Re: Petrol?

In news:,
GbH <[email protected]> blithered:
> This was sent to me by someone who suggested I pass it on to 10
> others, Seems to me to have possibilities.
>
> See what you think and pass it on if you agree with it. We are
> hitting 95p a litre in some areas now, soon we will be faced with paying £1 a
> litre.
>
>
> This makes MUCH MORE SENSE than the "don't buy petrol on a certain
> day"
> campaign that was going around last April or May! The oil companies
> just
> laughed at that because they knew we wouldn't continue to hurt
> ourselves by
> refusing to buy petrol. It was more of an inconvenience to us than it
> was a
> problem for them.
>
>
>
> BUT, whoever thought of this idea, has come up with a plan that can
> really
> work. Please read it and join in! Now that the oil companies and the
> OPEC
> nations have conditioned us to think that the cost of a litre is
> CHEAP, we
> need to take aggressive action to teach them that BUYERS control the
> market
> place not sellers. With the price of petrol going up more each day, we
>
> consumers need to take action. The only way we are going to see the
> price
> of petrol come down is if we hit someone in the pocket by not
> purchasing
> their Petrol! And we can do that WITHOUT hurting ourselves. Here's the
>
> idea:
>
>
>
> For the rest of this year, DON'T purchase ANY petrol from the two
> biggest
> oil companies (which now are one), ESSO and BP. If they are not
> selling any
> petrol, they will be inclined to reduce their prices. If
>
> they reduce their prices, the other companies will have to follow
> suit. But
> to have an impact, we need to reach literally millions of Esso and BP
>
> petrol buyers. It's really simple to do!! Now, don't wimp out on me at
>
> this point... keep reading and I'll explain how simple it is to reach
>
> millions of people!!
>
>
>
> I am sending this note to a lot of people. If each of you send it to
> at
> least ten more (30 x 10 = 300) ...and those 300 send it to at least
> ten
> more (300 x 10 = 3,000) ... and so on, by the time the message
>
> reaches the sixth generation of people, we will have reached over
> THREE
> MILLION consumers!
>
>
>
> If those three million get excited and pass this on to ten friends
> each,
> then 30 million people will have been contacted! If it goes one level
>
> further, you guessed it.....THREE HUNDRED MILLION PEOPLE!!!
>
>
>
> Again, all You have to do is send this to 10 people. That's all. (and
> not
> buy at ESSO/BP) How long would all that take? If each of us sends this
>
> email out to ten more people within one day of receipt, all
>
> 300 MILLION people could conceivably be contacted within the next 8
> days!!!
> I'll bet you didn't think you and I had that much potential, did you!
>
> Acting together we can make a difference. If this makes sense to
>
> you, please pass this message on. PLEASE HOLD OUT UNTIL THEY LOWER
> THEIR
> PRICES TO THE 69p a LITRE RANGE. It's easy to make this happen.
>
>
>
> Just forward this email, and buy your petrol at Shell, Asda, Tesco,
>
> Sainsbury's, Morrison's, Jet etc. i.e. boycott BP and Esso.
>
>
>
> POWER TO THE PEOPLE!!!!
>
>
>
> Regards



--
"He who says it cannot be done should not interrupt her doing it."

If at first you don't succeed,
maybe skydiving's not for you!

Petrol is a scarce good, there is only so much can be got out of the ground
transported and refined.

Even if it were a penny a litre it still does not mean there would be enough
to go round and queues at the filling station to get ones ration.

If more were being done to develop sustainable fuels such as bio diesel and
alcohol then that is something to campaing for.

Eventually the price of petrol will hike so high that currently uneconomic
alternatives will cross over, but I fear we will have to see the price go up
further yet before it happens.

