£25 congestion charge is it a done deal?

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
I think you will find that is popular Western myth.

Not so sure about that, or maybe I incorrectly phrased it, should possibly have been - the chinese may care but the chances of getting them to do something about it, given their political system, is unlikely.
 
I still think you are mistaken. They have pollution and ecology high on the political agenda and already employ use of renewable energy.
They have major plans for new environmental cities so as to reduce impact.

Obviously we are fed most information by OUR media so only see what they want us to.
 
I think you will find that is popular Western myth.

I wish that were true.........they (and Russia to a slightler lesser extent) are still building coal fired power stations like they are going out of fashion..........
We dont stand a snowballs chance in hell in trying to redress the balance against that level of pollution.
 
I still think you are mistaken. They have pollution and ecology high on the political agenda and already employ use of renewable energy.
They have major plans for new environmental cities so as to reduce impact.

Obviously we are fed most information by OUR media so only see what they want us to.

Perhaps I am missing the point here. Our media only let us see what our media want us to. But if one part of the media get it that wrong another part will blow them out of the water. Their media only let us see what their government want us to. Minor difference there concerning axes to grind. I don't know if you've ever lived in a totalitarian state or dictatorship (I have), but they make a fine art of propoganda. For now, and until evidence to the contrary presents itself, I will tend to believe our media and investigative journalists.
 
This will affect the wealthy because the residual values on band G cars will plummet and as the thresholds tighten further so will other high ranking groupage cars.
The £400 per year tax will cause £0000's to be knocked off the residuals.

So:

1. The tax increases the cost of owning a luxury car.
2. Residual values of luxury cars fall even quicker than they do now (is that possible?), making them cheaper to buy 2nd hand.
3. People will still buy them 2nd hand because they cost more to own but are cheaper to buy.
4. "The rich" (definition unclear) still buy them new because they can afford to stick 2 fingers up to Ken and say "**** you", and they consider themselves to have worked hard enough for their success to be able to enjoy the right to do as they damn well please.
5. Equilibrium is maintained.

Why concentrate on taxing the comparatively very small number of luxury cars on London's roads, rather than tackling the problems associated within the comparatively very large number of "cheap" cars, vans, taxis and buses?

Surely the answer to congestion and pollution on London's roads is to tax all cars costing less than, say, £40K list price? That would keep the numbers down......:D
 
Which muppet came up with the 3000cc and above idea for pre-2001 cars, did they just stick a pin in a chart or work out that big unstressed engines tend to last longer and therefore there will be proportionally more of them to tax/extort from than the smaller engined models? Why not tax all petrol cars without catalytic converters at the higher rate?
The sooner Londoners get rid of this idiot and his policies the better...
 
You quoted the text and you're still unclear?

No, actually Dieselman answered my query in posting 15.

MBManInKen:409611 said:
I think it's a bit naive to think that the people creating this diabolical scheme would have left such an obvious and gaping loophole in it. ...

I didn't think they had for one minute. I was merely interested in how the scheme would be operated, and Dieselman has answered for which many thanks.
 
Which muppet came up with the 3000cc and above idea for pre-2001 cars, did they just stick a pin in a chart or work out that big unstressed engines tend to last longer and therefore there will be proportionally more of them to tax/extort from than the smaller engined models? Why not tax all petrol cars without catalytic converters at the higher rate?
The sooner Londoners get rid of this idiot and his policies the better...

I think the 3000cc limit is just to be reasonable and fair, 3.0L diesels fall under the 225g/km limit anyway.

Why would you tax cars with no cat more when having a cat causes more Co2.?
 
I think the 3000cc limit is just to be reasonable and fair, 3.0L diesels fall under the 225g/km limit anyway.

Why would you tax cars with no cat more when having a cat causes more Co2.?
Because pollution is more than just a measure of CO2.

What do you think the CO2 emissions of my 1995 E320 Coupe are?
 
Because pollution is more than just a measure of CO2.

What do you think the CO2 emissions of my 1995 E320 Coupe are?

Probably about 300-330g/km. Find something with similar fuel consumption to compare to and you've got it.

CO2 is the major greenhouse issue so that's being targeted. Also the rest of the stuff is more local pollution, not a global problem.
 
Probably about 300-330g/km. Find something with similar fuel consumption to compare to and you've got it.

CO2 is the major greenhouse issue so that's being targeted. Also the rest of the stuff is more local pollution, not a global problem.
Hmm, didn't think it would be that high (so 24mpg = 300-330g/km?) a 2000 S320 is 276g/km.
I'd take CO2 conversion over the other toxic and carcinogenic emissions any day.
 
Last edited:
A LOT..!!

0-60 in 1s, 2200 HP. :cool:
 
I drove my SEC into the 'C' box, realised what I'd done and did a uey and got a £100 fine so I'm feeling a little abashed!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom