Do you think Road Pricing should be introduced here!

jock101

With the advent of the range of new tolls imposed on the Irish motorist in recent months and other penal taxes like VRT, Parking Levies, Car Insurance Levy and probably soon to be a congestion charge in Dublin etc... Do you think Road Pricing should be introduced in the next few years!

Anan1

As an alternative to road tax i'd be all in favour. I run two cars and my driving is almost all off-peak, so it should save me quite a bit.

Lisnagry

Known this country it will be put on top of all the other taxes on motoring

jock101

The Idea was suggested a few years back in the UK, but 2 million people signed an online potistion against it, and the Blair Government sidelined it.
I can't remember exactly what the charge per mile was going to be, but I think it was a fairly large price. 80p a mile?
Its also a very regressive tax on the working poor, as it hits their income far more then high wage earners. As the congestion charge does in London, As I have witnessed with my own eyes. The only privately owned cars you see driving in central London during 7am-6pm are generally Luxury cars. Where the £10 a day charge is nothing to such people, its actually a bargain to keep the streets relatively free of traffic for the movement of the Wealthy??

cyclopath2001

Anan1 wrote: »

As an alternative to road tax i'd be all in favour.

There is no road tax in Ireland.

Done correctly, road pricing would favour people who live near where they work/shop and who choose space-efficient methods of transportation.

jock101

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

There is no road tax in Ireland.

Done correctly, road pricing would favour people who live near where they work/shop and who choose space-efficient methods of transportation.

Oh sorry, Motor tax!:rolleyes:

Yeah a tax on the freedom of movement by use of GPS and the weapon of choice of our Fascist Dail, Financial controls! Why not microchip us all and be done with it!

Road pricing, if they get rid of all other motorist related taxes and introduce state car insurance cover for all. But that will never happen just imagine and impose new forms of tax. Or import and imploment nasty foreign idea's thought up in that other Fascist Cabala " Brussels".:mad:

EPM

All road pricing will do is penalize those who need to travel for work. Plus big brother will be watching you...no thanks...

Cookie_Monster

its an expensive and inefficient way of recording tax. think of all the technology that needs to be brought in to do it.

Much simpler would be a fuel tax, does effectivly the same thing, you pay by use not just per annum.

cyclopath2001

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

its an expensive and inefficient way of recording tax. think of all the technology that needs to be brought in to do it.

You could leverage the technology to handle speeding tickets and pay-parking. Could also help the Gardia recover stolen vehicles. Voluntary disclosure of te GPS tracks could help customers get cheaper insurance quotes.

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Much simpler would be a fuel tax, does effectivly the same thing, you pay by use not just per annum.

True this would discourage inefficient use of fule but it does not tackle the problem of inefficient use of road space. It could also serve to make it more attractive for people to live near where they work and shop, cutting down on imported fuel use.

Theanswers

Cant see it working to well for those of us who live in the country. It's an 8 mile trip into town.

On average I would drive 30-40 miles per day. Prob a tad bit more the some city folk so like the carbon tax it would affect those in the country more!

Not on, nor wont be happening...
So I think you all should forget about it as it wont work!

dr.fuzzenstein

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

There is no road tax in Ireland.

Done correctly, road pricing would favour people who live near where they work/shop and who choose space-efficient methods of transportation.

I need to travel over 100 km in total to and from work every day.
Why? because there is zero jobs in my area. I can only just afford it, there is no public transport alternative and if I suddenly had to pay more, I'd have to jack in my job, sell my car and sign on the dole again.
I and many others would gladly take public transport if there was any, but all the greens do is tax us more and more. This has nothing to do with being eco friendly and everything with screwing as much money out of the motorist as possible.
If there was an affordable public transport system and everyone gave up their car, Ireland would be broke within weeks since public transport never makes any money, it never has and it never will.
The government is dependent on people taking their car, drinking, smoking, shopping, buying houses, etc...
It might just the last straw to send the country spiralling into ruin, we're already taking on water as a country and this would be the equivalent to opening the scuttles.

jock101

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

I need to travel over 100 km in total to and from work every day.
Why? because there is zero jobs in my area. I can only just afford it, there is no public transport alternative and if I suddenly had to pay more, I'd have to jack in my job, sell my car and sign on the dole again.
I and many others would gladly take public transport if there was any, but all the greens do is tax us more and more. This has nothing to do with being eco friendly and everything with screwing as much money out of the motorist as possible.
If there was an affordable public transport system and everyone gave up their car, Ireland would be broke within weeks since public transport never makes any money, it never has and it never will.
The government is dependent on people taking their car, drinking, smoking, shopping, buying houses, etc...
It might just the last straw to send the country spiralling into ruin, we're already taking on water as a country and this would be the equivalent to opening the scuttles.

Could'nt have put it better myself!:);)

cyclopath2001

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

I need to travel over 100 km in total to and from work every day.

It's a sad fact of how people were pushed out of the city by bad planning.

100km commutes are bad for national competiveness. It's clogging up the roads so that goods cost more to delver and it's adding to our imported fuel bill. How do we solve this?

dr.fuzzenstein

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

It's a sad fact of how people were pushed out of the city by bad planning.

100km commutes are bad for national competiveness. It's clogging up the roads so that goods cost more to delver and it's adding to our imported fuel bill. How do we solve this?

Public Transport, Eco friendly cars, alternative fuels, fuel celled cars that drive on hydrogen and emit water, electric cars, better planning, ah fcuk it, too much hassle, let's just tax those cnuts...

Eric Cartman

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

I need to travel over 100 km in total to and from work every day.
Why? because there is zero jobs in my area. I can only just afford it, there is no public transport alternative and if I suddenly had to pay more, I'd have to jack in my job, sell my car and sign on the dole again.
I and many others would gladly take public transport if there was any, but all the greens do is tax us more and more. This has nothing to do with being eco friendly and everything with screwing as much money out of the motorist as possible.
If there was an affordable public transport system and everyone gave up their car, Ireland would be broke within weeks since public transport never makes any money, it never has and it never will.
The government is dependent on people taking their car, drinking, smoking, shopping, buying houses, etc...
It might just the last straw to send the country spiralling into ruin, we're already taking on water as a country and this would be the equivalent to opening the scuttles.

\

agreed, public transport doesnt really work inside the commuter belt either before i bought a car in 2008 I used to get public transport to work , and heres why i bought a car

public transport :
Train €3.00 (Leixlip/maynooth to connolly) , 16a bus €1.80 quays - terenure costs : 4.80 euro / 70-80 minutes
so €9.60 a day (2 hours 20 minutes travelling)

car :

148 euro a month insurance 4.90 a day
177 euro a month repayment 5.90 a day
288 euro a year tax 78c a day
300 euro a year servicing 82c a day
40 euro a week in fuel 5.70 a day

€18.10 a day (40 minutes travelling)

so in exchange for 9 euro im saving 1 hour 40 minutes and sitting next to weirdos on public transport, entirely worth it

jock101

Eric Cartman wrote: »

\

agreed, public transport doesnt really work inside the commuter belt either before i bought a car in 2008 I used to get public transport to work , and heres why i bought a car

public transport :
Train €3.00 (Leixlip/maynooth to connolly) , 16a bus €1.80 quays - terenure costs : 4.80 euro / 70-80 minutes
so €9.60 a day (2 hours 20 minutes travelling)

car :

148 euro a month insurance 4.90 a day
177 euro a month repayment 5.90 a day
288 euro a year tax 78c a day
300 euro a year servicing 82c a day
40 euro a week in fuel 5.70 a day

€18.10 a day (40 minutes travelling)

so in exchange for 9 euro im saving 1 hour 40 minutes , (spending 5.40 an hour to not get the bus) so if with that hour and 40 minutes i saved I could make 5.40 the car would be cheaper, entirely worth it not to deal with the bus

Not forgetting the comfort, efficiency and security you get having your own transport. It well worth the next cost!

Even if motoring cost increase massively in the coming years, Fuel, Tax, Insurance, Tolls etc... . I still wont give up my car. I will just buy something small and affordable to run. Like a Toyota Aygo etc.. or just leave this State.

Eric Cartman

jock101 wrote: »

Not forgetting the comfort, efficiency and security you get having your own transport. It well worth the next cost!

Even if motoring cost increase massively in the coming years, Fuel, Tax, Insurance, Tolls etc... . I still wont give up my car. I will just buy something small and affordable to run. Like a Toyota Aygo etc.. or just leave this State.

personally id just leave the state, i have yet to find a car under 2 litre I would actually like to own , a passat 1.8T is probably the only exception to that and a passat is the physically smallest car I could comfortably live with, i do 40k miles a year so basically need something I can live in

KamiKazi

No.

