English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

It makes total sense. Let's face it, who needs to drive their kids to school in a giant vehicle? The chances of having to drive through a hippo infested swamp are pretty low in Kensington, are they not? The world belongs to us all, so if you want to parade around in a big petrol guzzler you need to compensate the cost to the environment, (which money can't do anyway!) Increasing taxes is a way of encouraging more responsible car use, and penalising those who only think of themselves. Your opinions?

2007-02-05 21:25:57 · 17 answers · asked by Shona L 5 in News & Events Current Events

I walk my kids to school!

2007-02-06 02:50:34 · update #1

17 answers

Yes yes and yes again. It's about time these parents realised that the things dangling off the ends of their children's bodies are called legs - and they're designed for walking.
Good on LB Richmond for raising parking fees for these monsters and double good on Mayor Ken for extending the CC charge area to include that yummy mummy paradise of Kensington and Chelsea.

2007-02-05 21:30:34 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

Surely someone who drives a gas guzzler is paying more tax. Isn't about 80% of what we pay at the pumps tax? By virtue, if you use more fuel, you pay more tax. I agree fully that there is little need for a big 4x4 to do a 2 mile school run but should these Mums have to buy a second, smaller car for this purpose and leave the 4x4 at home for the weekend?

As with most things in life, you buy the best you can afford. The best is often the biggest. Increasing taxes will only make the 4x4 even more of a status symbol, only the very rich will be able to afford one.

Your question makes me think that you also drive during the school run hour, yet you are suggesting that others should leave the roads for you alone.

Would this tax hike be the same for someone who lives in a big house on their own? Surely they are using more energy to heat it than they would in a smaller home? Lets put a tax on big homes that are under occupied.

At the end of the day, the world will run out of fossil fuels within a hundred or so years. This will be just enough to bring Mediterranean temperatures to Britain for good. From then on, we won't have to drive/fly abroad on holiday cos we'll all have swimming pools in our back gardens. lol

2007-02-06 02:35:51 · answer #2 · answered by myownprivateroad 3 · 0 2

I thought this question was only for girls??? Front wheel drive means that the power from the engine transfers to the front wheels and they pull the car forward. Rear wheel drive is the opposite, The power from the engine transfers to the rear wheels which then pushes the car forward. Four wheen drive means that the power from the engine is transfered to all of the wheels to give power from all four. Four-wheel drive, 4x4 ("four by four"), all-wheel drive, (AWD for short) are terms used to describe a four-wheeled vehicle with a system that allows all four wheels to receive power from the engine simultaneously. Most people think exclusively of off-road vehicles, powering all four wheels provides better control on slick ice and is an important part of rally racing on mostly-paved roads. Four-wheel drive was the original term, often used to describe truck-like vehicles that required the driver to manually switch between a two wheel drive mode for streets and a four-wheel drive mode for low traction conditions such as ice, mud, or loose gravel. You also find that some bigger vehicles will use a multi drive system the ensure that they get good traction (grip) when they are moving heavy items over difficult surfaces. I hope this helps. Also you seriously need to think about how your boyfriend handled your questions. Maybe you should challange him with something stereotypically girlie like eyeliner or even better TAMPONS!!!

2016-03-29 07:20:35 · answer #3 · answered by Cynthia 4 · 0 0

I live in a flat area no real snow that requires 4 wheel drive.They should pay a high gas tax equal to 10 percent of their gas usage. The fees should go for stopping global warming and designing new available sources and technologies for the automotive industry.
For the next 50 years this tax should be invoked.
Polar bears are drowning due to global warming and we have a oil man president that is a billionaire.
O.K. let's re-start the draft we need a true revolt to stop these wars started for profit for the likes of G.W.B.
The people that have these giant 4 W.D. S.U.V."s
only care to show off only a small percentage dare use them for making a living. God forbid they dent them on a construction site.
They are ego centric selfish people that want to show off.

2007-02-05 21:40:07 · answer #4 · answered by trailertrashsucks 3 · 1 1

Hmmmm...not everyone lives in Kensington now do they?
People need 4X4's for snow. Some of us do live in states like Illinois and Minnesota, Wisconsin etc right? Winters here are harsh, roads are icy, it still snows around these parts. So I find it necessary to drive my kids to school in a giant vehicle that will save them from getting hit by someone with a 2 wheel sedan slipping all over the place.

2007-02-05 21:42:58 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2 2

I agree with this 100% but I dont think that people who need 4x4 vehicles, such as farmers, should be penalised. There needs to be a system in place whereby if you can PROVE that you need this you will not have to pay the higher tax. My brother and his girlfriend annoy me in the fact that they harp on about doing their bit for the environment, yet drive her kids around in a range-rover (they live in a city and have office jobs!). People like that shouldnt be allowed to even purchase such a vehicle !

2007-02-05 21:43:12 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

Charge them £1000 pa road tax in all cases; with guaranteed crushing if it's seen without a tax disc or with less than two people on board - UNLESS it can be prooved that the owner REALLY needs it. Eg. for regularly and frequently towing a big trailer or of necessity off the road.

2007-02-06 06:23:19 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Im all for it, i hate these idiots who insist on driving 2 miles through the city centre to drop thier kids of at school just so they can look the part in front of thier peers.

These people are idiots and make my journey into work so much more stressfull as the spend about 10 minutes kerb crawling looking for a space that i could park a bloody bus while passing spaces i could park a tank, tax the buggers through the nose.

And that fake mud that you can buy to make your 4x4 look auhentic should cost a ton as well

2007-02-05 21:34:02 · answer #8 · answered by poli_b2001 5 · 4 1

I would totally agree with you. I think that kids would feel the benefit of exercise in the morning, by WALKING to school, or at least to the bus stop, to get them to school, & back again afterwards to tackle obesity, if their parents won't feed them proper meals. They say it's cos they want to see their kids safely into school, but there are other ways to do that without a huge 4x4 polluting the environment.

2007-02-05 21:50:14 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

Yes the problem is this though. I live in a rural area and many of the people you see in 4 wheel drives actually NEED them.

I hate 4 wheel drives with a vengeance but we need to make sure the people in the agricultural industry are not penalised.

2007-02-05 21:38:27 · answer #10 · answered by Not Ecky Boy 6 · 2 1

fedest.com, questions and answers