inflation, the tax should be adjusted downwards to compensate. Equally, the tax should rise if the underlying price drops. Alternatively, if the purpose of the tax is to raise revenue, then it is the level of tax that matters not the final price. On that basis, the level of tax should change only with political whim and is unrelated to the underlying price. Economics being a science, albeit a dismal one, we can determine the underlying reason for the tax by a simple experiment. Wait for the oil price to rise, and see what happens to the price. Does the Government act on behalf of the people and maintain the price at a level that is as high as necessary (but no higher), or does it act on its own behalf and keep the tax at the same level? Hmmm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuprabob Posted March 31, 2008 Report Share Posted March 31, 2008 You also have to remember that the Govt is also gaining from the increased tax revenues from the crude oi being sold from the North sea. They are effectively having their cake and eating it. I don't think the same type of blockades we had a few years ago would work. I'm pretty sure Gordon brown has contingency in place should this happen again. I really wish they would stop saying the higher taxation is on the basis of he environment it's just pure and simply to make more money to keep these guys going on expenses and pay for the war Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EssFour Posted March 31, 2008 Report Share Posted March 31, 2008 A couple of points. 1) The decision to increase pterol duty was in Oct07. Since then due to high oil prices the government can actually afford to cut petrol by 9p/ltr and still be in profit. 2) Protests are now forbidden. If you were to protest you could be charge under the terrorism act as mentioned above. We now longer live in a Democracy but continue to think so..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patently Posted March 31, 2008 Report Share Posted March 31, 2008 EssFour - I quite agree with (2). Now, the previous fuel protests were a right royal pain in the neck, caused me no end of hassle, and very nearly ruined a family holiday. So I wouldn't want to see them return. Nevertheless, I find it unnerving that the population is too cowed to consider it. I think I'd like the situation to be that people feel free to protest, but don't feel the need. Feeling the need to protest but being too frightened actually to do it is in last place in my order of preferences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EssFour Posted April 1, 2008 Report Share Posted April 1, 2008 Patently: I think there is far too much apathy within the UK. So much so that it in not the case of feeling the need to protests but more cannot be @rsed. Even if they felt the need there are things in place to prevent a peaceful protest from going ahead. It is a sad state of affairs when applications for a protest have to be submitted to the Police and the ultimate decision as to whether they are given a green light is provided by Whitehall. But we must never forget though that this is in all our best interest and security. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarmac_Terrorist Posted April 2, 2008 Author Report Share Posted April 2, 2008 I never realised that you had to 'apply' to have a protest! At Easter time I was passing AWE, Aldermaston where an anti nuclear protest was taking place. The police eventually had to close the road and I was ordered to take a diversion. A bit inconvenient I guess but probably a fair reason to hold a demonstration maybe. Obviously policing comes at a cost so perhaps the more minority groups will have their protests sanctioned where as larger popular ones such as fuel costs would be declined on the basis they would be too expensive to police. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PsYcHe Posted April 2, 2008 Report Share Posted April 2, 2008 Re EssFour. Just thinking on your post... I can just see the Sex Pistols now if they were to have been formed, as a bunch of brown-suited accountants with an acoustic set-up singing 'apathy in the UK' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now