Abolish motor tax and tolls, and just have a fuel tax. Might get rid of some of the clowns doing school runs in huge SUVs around the city center :rolleyes:

Eric Cartman

KamiKazi wrote: »

No.

Abolish motor tax and tolls, and just have a fuel tax. Might get rid of some of the clowns doing school runs in huge SUVs around the city center :rolleyes:

couldnt be done, if they push diesel any higher its going to kill small firms, we need diesel for trucks and vans and jeeps to actually do work, the clowns doing school runs in those huge SUVs have paid their price in the forms of VRT and the amount of fuel it consumes , dont agree with them, if I could id ban anyone doing under 15k miles a year from owning such a vehicle but they are paying for it, like it or not them buying a 80-100grand car brings the goverment enough money not to load fuel or increase VRT for the rest of us, taxing the fuel instead of the vehicle would just make more people able to afford these large SUV's and only able to afford the fuel for short (school) runs, so it would add to your problems

jock101

KamiKazi wrote: »

No.

Abolish motor tax and tolls, and just have a fuel tax. Might get rid of some of the clowns doing school runs in huge SUVs around the city center :rolleyes:

Something like that operates in New Zealand! An extra 10c on the litre that pays for the other motoring taxe, and they have a similar population to us!:)

KamiKazi

Eric Cartman wrote: »

couldnt be done, if they push diesel any higher its going to kill small firms, we need diesel for trucks and vans and jeeps to actually do work, the clowns doing school runs in those huge SUVs have paid their price in the forms of VRT and the amount of fuel it consumes , dont agree with them, if I could id ban anyone doing under 15k miles a year from owning such a vehicle but they are paying for it, like it or not them buying a 80-100grand car brings the goverment enough money not to load fuel or increase VRT for the rest of us, taxing the fuel instead of the vehicle would just make more people able to afford these large SUV's and only able to afford the fuel for short (school) runs, so it would add to your problems

Of course it could.

The price added to fuel would equate to what you'd be paying in road tax and tolls

Eric Cartman

KamiKazi wrote: »

Of course it could.

The price added to fuel would equate to what you'd be paying in road tax and tolls

the current system is a level playing field , you can drive whatever car you want as long as you can pay for it , and you can drive whatever mileage you want at a reasonable cost no matter the car ,

the new system would mean the person with a range rover or a jag they use for the school run is paying less than the rep in a ford focus or the van driver in a berlingo

galwaytt

Eric Cartman wrote: »

the current system is a level playing field , you can drive whatever car you want as long as you can pay for it , and you can drive whatever mileage you want at a reasonable cost no matter the car ,

the new system would mean the person with a range rover or a jag they use for the school run is paying less than the rep in a ford focus or the van driver in a berlingo

No it's not ! I test drove a new Merc E-Class coupé today - part of Father's Day present, M-B were doing a Drive & Dine thing, so dinner included test drive in Merc of your choice. Loved it. E250, cheap to run on juice, and 300 p.a. on tax. Yet 60k to buy.

I then got into my 17yr old car, worth 9k, which costs 1290 to tax. There's nothing fair, nor equitable about that. The people who could most afford a 60k car get better mpg, and 1/4 the car/road/whatever tax, I do ? You need a reality check you do......

OP - we already have 'road pricing'. And at €1290 p.a. my car/road/motor tax, is it. That and the tolls on all the new roads - I drove to Drogheda last weekp-end and incurred 4 tolls. Can I get a refund on my car tax for that, seeing as it's double-taxation ?

So, a fuel tax I could live with, and as business, hey, all they have to do is allow trade users (traders/business) to reclaim it against income tax. Problem solved.

McSpud

Remove motor tax and add it to the price of fuel. It would obviously lead to huge increase in the price of fuel but is the easiest pay as you use system. Once you already have a car the current system does not discourage usage.

Voodoomelon

The fact that people who drive to work or drive for work will be hit more is somewhat irrelevant, what is relevant is that they use the roads more and hence should pay more. The fact that there may be no public transport in your area and you have no other choice is also irrelevant, this is about making the taxation system fairer.

Issues with housing, public transport, rent etc are all seperate matters.

Why should someone who drives 5000 miles a year with a large engined car pay 4 times more motor tax than someone who drives 40000 miles a year in a 1.9 diesel?

Yes it hits the traveller harder, but is that not the fairest way of doing it? Because as the system is set up right now, it is completely unfair. Not everyone who pays over €1000 a year motor tax is a millionare, infact very few are I would imagine. And even the CEO who does 40,000 miles a year in his S600 Mercedes is going to be paying a massive amount of tax with fuel based tax, and rightly so.

If the tax is on fuel, you are paying for your consumption, you are paying for your CO2 emissions and you are paying for your road usage. The system is fairer and not top heavy, loading the larger engined cars with ridiculous costs.

I pay 7 times more tax than a Micra of the same era, despite the fact I emit less than twice the C02 and only do 9.5k miles a year. Wheres the fairness in that?

jock101

Voodoomelon wrote: »

The fact that people who drive to work or drive for work will be hit more is somewhat irrelevant, what is relevant is that they use the roads more and hence should pay more. The fact that there may be no public transport in your area and you have no other choice is also irrelevant, this is about making the taxation system fairer.

Issues with housing, public transport, rent etc are all seperate matters.

Why should someone who drives 5000 miles a year with a large engined car pay 4 times more motor tax than someone who drives 40000 miles a year in a 1.9 diesel?

Yes it hits the traveller harder, but is that not the fairest way of doing it? Because as the system is set up right now, it is completely unfair. Not everyone who pays over €1000 a year motor tax is a millionare, infact very few are I would imagine. And even the CEO who does 40,000 miles a year in his S600 Mercedes is going to be paying a massive amount of tax with fuel based tax, and rightly so.

If the tax is on fuel, you are paying for your consumption, you are paying for your CO2 emissions and you are paying for your road usage. The system is fairer and not top heavy, loading the larger engined cars with ridiculous costs.

I pay 7 times more tax than a Micra of the same era, despite the fact I emit less than twice the C02 and only do 9.5k miles a year. Wheres the fairness in that?

If you can afford to buy and run a vehicle with a large cc engine, 2 Litres or more. You should pay for for the privilege. As for this CO2 emissions crap, that has yet to be fully proven. As I for one and many others dont believe CO2 is really damaging the Planet. This is just the Greens bunkum, that Fianna Fail use as an excuse to screw the Serfdom classes for more tax. Road pricing would just be another system to screw more tax and control peoples freedom of movement. Even if a car was invented that ran on water, there would be some kind of tax or water levy imposed. Even when the Hydrogen fuel cell become widely used in the next decade or so, that emits water and oxygen. They will slap some other tax on to replace CO2?????????:mad:

Victor

Eric Cartman wrote: »

\

agreed, public transport doesnt really work inside the commuter belt either before i bought a car in 2008 I used to get public transport to work , and heres why i bought a car

public transport :
Train €3.00 (Leixlip/maynooth to connolly) , 16a bus €1.80 quays - terenure costs : 4.80 euro / 70-80 minutes
so €9.60 a day (2 hours 20 minutes travelling)

car :

148 euro a month insurance 4.90 a day
177 euro a month repayment 5.90 a day
288 euro a year tax 78c a day
300 euro a year servicing 82c a day
40 euro a week in fuel 5.70 a day

€18.10 a day (40 minutes travelling)

so in exchange for 9 euro im saving 1 hour 40 minutes and sitting next to weirdos on public transport, entirely worth it

Or do this for less than €2 per day. http://www.taxsaver.ie/Ticket-Calculator/Ticket-Calculator/

ART6

jock101 wrote: »

With the advent of the range of new tolls imposed on the Irish motorist in recent months and other penal taxes like VRT, Parking Levies, Car Insurance Levy and probably soon to be a congestion charge in Dublin etc... Do you think Road Pricing should be introduced in the next few years!

I would be very surprised if it isn't, and expect that all of the other motor taxes will remain in place with, wherever possible, taxes being applied to taxes. Political greed, cheating, lying and incompetence have not died out in this country as a result of the recession. In fact, since the government cannot even get close to balancing it's books but hasn't the will to cut it's costs appropriately, more taxes like this are inevitable.

MrAbc

Isn't it all a question of deciding what you're trying to achieve with the taxation system?

Surely the point of it all, ideally, is to contribute towards:

a) paying for the provision of the roads & supporting infrastructure (inc maintenance/new roads/traffic gardai/etc/etc)
b) discouraging usage that is problematic (inc pollution reduction/congestion avoidance)
c) encouraging or stimulating certain policy objectives (eg job-related usage is good, public transport is preferred, enable non-urban society to function etc)


Anyway, I'd say the overheads of Road Pricing (GPS hardware? user maintenance? reporting system? fraud?!) would negate any benefits.

Maybe simple fuel taxing is the most equitable choice (use more, pay more) provided you exempt business usage to some degree.

Automatically you are discouraging high-mileage for cars that are inefficent. (You would need to replace a typical current rate of €600/year with, ballpark, €600/(15000miles@40mpg) == €600/1700Litres == 35cent/Litre )

If you *still* want to discourage even low-milage of supercars(unsafe?), SUVs and Hummers(anti-social?), etc then you've got to tax everything again based on BHP or Power-to-weight or gross weight, or probably all three, in fact.

Okay, so your shiny new system is something like:
1) VAT/VRT on the purchase price [catch the money bags]
2) 35cent/Litre fuel usage [catch the road hogs]
3) scaled tax on power-to-weight ratio [catch the sportscars; easy on estates]
4) scaled tax on gross weight [catch the lumbering SUVs, Hummers]
5) scaled tax on BHP [really catch the supercars; easy on common sense]
You could set a zero rate thresholds for 3), 4) and 5) based on a family saloon, say, 140HP, 1400kg, ie 0.1 HP/kg and anything below those specs.
[Maybe even give discounts on your fuel tax if your Pwr, Wgt, pwr/wgt are below those thresholds. But do you want to encourage huge masses of tiny, light-weight, slow, depression inducers??!!]

That's one messy system though!! LOL

KamiKazi

jock101 wrote: »

If you can afford to buy and run a vehicle with a large cc engine, 2 Litres or more. You should pay for for the privilege. As for this CO2 emissions crap, that has yet to be fully proven. As I for one and many others dont believe CO2 is really damaging the Planet. This is just the Greens bunkum, that Fianna Fail use as an excuse to screw the Serfdom classes for more tax. Road pricing would just be another system to screw more tax and control peoples freedom of movement. Even if a car was invented that ran on water, there would be some kind of tax or water levy imposed. Even when the Hydrogen fuel cell become widely used in the next decade or so, that emits water and oxygen. They will slap some other tax on to replace CO2?????????:mad:

Maybe you should stop posting until you pull your head out of your arse

Anan1

KamiKazi wrote: »

Maybe you should stop posting until you pull your head out of your arse

Maybe you should rebut his points with a valid counter-argument?

KamiKazi

Anan1 wrote: »

Maybe you should rebut his points with a valid counter-argument?

It's already been done by numerous other posters in this thread.

Anan1

KamiKazi wrote: »

It's already been done by numerous other posters in this thread.

My point being that even smilies don't make personal abuse ok.:)

Tigerbaby

current system hammers urban dwellers. we are subsidising long distance commuters. I drive less than 5000k a year, yet pay same Tax and Insurance as someone doing 10 times that. Unjust. bring in New Zealand model. Levy at the pumps. It would take a team of actuaries a couple of weeks to sort it out.

Typical though, Dublin raises 60% of taxes for this Country, and gets 40% of the spend. Cant see any justice on the horizon with Offaly and Mayo leaders of both FF and FG.

galwaytt

jock101 wrote: »

If you can afford to buy and run a vehicle with a large cc engine, 2 Litres or more. You should pay for for the privilege. As for this CO2 emissions crap, that has yet to be fully proven. As I for one and many others dont believe CO2 is really damaging the Planet. This is just the Greens bunkum, that Fianna Fail use as an excuse to screw the Serfdom classes for more tax. Road pricing would just be another system to screw more tax and control peoples freedom of movement. Even if a car was invented that ran on water, there would be some kind of tax or water levy imposed. Even when the Hydrogen fuel cell become widely used in the next decade or so, that emits water and oxygen. They will slap some other tax on to replace CO2?????????:mad:

I'm with you on all bar the first line, the 'if you can afford..' That is a false argument. I can afford my 3.0 car. I can afford the petrol. It is cheap to service, it is reliable. I also do about 4k miles a year, so, irrespective, I emit less CO2 than Mary Next Door commuting 25 miles each way in her whatever.

