[OT] Petrol

"flembo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

<snip a well-reasoned argument about fuel prices>

Quoted message said:

What about diesel? Or should that be Diesel? No matter. Petrol prices,
although they are mostly higher, are broadly in line with our major EU
neighbours BUT diesel is significantly more expensive. What I don't know

is

Quoted message said:

whether there are the same concessions in other countries regarding diesel
for agricultural and marine use.

Some do, some don't. take a look at news:uk.rec.waterways for discussions
about the UK derogation for duty on diesel fuel.

--
MatSav

in message <[email hidden]>, flembo

(') said:

"Mark Hewitt" <[email hidden]> wrote in
message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Tim Woodall" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Assuming the figures I saw the other day on the BBC site are correct
on a 97p litre of fuel there is 47p of tax.

You assume wrongly, there is 47.1p per litre of duty on petrol and
diesel, then you add the VAT on top of that.

Quoted message said:

So that means 50p for the fuel, 32.5p duty and then 14.5p VAT

Nope.

Quoted message said:

At 77p/litre (IIRC the fuel protests were at about 80p litre) then
we

get

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

33p fuel, 32.5p duty and 11.5p VAT.

Nope.

Let me elaborate on that 'Nope', if I may. I hope I've understood you
correctly.

Retail fuel costs in the UK are not proportional to crude oil prices.
If they were, the cost of a litre of petrol today (based on this time
two years ago) would be nearer to 135 pence than 95 pence. The retail
price of fuel is proportional to refined petroleum product + the
attendant duty and other taxes. In the UK, in the case of petrol, it
leaves the refinery at around
$2.25/US Gallon and leaves the pumps at around $6.80/ US Gallon. This
is where the 62% or 61 pence markup that has been bandied about over
the last few days comes from. If petrol was given away free to
retailers at the refinery gate, it would cost 55 pence a litre at the
pump before they could make a profit (ie fuel duty + VAT) . The 61
pence that's been quoted is because both fuel and duty are taxed, ie
(33+47)*1.175 =94, 94-33 =61, et voila! I think that's what you were
saying.

[scythe]

Look, let's bring this down to something every cyclist can understand.
I'm going to cycle across a desert. The next well is 200 miles away. I
have one camelback, holding 3 litres of water. If I'm /very/ careful, my
water will last. After a while I meet another cyclist crossing the
desert, and he hasn't brought a camelback. So I give him a drink out of
mine. We ride on together, and meet more and more cyclists. Soon we're
passing the camelback from hand to hand as fast as we can go, just so
everyone can get a drink. 'I know', says one bright spark by the name of
Gordon, 'lets put another drinking tube into the camelback so that we
can suck the water out faster'. Exercise for the advanced reader: who
gets to the next well alive?

OK, OK, so that's bad enough. But in the real world there _is_ no next
well, or if there is we don't know of it yet. Conserve energy as much as
we like, it may still run out before we find an abundant alternative
source. So what does the rational person do about this situation?
Increase or decrease consumption?

The problem isn't that fuel is too expensive in Britain. It isn't. It's
still way too cheap. If it were much more expensive, people would start
seriously seeking ways of reducing their consumption.

Last night on the BBC, a 'hill farmer' (who not only does not pay tax on
his fuel, but actually has his income hugely subsidised by you and me
out of /our/ taxes) was shown driving an enormous, apparently brand new
four wheel drive tractor to blockade a petrol refinery in Newcastle. The
fuel costs of this enormous beast, he complained, were too much for his
business. So the solutions is...?

/If/ he is, as stated, a hill farmer... I grew up on a hill farm. It had
tractors - grey Fergussons of 28 horse power which could run all day on
less fuel than his penis extension burns in an hour[1]. But most of the
time, the tractors stayed in their sheds. To go out and look or feed the
sheep, there was a mini pickup (although most of the shepherds on
neighbouring farms just walked). Sure, the hay harvest needed more folk
than the farm employed permanently, but that's what school holidays were
for. But last night's fuel protester wasn't thinking of selling his
monstrous pride and joy. Not he. He wasn't thinking of living within his
means, of using equipment appropriate to his budget or his needs. No,
no, no. Perish the very thought.

And though his hypocrisy was extreme, it's only more obvious than that of
the person who uses a sports-car or an SUV for suburban commuting and
shopping journeys, and then complains about the cost of fuel.

[1] Massey Fergusson's current big 4x4 - the 8400 - burns 35 litres of
diesel per hour - according to the manufacturer's brochure - at full
chat. No wonder he can't afford to run it!

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; Diplomacy, American: see Intelligence, Military

Simon Brooke said:

Last night on the BBC, a 'hill farmer' (who not only does not pay tax on
his fuel,

<pedant> red diesel is taxed. Just not very much. </pedant>

Otherwise I concur heartily.

R.

Simon Brooke said:

Look, let's bring this down to something every cyclist can understand.
I'm going to cycle across a desert. The next well is 200 miles away. I
have one camelback, holding 3 litres of water. If I'm /very/ careful, my
water will last. After a while I meet another cyclist crossing the
desert, and he hasn't brought a camelback. So I give him a drink out of
mine. We ride on together, and meet more and more cyclists. Soon we're
passing the camelback from hand to hand as fast as we can go, just so
everyone can get a drink. 'I know', says one bright spark by the name of
Gordon, 'lets put another drinking tube into the camelback so that we
can suck the water out faster'. Exercise for the advanced reader: who
gets to the next well alive?

OK, OK, so that's bad enough. But in the real world there _is_ no next
well, or if there is we don't know of it yet. Conserve energy as much as
we like, it may still run out before we find an abundant alternative
source. So what does the rational person do about this situation?
Increase or decrease consumption?

The problem isn't that fuel is too expensive in Britain. It isn't. It's
still way too cheap. If it were much more expensive, people would start
seriously seeking ways of reducing their consumption.

There is also the problem of the big kids forcing their drinking
straws into your camelbak at gunpoint.

"Bob"
--

Email address is spam trapped, to reply directly remove the beverage.

"Simon Brooke" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

/If/ he is, as stated, a hill farmer... I grew up on a hill farm. It had
tractors - grey Fergussons of 28 horse power which could run all day on
less fuel than his penis extension burns in an hour[1]. But most of the
time, the tractors stayed in their sheds. To go out and look or feed the
sheep, there was a mini pickup (although most of the shepherds on
neighbouring farms just walked).

Vehicle of choice for local farmers personal transport these days is a quad
bike. I think the Dales might count as hill farming..

cheers,
clive

Clive George said:

Vehicle of choice for local farmers personal transport these days is a quad
bike. I think the Dales might count as hill farming..

I saw loads of those while walking the coast-to-coast this year. Doubt they
use that much fuel though.

--
Arthur Clune

"Arthur Clune" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Clive George said:

Vehicle of choice for local farmers personal transport these days is a
quad
bike. I think the Dales might count as hill farming..

I saw loads of those while walking the coast-to-coast this year. Doubt
they
use that much fuel though.

Indeed - as such, I think they are probably a sensible choice.

cheers,
clive

I submit that on or about Tue, 13 Sep 2005 21:52:03 GMT, the person
known to the court as "Richard Bullock"
<[email hidden]> made a statement
(<[email hidden]> in Your Honour's bundle) to
the following effect:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

All that has changed is that the global price of oil has
risen, and since that is largely controlled by a cartel it is hardly
the Government's fault.

Quoted message said:

Was it not even slightly affected by the Iraq war then?

What part of largely were you having trouble understanding? :o)

Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

"To every complex problem there is a solution which is
simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken

Quoted message said:

Chris Tarrent had a good idea on the radio this morning. Spend all
day driving north up the M1/M6/M74 topping up at every sevice station
on the route. And then reverse the process driving south.

Well I managed the M6 and M74 bit, but missed out the topping up. Had
to fillup before the journey and that was interesting, just a short
queue.

Edinburgh was full of sheep at every station.

Richard Webb

In message id <[email hidden]> on Tue, 13 Sep 2005
23:47:17 +0100, Ambrose Nankivell wrote in uk.rec.cycling :

Quoted message said:

The Lemmings don't seem to go far. I've been commuting 40 miles up the M6 by
car for rather long-winded & shameful reasons for the past week, and the
service stations have been completely empty of queues. But come off the
motorway, and even at the identically priced garage, there's a queue coming
straight back halfway across the roundabout.

I saw stations on one side of a dual carriage way with queues
effectively closing the inside lane. The garage across the road was
empty - no signs indicating no fuel. To get to the "other side" was a
simple right turn, twice if it meant that they were part way through a
journey. They probably didn't do it as they never let each other cross
for right turns!

John Blake said:

In message id <[email hidden]> on Tue, 13 Sep 2005
23:47:17 +0100, Ambrose Nankivell wrote in uk.rec.cycling :

Quoted message said:

The Lemmings don't seem to go far. I've been commuting 40 miles up the M6 by
car for rather long-winded & shameful reasons for the past week, and the
service stations have been completely empty of queues. But come off the
motorway, and even at the identically priced garage, there's a queue coming
straight back halfway across the roundabout.

Looks like I was right to refuse to join the queues, 2p/l less than
last week already.

Nobody Here said:

Quoted message said:

I think the problem people have with fuel is that you pay duty on it
and then pay VAT on the duty.Gordon Brown is raking in a vast amount of
cash that he could not have forseen simply due to the fact that the
cost of the fuel has gone up. People then wonder if he could actually
cut the tax to relieve the "burden".

AIUI you pay VAT on the "fuel" part only, not the duty.

No, you pay VAT on both.

Clive George said:

"Nobody Here" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I think the problem people have with fuel is that you pay duty on it
and then pay VAT on the duty.Gordon Brown is raking in a vast amount of
cash that he could not have forseen simply due to the fact that the
cost of the fuel has gone up. People then wonder if he could actually
cut the tax to relieve the "burden".

AIUI you pay VAT on the "fuel" part only, not the duty.

You'd be wrong. Not that it's relevant - duty + VAT = fixed cost, so just
think of it as that.

Simon's phrasing is either unfortunate or wrong - as the fuel price goes up,
the duty doesn't, and neither does the VAT on the duty. The people who are
complaining about the extra VAT GB is getting due to the recent price rises
don't realise it would only be worth 2p/litre - far less than the amount of
increase they're actually complaining about.

They also don't realise that because fuel prices rising contribute to
inflation, the chanellor is not getting the free lunch people claim.

Simon Proven said:

They also don't realise that because fuel prices rising contribute to
inflation, the chanellor is not getting the free lunch people claim.

Yes but the price of oil has risen which means he's making a tidy sum
out of the North Sea as well.

--
Tony

"I did make a mistake once - I thought I'd made a mistake but I hadn't"
Anon

Also sprach MartinM [email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

Looks like I was right to refuse to join the queues, 2p/l less than
last week already.

Not at Corley services on Saturday though. Bah!

--
Dave Larrington - <http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/>
Here, take these cheese-shaped stilts. You'll know when to use them.