--
Larry
Series 3 rust and holes



"GbH" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In news:,
> GbH <[email protected]> blithered:
> > This was sent to me by someone who suggested I pass it on to 10
> > others, Seems to me to have possibilities.
> >
> > See what you think and pass it on if you agree with it. We are
> > hitting 95p a litre in some areas now, soon we will be faced with paying
£1 a
> > litre.
> >
> >
> > This makes MUCH MORE SENSE than the "don't buy petrol on a certain
> > day"
> > campaign that was going around last April or May! The oil companies
> > just
> > laughed at that because they knew we wouldn't continue to hurt
> > ourselves by
> > refusing to buy petrol. It was more of an inconvenience to us than it
> > was a
> > problem for them.
> >
> >
> >
> > BUT, whoever thought of this idea, has come up with a plan that can
> > really
> > work. Please read it and join in! Now that the oil companies and the
> > OPEC
> > nations have conditioned us to think that the cost of a litre is
> > CHEAP, we
> > need to take aggressive action to teach them that BUYERS control the
> > market
> > place not sellers. With the price of petrol going up more each day, we
> >
> > consumers need to take action. The only way we are going to see the
> > price
> > of petrol come down is if we hit someone in the pocket by not
> > purchasing
> > their Petrol! And we can do that WITHOUT hurting ourselves. Here's the
> >
> > idea:
> >
> >
> >
> > For the rest of this year, DON'T purchase ANY petrol from the two
> > biggest
> > oil companies (which now are one), ESSO and BP. If they are not
> > selling any
> > petrol, they will be inclined to reduce their prices. If
> >
> > they reduce their prices, the other companies will have to follow
> > suit. But
> > to have an impact, we need to reach literally millions of Esso and BP
> >
> > petrol buyers. It's really simple to do!! Now, don't wimp out on me at
> >
> > this point... keep reading and I'll explain how simple it is to reach
> >
> > millions of people!!
> >
> >
> >
> > I am sending this note to a lot of people. If each of you send it to
> > at
> > least ten more (30 x 10 = 300) ...and those 300 send it to at least
> > ten
> > more (300 x 10 = 3,000) ... and so on, by the time the message
> >
> > reaches the sixth generation of people, we will have reached over
> > THREE
> > MILLION consumers!
> >
> >
> >
> > If those three million get excited and pass this on to ten friends
> > each,
> > then 30 million people will have been contacted! If it goes one level
> >
> > further, you guessed it.....THREE HUNDRED MILLION PEOPLE!!!
> >
> >
> >
> > Again, all You have to do is send this to 10 people. That's all. (and
> > not
> > buy at ESSO/BP) How long would all that take? If each of us sends this
> >
> > email out to ten more people within one day of receipt, all
> >
> > 300 MILLION people could conceivably be contacted within the next 8
> > days!!!
> > I'll bet you didn't think you and I had that much potential, did you!
> >
> > Acting together we can make a difference. If this makes sense to
> >
> > you, please pass this message on. PLEASE HOLD OUT UNTIL THEY LOWER
> > THEIR
> > PRICES TO THE 69p a LITRE RANGE. It's easy to make this happen.
> >
> >
> >
> > Just forward this email, and buy your petrol at Shell, Asda, Tesco,
> >
> > Sainsbury's, Morrison's, Jet etc. i.e. boycott BP and Esso.
> >
> >
> >
> > POWER TO THE PEOPLE!!!!
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards
>
>
>
> --
> "He who says it cannot be done should not interrupt her doing it."
>
> If at first you don't succeed,
> maybe skydiving's not for you!
>
>

GbH wrote:

<snip>
>>
>>Just forward this email, and buy your petrol at Shell, Asda, Tesco,
>>Sainsbury's, Morrison's, Jet etc. i.e. boycott BP and Esso.
>>
>>
>>POWER TO THE PEOPLE!!!!
>>
If people buy up all Shell's stock of petrol and BP and Esso have large
stocks of refined fuel then I would assume that Shell will just purchase
from them at a discount price.

PJ

Aren't you all forgetting its the GOVERNMENTS TAX on fuel that is
responsible for our stupidly inflated prices.

Approximately 75% of the cost of a litre of fuel is TAX!!

Rather than penalise companies that do all the work of extraction,
processing, marketing and delivery, consider more direct action that
the government will have to take notice of.


But we have tried this before, and nobody really gives a toss, I was
at the last round of fuel protests and hardly anyone turned up.

The price of fuel is directly proportional to the majority of the
country's lack of interest.

Quit moaning, get off your backsides and do something positive - lobby
your MP big time, and be there at the next show of support.








On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 11:09:54 +0100, "GbH"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>In news:,
>GbH <[email protected]> blithered:
>> This was sent to me by someone who suggested I pass it on to 10
>> others, Seems to me to have possibilities.
>>
>> See what you think and pass it on if you agree with it. We are
>> hitting 95p a litre in some areas now, soon we will be faced with paying £1 a
>> litre.
>>
>>
>> This makes MUCH MORE SENSE than the "don't buy petrol on a certain
>> day"
>> campaign that was going around last April or May! The oil companies
>> just
>> laughed at that because they knew we wouldn't continue to hurt
>> ourselves by
>> refusing to buy petrol. It was more of an inconvenience to us than it
>> was a
>> problem for them.
>>
>>
>>
>> BUT, whoever thought of this idea, has come up with a plan that can
>> really
>> work. Please read it and join in! Now that the oil companies and the
>> OPEC
>> nations have conditioned us to think that the cost of a litre is
>> CHEAP, we
>> need to take aggressive action to teach them that BUYERS control the
>> market
>> place not sellers. With the price of petrol going up more each day, we
>>
>> consumers need to take action. The only way we are going to see the
>> price
>> of petrol come down is if we hit someone in the pocket by not
>> purchasing
>> their Petrol! And we can do that WITHOUT hurting ourselves. Here's the
>>
>> idea:
>>
>>
>>
>> For the rest of this year, DON'T purchase ANY petrol from the two
>> biggest
>> oil companies (which now are one), ESSO and BP. If they are not
>> selling any
>> petrol, they will be inclined to reduce their prices. If
>>
>> they reduce their prices, the other companies will have to follow
>> suit. But
>> to have an impact, we need to reach literally millions of Esso and BP
>>
>> petrol buyers. It's really simple to do!! Now, don't wimp out on me at
>>
>> this point... keep reading and I'll explain how simple it is to reach
>>
>> millions of people!!
>>
>>
>>
>> I am sending this note to a lot of people. If each of you send it to
>> at
>> least ten more (30 x 10 = 300) ...and those 300 send it to at least
>> ten
>> more (300 x 10 = 3,000) ... and so on, by the time the message
>>
>> reaches the sixth generation of people, we will have reached over
>> THREE
>> MILLION consumers!
>>
>>
>>
>> If those three million get excited and pass this on to ten friends
>> each,
>> then 30 million people will have been contacted! If it goes one level
>>
>> further, you guessed it.....THREE HUNDRED MILLION PEOPLE!!!
>>
>>
>>
>> Again, all You have to do is send this to 10 people. That's all. (and
>> not
>> buy at ESSO/BP) How long would all that take? If each of us sends this
>>
>> email out to ten more people within one day of receipt, all
>>
>> 300 MILLION people could conceivably be contacted within the next 8
>> days!!!
>> I'll bet you didn't think you and I had that much potential, did you!
>>
>> Acting together we can make a difference. If this makes sense to
>>
>> you, please pass this message on. PLEASE HOLD OUT UNTIL THEY LOWER
>> THEIR
>> PRICES TO THE 69p a LITRE RANGE. It's easy to make this happen.
>>
>>
>>
>> Just forward this email, and buy your petrol at Shell, Asda, Tesco,
>>
>> Sainsbury's, Morrison's, Jet etc. i.e. boycott BP and Esso.
>>
>>
>>
>> POWER TO THE PEOPLE!!!!
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards

"Lofty" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Aren't you all forgetting its the GOVERNMENTS TAX on fuel that is
> responsible for our stupidly inflated prices.
>
> Approximately 75% of the cost of a litre of fuel is TAX!!
>
> Rather than penalise companies that do all the work of extraction,
> processing, marketing and delivery, consider more direct action that
> the government will have to take notice of.
>
>
> But we have tried this before, and nobody really gives a toss, I was
> at the last round of fuel protests and hardly anyone turned up.
>
> The price of fuel is directly proportional to the majority of the
> country's lack of interest.
>
> Quit moaning, get off your backsides and do something positive - lobby
> your MP big time, and be there at the next show of support.
>
>

HERE HERE!!

I just cant believe that the people cant see the wood for the trees!!!!

Ali

In message <[email protected]>
"Ali" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> "Lofty" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Aren't you all forgetting its the GOVERNMENTS TAX on fuel that is
> > responsible for our stupidly inflated prices.
> >
> > Approximately 75% of the cost of a litre of fuel is TAX!!
> >
> > Rather than penalise companies that do all the work of extraction,
> > processing, marketing and delivery, consider more direct action that
> > the government will have to take notice of.
> >
> >
> > But we have tried this before, and nobody really gives a toss, I was
> > at the last round of fuel protests and hardly anyone turned up.
> >
> > The price of fuel is directly proportional to the majority of the
> > country's lack of interest.
> >
> > Quit moaning, get off your backsides and do something positive - lobby
> > your MP big time, and be there at the next show of support.
> >
> >
>
> HERE HERE!!
>
> I just cant believe that the people cant see the wood for the trees!!!!
>
> Ali
>
>

So which alternative way do you prefer to pay the tax? Increase VAT?
Increase Income Tax?

Richard
--
www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk [email protected]
Running a business in a Microsoft free environment - it can be done
Powered by Risc-OS - you won't get a virus from us!!
Helping keep Land Rovers on and off the road to annoy the Lib Dems

beamendsltd wrote:


>>
>
> So which alternative way do you prefer to pay the tax? Increase VAT?
> Increase Income Tax?
>

Decrease bureacracy?

P.

On or around Wed, 24 Aug 2005 08:19:53 +0000 (UTC), beamendsltd
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>In message <[email protected]>
> "Ali" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>> "Lofty" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>> > Aren't you all forgetting its the GOVERNMENTS TAX on fuel that is
>> > responsible for our stupidly inflated prices.
>> >
>> > Approximately 75% of the cost of a litre of fuel is TAX!!
>> >
>> > Rather than penalise companies that do all the work of extraction,
>> > processing, marketing and delivery, consider more direct action that
>> > the government will have to take notice of.
>> >
>> >
>> > But we have tried this before, and nobody really gives a toss, I was
>> > at the last round of fuel protests and hardly anyone turned up.
>> >
>> > The price of fuel is directly proportional to the majority of the
>> > country's lack of interest.
>> >
>> > Quit moaning, get off your backsides and do something positive - lobby
>> > your MP big time, and be there at the next show of support.
>> >
>> >
>>
>> HERE HERE!!
>>
>> I just cant believe that the people cant see the wood for the trees!!!!
>>
>> Ali
>>
>>
>
>So which alternative way do you prefer to pay the tax? Increase VAT?
>Increase Income Tax?

I'm not in favour of reducing income tax to very low levels and then putting
the tax all on purchases. There needs to be balance. Granted, people with
high incomes are more likely to spend it and thus pay more purchase tax, but
weighting it too far in favour of purchase tax is self-defeating in many
ways - low-paid workers have to be supported by state subsidy, for example,
in order to be able to afford to live. With higher income tax on
medium-to-high incomes, and a bit less on purchases, you'd not need so much
in the way of benefits for unemployed and low-wage jobs.

as to very-high incomes, well... there's a good argument in favour of taxing
them the same - people with 6-figure incomes can afford to move to a country
with a favourable tax regime, and many do. if you tried to put a super-tax
of say 90% on all income over 500,000 then I venture to suggest you'd
collect next-to-sod-all - arrange it that all income is taxed at say 25-30%
(guessing at figures, here) for example, above a threshold level of
something around 8 grand a year (which is a pretty low wage these days)
would, I suspect, raise more revenue - people with big incomes would either
not move away or would even move here from elsewhere. I don't know what the
figures are, and whether for example 30% is low enough to be attractive. 30%
tax on billions is better than 90% on SFA.


coming back to fuel prices... raising the fuel price to very high levels is
no help in preventing waste of fuel - people will pay, then demand pay
increases; transport of goods will get more expensive leading to inflation
of retail prices, etc. etc. Making fuel very expensive only hurts those
least able to pay; while those who can afford a vehicle with a 12-mpg thirst
for everyday use (rather than as an occasional toy) can afford to fill it
with petrol.
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"Festina Lente" (Hasten slowly) Suetonius (c.70-c.140) Augustus, 25

Austin Shackles <[email protected]> wrote:

> I'm not in favour of reducing income tax to very low levels and then putting
> the tax all on purchases.

Isn't this the philosophy of not taxing what you put into the
economy (your labour) but only taxing what you take out (your
purchases).

Admittedly it would deserve a tax regime that zero rated essentials
and progressively taxed more luxury goods.