However, I am being asked to pay 4 times the tax of 'Mary's' car, for a notional reason, which harks back over 100 years. There is simply no justification at all for the levels of car tax anyone - ANYONE - on the cc-based system is paying - especially the large engined cars. Modern engineering means the larger cars are now more efficient than the smaller, the example of the Merc I got to drive on Sunday being a case in point: despite it's huge bulk, performance, it's economical, clean (:rolleyes: - not that I give a hoot, tbh..), but only €300 p.a. to tax.

The point is, tax, all tax, is supposed to be equitable. It's not.

To appreciate this, you need to understand why the tax came to be taxed they way they were, up to 2008.

Originally, car taxes were brought in to, supposedly, pay for the infrastructure they used. I'm sure there was an element of penalty, or luxury tax, in it too, given cars were very much a luxury at the time. A tax mechanism was devised, based on 'horsepower' and a correlation was made that that bigger pistons were in more powerful/more expensive cars, and that they could/should pay more. It was based on piston diameter.

As time went by, cars did get bigger/faster etc, as the cheapest, and technically easiest way to increase power etc, was to fit bigger engines, and the hey-days of enormous engined cars came to pass. Again, all was expressed in 'horsepower', and taxes applied on that basis. And as manufacturers were selling their cars based on having more 'hp' than the next guy........increased levels of tax was a no-brainer. Who'd buy a car that had 'less' horsepower than the competition ??

So, manufacturers, ever the cute hoors, even way back then, and this being the UK, decided to 'tweak' car design to mitigate the taxes. First, to make cars more powerful, but to avoid the taxes. First, more and more multi, but smaller bore cylinders. Longer strokes, keeping bores small. All helped on the tax front, as piston dia was still equated to 'hp'. Of course it did nothing of the sort.

But, how to advertise you had more power, but low 'hp', for tax purposes ? Well, anyone who's owned a Wolseley, or seen one, could see the badge 15/50, for example. 15 taxable hp, but 50 actual. See ?

Naturally, mainland Europe had a different approach - but the French did have 'CV', which isn't far removed.

Over time, the gulf between the 'hp' and the actual bhp, grew, and the taxation classes existed in name only. Right up to the '70's (or 80's ?), we were taxing cars this way, which was a complete irrelevancy. So they changed to cc-based, which was at least, simpler.

However, that too has come to pass, but the difference now is that we have a two-tier system, which is leaving a huge imbalance, and unjust tax burden on some more than others. If we had all moved to a new 'inequitable' system, there'd be less to give out about, but the two-tier model shows up the cc-based system for the inequity that it is. It needs to be revisited.

So it has nothing to do with 'being able to afford', nor the car itself. It's the system that's wrong.

galwaytt

Tigerbaby wrote: »

current system hammers urban dwellers. we are subsidising long distance commuters. I drive less than 5000k a year, yet pay same Tax and Insurance as someone doing 10 times that. Unjust. bring in New Zealand model. Levy at the pumps. It would take a team of actuaries a couple of weeks to sort it out.

Typical though, Dublin raises 60% of taxes for this Country, and gets 40% of the spend. Cant see any justice on the horizon with Offaly and Mayo leaders of both FF and FG.

Oh FFS, gimmeabreak - the world does not revolve around Dublin.

I'd be more interested to see the placement of GDP, geographically - with chemical and medical device carrying the banner for exports, it's no exaggeration to say that Galway, Cork, Sligo, and other key places outside Dublin are 'where it's at'.

And we outside the Pale paid for, remember, the LUAS, M50 (twice), Widening the M50, Port Tunnel, Dublin Airport's new extensions, DART, Dublin Bus. None of those projects will, could, ever be paid for by Dublin alone. And you have the luxury of using them at our expense, subsidised.

Tigerbaby

galwaytt wrote: »

Oh FFS, gimmeabreak - the world does not revolve around Dublin.

I'd be more interested to see the placement of GDP, geographically - with chemical and medical device carrying the banner for exports, it's no exaggeration to say that Galway, Cork, Sligo, and other key places outside Dublin are 'where it's at'.

And we outside the Pale paid for, remember, the LUAS, M50 (twice), Widening the M50, Port Tunnel, Dublin Airport's new extensions, DART, Dublin Bus. None of those projects will, could, ever be paid for by Dublin alone. And you have the luxury of using them at our expense, subsidised.

nor does the World revolve around Galway or some other uninhabited part of the Country. all those grand public projects you mentioned still dont balance the 60/40 tax disparity. Many of those projects are used extensively by ALL citizens of the State.

