Are we ready to protest petrol price increases?

darich

albertross wrote: »

That would be the choice between Labour and the Conservatives.

Whilst not saying one party is better or worse than the other, I doubt that any party in power would reduce the tax to a level we all like and effectively write off several billion pounds of income.

Whichever party is in power will continue to tax fuel heavily because it's an almost guaranteed income. If that's stopped or drastically reduced, then that money must be found elsewhere.
If not, then schools, hospitals etc will close and/or the police force reduced.

None of which we want, but it must be paid for somehow.

stugib

darich wrote: »

Whichever party is in power will continue to tax fuel heavily because it's an almost guaranteed income.

Agreed. I tried to find the historical data for how the fuel duty had risen over the last 20 years but couldn't find it. But IIRC the last Tory government had the fuel duty escalator, a guaranteed above-inflation(?) yearly increase in the duty level, which was only scrapped after 97.

And albertross saying one is a high tax, one a low tax party is only telling half the story - more accurately it's traditionally between tax and spend, and lower tax and less public services. But even that's an oversimplification and probably based more on the 'old' parties.

yeslek

i've only been driving 5 years and have noticed pretty much a doubling in price per liter since then (i could fill my tank on £25, now its £45 odd)
NOTHING else have i seen rise so fast, and what with the high cost of trains/buses it seems to make little or difference what you do and seems that convienience wins over.
its disgusting and unfair and is barely more than the lesser of two evils

Andy_L

http://customs.hmrc.gov.uk/channelsPortalWebApp/downloadFile?contentID=HMCE_PROD1_023552

Goes back to 89 when unleaded was 17.72 ppl (vice 51.52p now) but doesn't adjust for inflation. Using this inflation calculator
http://img.thisismoney.co.uk/calculators/calcPriceInflate.html
says 18p in '89 is worth 33p now

superscaper

southernscouser wrote: »

Someone else said earlier, it's all very well protesting and having a go at Shell, BP etc but it's the government who take the biggest cut and by a long way.

Not only that but the oil companies don't get a profit from petrol, the cut they take from it only covers the distribution costs and infrastructure to them. So they're not going to reduce their costs any more otherwise they're essentially paying to distribute the petrol, ie making a huge loss on it.

catlover1_2

Sorry, wouldn't even consider joining any protest even if it reached £10.00 a litre .... absolute waste of time.

If you don't like the price don't use a car take public transport/ walk/ cycle .. totally your choice to buy or not

xx

marleyboy

I remember the days when a car was classed as a luxury item, not a neccessity. There are alternatives although admittedly I can read todays paper and see that Rail fares are going up above inflation, in return for a poorer service (I would NEVER get a train again, you just cant fit on one).

Buses and Air Travel arent exempt either, the whole public transport system is a shambles. Making it not only cheaper, but more reliant to use a car.

Yet the roads cant keep up with the flow of traffic, too many cars cram them up, and it will only get worse.

It would be preferable for me to Cycle or walk to work, (healthy and good exercise and a lot cheaper to run).

HOwever not many employers are prepared to take someone on who doesnt own a car. The irony is I could easily beat my boss to work using a pushbike.

Im with catlover1 on the protest issue. Not only is it a complete waste of time, its a hindrence to others suffering in the same boat, to create a blockade.

We are all just as eager to get to work whatever method we choose. should that somehow be obstructed, wether or not its costing the Government, its still costing us in our wages. As previously said, Bosses are more interested in an employer being at work, not what problems they have in getting there.

Andy_L

superscaper wrote: »

Not only that but the oil companies don't get a profit from petrol, the cut they take from it only covers the distribution costs and infrastructure to them. So they're not going to reduce their costs any more otherwise they're essentially paying to distribute the petrol, ie making a huge loss on it.

Run that by me again slowly, preferably with simple words.

Your saying that none of the ~£1/l pump price is profit for the oil companies? Why on earth do thy bother with petrol then? do they make so much from the heavier distillation products that it's cheaper to give it away rather than dispose of it?

vikingaero

BP 2006 Profits £5.3bn
Royal Dutch Shell $26bn
etc etc etc

superscaper

Andy_L wrote: »

Run that by me again slowly, preferably with simple words.

Your saying that none of the ~£1/l pump price is profit for the oil companies? Why on earth do thy bother with petrol then? do they make so much from the heavier distillation products that it's cheaper to give it away rather than dispose of it?

That's right yes. The 30 odd p/litre (the rest goes to the Government) simply covers the cost of distribution etc of the petrol. Very little if any ends up being profitable. ALL the profits vikingaero quoted are from the other petrochemicals, oil/gas power generation/energy, and plastics. Petrol is simply a convenient byproduct sold on. At best you'd be requesting oil companies to subsidise the petrol forecourts. How many private companies would do that? As for the forecourts, they themselves only make a profit from what they sell in the forecourt shop and not from the petrol.