> There needs to be balance.

Sadly yes but tax is, as most things like that, set on political
agendas not rational ones.

nigelH

In message <[email protected]>
"Paul S. Brown" <[email protected]> wrote:

> beamendsltd wrote:
>
>
> >>
> >
> > So which alternative way do you prefer to pay the tax? Increase VAT?
> > Increase Income Tax?
> >
>
> Decrease bureacracy?
>
> P.

OK - so lets have some details. How? And just saying "increase
efficiency", "reduce headcount" is cheating - its got to be
x thousand from here, their work to be done instead by ...,
that sort of thing. Oh, and don't forget to cost the extra
benefits, reduancy payments, pension payments, social cost of house
reposessions etc etc etc that this reduced bureacracy will entail.
Oh, and don't forget the cost to us individuals that farmimg out
to private firms will be.....


Richard
--
www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk [email protected]
Running a business in a Microsoft free environment - it can be done
Powered by Risc-OS - you won't get a virus from us!!
Helping keep Land Rovers on and off the road to annoy the Lib Dems

> So which alternative way do you prefer to pay the tax? Increase VAT?
> Increase Income Tax?

It may interest you lot to know that the so called high barrel prices on oil
being blamed for the high pump prices is a hoax. I've just driven back from
Berlin where the pump prices are at rates we were paying last year i.e
around 70p per litre. What's more diesel is still more realistically priced
below petrol at about 1.03 euros.

It's patently clear that the government is raising tax on fuel as a way of
generating revenue to finance the bl**dy Iraq fiasco - but of course, they
couldn't possibly admit it, the public would go into a frenzy!

I hate to say it, but the Government has really buggared the economy big
time. Remember the council tax hikes last year? The b*st*rds did that to
save money on financing the police out of the central purse.

Angry!?... I'm bl**dy furious! we are all being well and truly shafted.

Gail.

beamendsltd wrote:

> In message <[email protected]>
> "Paul S. Brown" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> beamendsltd wrote:
>>
>>
>> >>
>> >
>> > So which alternative way do you prefer to pay the tax? Increase VAT?
>> > Increase Income Tax?
>> >
>>
>> Decrease bureacracy?
>>
>> P.
>
> OK - so lets have some details. How? And just saying "increase
> efficiency", "reduce headcount" is cheating - its got to be
> x thousand from here, their work to be done instead by ...,
> that sort of thing. Oh, and don't forget to cost the extra
> benefits, reduancy payments, pension payments, social cost of house
> reposessions etc etc etc that this reduced bureacracy will entail.
> Oh, and don't forget the cost to us individuals that farmimg out
> to private firms will be.....
>
>

My you're in a bolshy mood this morning - get EP90 on your cornflakes by
mistake?

I shouldn't rise to this, but hey, I'm bored.

UB payments to civil servants means we're still paying for them to exist,
just at a fraction of their current cost. Redundancy payment is a one off
cost and still less than the cost of owning them for a year.

Let's see.

Flatten the tax system completely. No separation of taxes - simply a
"transaction" tax. Money moves, it's taxed. Yes, this hits everybody. Yes
this sucks. Suddenly we don't need most of HMR&C due to the complexity of
the system being close to zero. That's how many tens of thousands of £24k
per year types suddenly costing us £6k per year with no pension
contribution? Net saving - in excess of £18k per year per head in top line
costs. Even accounting for the lost tax revenue this is still a savings as
when the revenue goes to pay for yourself it's still a net cost.

Oh yes - suddenly council tax is gone too - transaction tax pays for
everything - so, remove the councils payment departments too. Hell, even if
we keep them why not offshore the whole shebang - you'll half the
savings,but they're still realisable. Call it a £9k per head saving once
you've accounted for the staffers on the buroo and their
indian/pakistani/czech/polish replacement.

Stop fighting wars. They're not ours. We don't have any vested interests in
them. Downsize the armed forces to a "1 major action" response and make the
rest of the forces territorial. Don't get dragged in on warmongers penis
enlargement exercises like Iraq. Pretend we're Switzerland. So - that'a
another what? 50,000 government employees looking for more work, partly
frontline, partly back office.