Why should Dublin citizens subsidise Country commuters? Answer me that if you can.

galwaytt

Tigerbaby wrote: »

nor does the World revolve around Galway or some other uninhabited part of the Country. all those grand public projects you mentioned still dont balance the 60/40 tax disparity. Many of those projects are used extensively by ALL citizens of the State.

Why should Dublin citizens subsidise Country commuters? Answer me that if you can.

You don't, all of your provided commuting is subsidised by us, outside Dublin, so, I'll put it right back at ya: Why should Dublin outside Dublin citizens subsidise Country Dublin commuters?

None of your M50/Dublin Bus etc cover's it's costs.

galwaytt

Tigerbaby wrote: »

Many of those projects are used extensively by ALL citizens of the State.

....not unless you move them here, it doesn't.

keithclancy

Tigerbaby wrote: »

nor does the World revolve around Galway or some other uninhabited part of the Country. all those grand public projects you mentioned still dont balance the 60/40 tax disparity. Many of those projects are used extensively by ALL citizens of the State.

Why should Dublin citizens subsidise Country commuters? Answer me that if you can.

Because the downside is that it would be cheaper for everyone just to move into Dublin driving the cost of living up.

Decentralisation is the way forward, having everything in Dublin is just stupid when they don't have the infrastructure to back it up.

Business and Industry should be spread out equally over at least 3 cities (given the current population) cramming a quarter of the population of the country into the county of Dublin isn't a good idea.

Instant fail imo, even the Germans give you 35 cent / kilometer back on your taxes for your commute to and from work to combat population clustering.

Dublin is almost on par with Stuttgart ffs (with regard to density / square kilometer)

To reverse your argument, living in the city center of the metropolis that is dublin, you shouldn't need a car. The Dutch for example slap on extra tax for owning a car when you live within a city in the randstad.

Owning my car in Brabant (Motor Tax wise)
1346 Euros / year.

Owning the same car in the The Hague:
1690 Euros / year.

Also, a large amount of tax revenue may come from Dublin, but that again is due to the high population density, they should develop the country as a whole and not just one particular spot.

IMO, complicating things with technology such as GPS Trackers (The Dutch have tried to bring it in and failed) doesn't work. Their better off just sticking it into the price of fuel,

The more you drive the more you pay
The more fuel you consume the more you pay
The heavier the vehicle the more fuel you will need to consume

Fairest system imo.

I don't even see how they could contemplate it when they can't get the f*cking barrier free tolling done properly

Tigerbaby

nevertheless, its a 60/40 split and Dublin commuters continue to subsidise those who live in more lightly inhabited areas. There is a far larger chance of a Galway man using the M50 and Dublin Airport than a Dublin man using the road linking Galway to Oughterard. Therefore the Galway man benefits from the M50 whereas the Dublin man will rarely if ever benefit from the N17.

Yes, there is a commuter service in Dublin, of course. It would be insane to run a City on just the private car alone. and there are commuter services in many of our Cities around the Country too, including Galway.

Like, ESB, GAS etc, the user of a service ( in this case the roads) should pay proportionate to their usage. Thats my only point. Not trying to start a civil war here ok? all the best. enjoy the weather.

keithclancy

Tigerbaby wrote: »

nevertheless, its a 60/40 split and Dublin commuters continue to subsidise those who live in more lightly inhabited areas. There is a far larger chance of a Galway man using the M50 and Dublin Airport than a Dublin man using the road linking Galway to Oughterard. Therefore the Galway man benefits from the M50 whereas the Dublin man will rarely if ever benefit from the N17.

Yes, there is a commuter service in Dublin, of course. It would be insane to run a City on just the private car alone. and there are commuter services in many of our Cities around the Country too, including Galway.

Like, ESB, GAS etc, the user of a service ( in this case the roads) should pay proportionate to their usage. Thats my only point. Not trying to start a civil war here ok? all the best. enjoy the weather.

The M50 is a toll road.
If i recollect you pay 3 tolls from Galway to Dublin, hence he/she pays more if they use the road more.

Cookie_Monster

keithclancy wrote: »

The M50 is a toll road.

only between one junction though. I use it daily (nearly) without paying

Eric Cartman

bottom line i dont give a sh*t what the goverment does, im going to keep driving 3+ litre 4x4s around dublin city one way or another, if i have to set up a country and get an embassy here to be exempt from vrt and tax i will do that,

the green party and all the do-gooders are just trying to ruin motoring for everyone , if all the green party had the money to go out and buy evo's , range rovers and jags i dont think theyd be so against the likes of me

KamiKazi

Eric Cartman wrote: »

bottom line i dont give a sh*t what the goverment does, im going to keep driving 3+ litre 4x4s around dublin city one way or another

Go on ya hero!

Joe 90

Eric Cartman wrote: »

\

agreed, public transport doesnt really work inside the commuter belt either before i bought a car in 2008 I used to get public transport to work , and heres why i bought a car

public transport :
Train €3.00 (Leixlip/maynooth to connolly) , 16a bus €1.80 quays - terenure costs : 4.80 euro / 70-80 minutes
so €9.60 a day (2 hours 20 minutes travelling)

car :

148 euro a month insurance 4.90 a day
177 euro a month repayment 5.90 a day
288 euro a year tax 78c a day
300 euro a year servicing 82c a day
40 euro a week in fuel 5.70 a day

€18.10 a day (40 minutes travelling)

so in exchange for 9 euro im saving 1 hour 40 minutes and sitting next to weirdos on public transport, entirely worth it

In fact if you make any other use of your car besides commuting the portion you would attribute to the commute would be less. You have though miised out on depreciation although the repayments don't go on forever so could be swings and roundabouts there.

Eric Cartman

Joe 90 wrote: »

In fact if you make any other use of your car besides commuting the portion you would attribute to the commute would be less. You have though miised out on depreciation although the repayments don't go on forever so could be swings and roundabouts there.

exactley thats why i left it out , and yes exactley if you do anything aside from commute fuel is the only cost that increases, and those costs were done on a 2004 Kia Sorento 2.5TD so not exactley an enviromentally friendly beast, if it was in a Co2 band A car that did more than 28mpg then those figures would drop considerably

Joe 90

Eric Cartman wrote: »

bottom line i dont give a sh*t what the goverment does, im going to keep driving 3+ litre 4x4s around dublin city one way or another, if i have to set up a country and get an embassy here to be exempt from vrt and tax i will do that,

the green party and all the do-gooders are just trying to ruin motoring for everyone , if all the green party had the money to go out and buy evo's , range rovers and jags i dont think theyd be so against the likes of me

The green party , melons int fact, green (with envy) on the outside and red (communist) on the inside.

ArphaRima

The point is, tax, all tax, is supposed to be equitable.

Is it?

I thought we designed tax systems to ensure that we all pay different rates. If I work harder and earn more money than you, not only do I pay more tax by virtue of the percentage I pay, but they increase the percentage chargeable. Equitable?

MrAbc

fluffer wrote: »

If I work harder and earn more money than you, not only do I pay more tax by virtue of the percentage I pay, but they increase the percentage chargeable. Equitable?

Equitable, not necessarily equal :-) We should all pay a fair, or just amount of tax - that often implies the amount or rate is means tested... you make allowances for people's circumstances.

I think people either believe in redistribulating some of the wealth in society, or they don't - and I suspect many really don't. If we didn't bother with some redistribution, then, in the extreme case, we let everyone fend for themselves... and poverty compounds itself even worse, ghetto-isation spirals out of control, corruption becomes rife as low paid police, judiciary, regulatory inspectors routinely look the other way for the right price, etc, etc
Even weathly elements benefit from the effort to help out the less well off - less crime, more political stability, less serious disease outbreaks!!!

But it does all mean that there's actual financial pressure on everyone to choose a modest car, a modest house, a modest everything and not too many of them, and don't use them too often, etc, etc, etc or you need to pay more and more and more.... and then you're helping pay for someone to be given free use of a house, or for a helicopter to rescue someone off a boat, and the road network, and rural post offices, yadda yadda

[/preachy waffle]

"Mmmm... waffles..." LOL

supermonkey

How comfortable would people be about letting your insurer / the state see exactly how and where you drive through one of these GPS thingies?

I suppose that low speed, low mileage drivers could see a large fall in premia but would this be enough to compensate for the privacy issues?