Streamline the ****ing IT operations for the country by putting in people
(some of whom are here) who know what the hell they're doing and stick to
bloody specifications - just sticking to the agreed specs will save
millions on *any* IT procurement effort the government does - there are a
lot of these procurements go perfectly fine, but when they stuff up they're
always doozies and almost invariably blamable on the civil servants who
tried to sneak in mission-creep and incurred expense and delay. If done
properly this could save anything up to £2bn per year in stuffups.

Eliminate "internal trading" in all government organisations. Coincidentally
eliminate the staff responsible for mananging the internal trading. If a
patient is sick and somebody somewhere else has a bed free, send them
there. Figure on knocking out up to 100 people per PCT - maybe more.

Reduce to zero overseas aid which is obviously going nowhere near its
intended targets. The humanitarian stuff is all well and good, but when
it's buying some tinpot dictator mercedes or guerrillas arms then it has to
stop. Couple of hundred million a year savings.

Move *all* civil service other than that required to actually run the city
out of London to the provinces with resultant reductions in london loadings
and such like - dunno what this will save, but it'll be something in
addition to improving regional employment at the cost of London itself.

Given that all of the above would get everybody involved hating anything to
do with it, and that it's not going to happen, it's still doable and in
reasonable timescales.

P.

> OK - so lets have some details. How? And just saying "increase
> efficiency", "reduce headcount" is cheating -

No it's not.

I live near Oxford and I've had this converation with the local authority.
I asked why we had to have so many government buildings and why we could
save money by merging them all into one central administrative
center...needles to say they couldn't or wouldn't answer that one.


> its got to be
> x thousand from here, their work to be done instead by ...,
> that sort of thing. Oh, and don't forget to cost the extra
> benefits, reduancy payments, pension payments, social cost of house
> reposessions etc etc etc that this reduced bureacracy will entail.
> Oh, and don't forget the cost to us individuals that farmimg out
> to private firms will be.....

This all sounds remarkably like a good argument for reducing the population.
Then the Government could save money by not having to employ so many people
and merging their office buildings. The roads would become less congested,
house prices would become more sensibly priced, young people could actually
afforded housing, there would be enough jobs for the everyone... ha ha...
Bargain!

Lets face it, taxation is at farcical levels. It is as much a contributor to
inflation as wage increases and increased high st pricing. But the
Government choose to be blind to this meagre detail. They think we all have
bottom less pockets of cash and our only function in life is to go to work
to pay tax! well I have news for you - I work to have a life, not to bank
roll the bl**dy chancellor!

Gail

In message <[email protected]>
"Paul S. Brown" <[email protected]> wrote:

> beamendsltd wrote:
>
> > In message <[email protected]>
> > "Paul S. Brown" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> beamendsltd wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > So which alternative way do you prefer to pay the tax? Increase VAT?
> >> > Increase Income Tax?
> >> >
> >>
> >> Decrease bureacracy?
> >>
> >> P.
> >
> > OK - so lets have some details. How? And just saying "increase
> > efficiency", "reduce headcount" is cheating - its got to be
> > x thousand from here, their work to be done instead by ...,
> > that sort of thing. Oh, and don't forget to cost the extra
> > benefits, reduancy payments, pension payments, social cost of house
> > reposessions etc etc etc that this reduced bureacracy will entail.
> > Oh, and don't forget the cost to us individuals that farmimg out
> > to private firms will be.....
> >
> >
>
> My you're in a bolshy mood this morning - get EP90 on your cornflakes by
> mistake?
>
> I shouldn't rise to this, but hey, I'm bored.
>
> UB payments to civil servants means we're still paying for them to exist,
> just at a fraction of their current cost. Redundancy payment is a one off
> cost and still less than the cost of owning them for a year.
>
> Let's see.
>
> Flatten the tax system completely. No separation of taxes - simply a
> "transaction" tax. Money moves, it's taxed. Yes, this hits everybody. Yes
> this sucks. Suddenly we don't need most of HMR&C due to the complexity of
> the system being close to zero. That's how many tens of thousands of £24k
> per year types suddenly costing us £6k per year with no pension
> contribution? Net saving - in excess of £18k per year per head in top line
> costs. Even accounting for the lost tax revenue this is still a savings as
> when the revenue goes to pay for yourself it's still a net cost.
>
> Oh yes - suddenly council tax is gone too - transaction tax pays for
> everything - so, remove the councils payment departments too. Hell, even if
> we keep them why not offshore the whole shebang - you'll half the
> savings,but they're still realisable. Call it a £9k per head saving once
> you've accounted for the staffers on the buroo and their
> indian/pakistani/czech/polish replacement.
>
> Stop fighting wars. They're not ours. We don't have any vested interests in
> them. Downsize the armed forces to a "1 major action" response and make the
> rest of the forces territorial. Don't get dragged in on warmongers penis
> enlargement exercises like Iraq. Pretend we're Switzerland. So - that'a
> another what? 50,000 government employees looking for more work, partly
> frontline, partly back office.
>
> Streamline the ****ing IT operations for the country by putting in people
> (some of whom are here) who know what the hell they're doing and stick to
> bloody specifications - just sticking to the agreed specs will save
> millions on *any* IT procurement effort the government does - there are a
> lot of these procurements go perfectly fine, but when they stuff up they're
> always doozies and almost invariably blamable on the civil servants who
> tried to sneak in mission-creep and incurred expense and delay. If done
> properly this could save anything up to £2bn per year in stuffups.
>
> Eliminate "internal trading" in all government organisations. Coincidentally
> eliminate the staff responsible for mananging the internal trading. If a
> patient is sick and somebody somewhere else has a bed free, send them
> there. Figure on knocking out up to 100 people per PCT - maybe more.
>
> Reduce to zero overseas aid which is obviously going nowhere near its
> intended targets. The humanitarian stuff is all well and good, but when
> it's buying some tinpot dictator mercedes or guerrillas arms then it has to
> stop. Couple of hundred million a year savings.
>
> Move *all* civil service other than that required to actually run the city
> out of London to the provinces with resultant reductions in london loadings
> and such like - dunno what this will save, but it'll be something in
> addition to improving regional employment at the cost of London itself.
>
> Given that all of the above would get everybody involved hating anything to
> do with it, and that it's not going to happen, it's still doable and in
> reasonable timescales.
>
> P.
>

No EP90, just getting fed up with one-line "solutions" to problems!

Richard
--
www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk [email protected]
Running a business in a Microsoft free environment - it can be done
Powered by Risc-OS - you won't get a virus from us!!
Helping keep Land Rovers on and off the road to annoy the Lib Dems

In message <[email protected]>
"Gail" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> > So which alternative way do you prefer to pay the tax? Increase VAT?
> > Increase Income Tax?
>
> It may interest you lot to know that the so called high barrel prices on oil
> being blamed for the high pump prices is a hoax.

No hoax - in the UK we have elected over the years to pay quite a
lot of our taxes indirectly (rightly or wrongly).

> I've just driven back from
> Berlin where the pump prices are at rates we were paying last year i.e
> around 70p per litre. What's more diesel is still more realistically priced
> below petrol at about 1.03 euros.

And what is the German rate of income tax?

>
> It's patently clear that the government is raising tax on fuel as a way of
> generating revenue to finance the bl**dy Iraq fiasco - but of course, they
> couldn't possibly admit it, the public would go into a frenzy!
>

The Government isn't rasing anything - the tax on fuel is a percentage
based on the price of oil - oil goes up, Government revenue goes up;
oil goes down, Goverenment revenue goes down. The budget for the war in
Iraq may seem huge, but as a percentage of overall spending it hardly
registers - and it certaily isn't charged against fuel tax revenue!.

Now, if you were to say that the yuppies on the oil exchanges should
have their bonuses calculated on their ability to keep oil prices
down rather than up, then you would have a point. If they turn round
and *all* say that are not going to pay more than x for a barrel of
oil then the price hike cannot take place. It's not going to happen
though.

> I hate to say it, but the Government has really buggared the economy big
> time. Remember the council tax hikes last year? The b*st*rds did that to
> save money on financing the police out of the central purse.
>
> Angry!?... I'm bl**dy furious! we are all being well and truly shafted.
>
> Gail.
>

Richard
--
www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk [email protected]
Running a business in a Microsoft free environment - it can be done
Powered by Risc-OS - you won't get a virus from us!!
Helping keep Land Rovers on and off the road to annoy the Lib Dems

> And what is the German rate of income tax?

Well, I seem to remember my german colleagues saying about the same as it is
here .
And in Italy, the income tax is the same as UK, they also have same rate
vat, no council tax or water charges!

> The Government isn't rasing anything - the tax on fuel is a percentage
> based on the price of oil - oil goes up, Government revenue goes up;
> oil goes down, Goverenment revenue goes down.

Y'up That makes sence. It just strikes me as odd that the oil trading market
for europe is based in Amsterdam and therefore the European barrel prices
are aggreed there. So either we're being lied to or the Europeans are
getting a better deal than we are. Being as most of the oil companies with
fuel forcourts in europe seem to be BP, Shell etc, one is naturally lead to
the conclusion that we in the UK are being lied to.

I reitterate..

> > I hate to say it, but the Government has really buggared the economy big
> > time..... We are being shafted!

Gail

In message <[email protected]>
"Gail" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> > And what is the German rate of income tax?
>
> Well, I seem to remember my german colleagues saying about the same as it is
> here .
> And in Italy, the income tax is the same as UK, they also have same rate
> vat, no council tax or water charges!
>

I think you'll find the UK direct tax burden is one of the lowest in
Europe, and indeed the "developed world".

> > The Government isn't rasing anything - the tax on fuel is a percentage
> > based on the price of oil - oil goes up, Government revenue goes up;
> > oil goes down, Goverenment revenue goes down.
>
> Y'up That makes sence. It just strikes me as odd that the oil trading market
> for europe is based in Amsterdam and therefore the European barrel prices
> are aggreed there. So either we're being lied to or the Europeans are
> getting a better deal than we are. Being as most of the oil companies with
> fuel forcourts in europe seem to be BP, Shell etc, one is naturally lead to
> the conclusion that we in the UK are being lied to.

No - oil costs x per barrel. Other countries applys n tax to the price of
finished product. We apply 3x that amount of tax - the oil still cost
the same - no one is being lied to.

>
> I reitterate..
>
> > > I hate to say it, but the Government has really buggared the economy big
> > > time..... We are being shafted!

>
> Gail
>
>
>

--
www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk [email protected]
Running a business in a Microsoft free environment - it can be done
Powered by Risc-OS - you won't get a virus from us!!
Helping keep Land Rovers on and off the road to annoy the Lib Dems

beamendsltd wrote:

> No - oil costs x per barrel. Other countries applys n tax to the price of
> finished product. We apply 3x that amount of tax - the oil still cost
> the same - no one is being lied to.
>

Actually - on that one we have been lied to directly.

At the time of the last fuel crisis Gordon Brown was on TV stating that
"There is no mulitplier on fuel taxation"

Now, there's no multiplier on Fuel Excise Duty certainly, however there's
VAT on top of that - and VAT is a multiplier tax.

Outright lie.

And I'm ****ed at having to pay the commodity price, plus a fixed excise
levy and then pay a multiplier tax so I'm paying VAT on another tax.

P.

> I think you'll find the UK direct tax burden is one of the lowest in
> Europe, and indeed the "developed world".

Well that is blatant rubbish.
I'd really like to know where you get this nonsence from.
I get mine from the residents of the respective countries.

> No - oil costs x per barrel. Other countries applys n tax to the price of
> finished product. We apply 3x that amount of tax - the oil still cost
> the same - no one is being lied to.

Yes I understand that, but the question is why are these punitive measures
applied to us?

On the BBC morning news recently, it was announced that the increasing
prices of petrol on the forcourts of the UK was as a direct result of rising
barrel prices. Well I was in France of May of this year and fuel prices were
the same then as now. If the barrel prices have increased and based on your
logic, it would naturally follow that the the prices in mainland Europe
would have increase too. They have not!

explain that!?


> > I reitterate..

>>....We really are being shafted - big time!!!

Gail

On or around Wed, 24 Aug 2005 10:26:24 +0100, "Paul S. Brown"
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>beamendsltd wrote:
>
>
>>>
>>
>> So which alternative way do you prefer to pay the tax? Increase VAT?
>> Increase Income Tax?
>>
>
>Decrease bureacracy?

come now, stay within the bounds of what is actually possible...
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
Appearances: You don't really need make-up. Celebrate your authentic
face by frightening people in the street.
from the Little Book of Complete B***ocks by Alistair Beaton.