UK plan to launch rival to EU sat-nav system.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
It would have to be somewhat sophisticated, eg if you deemed three cars waiting at a red light to be "free flowing" normal operation, but four cars waiting at a red light to be "congestion", but hey, it all means more work for programmers
Actually, you could just buy the data off Google - charge people per second spent anywhere that is coloured red or worse on Google Maps.
Last edited by Gertrude the Wombat; 16th Jun 2018 at 08:02. Reason: Add charging algorithm in last para
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: mids
Age: 58
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't have a problem with charging for road usage at peak times to be honest.
It wouldn't need to be number of cars at a set of lights and it would also have economic implications for bank holiday weekends which would destroy income in some areas and possibly would cause huge bills through no fault of the driver.
Just use KISS, set times with green amber and red charging periods in set areas. Areas with no pollution issues no charge and no time restrictions.
It wouldn't need to be number of cars at a set of lights and it would also have economic implications for bank holiday weekends which would destroy income in some areas and possibly would cause huge bills through no fault of the driver.
Just use KISS, set times with green amber and red charging periods in set areas. Areas with no pollution issues no charge and no time restrictions.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Which would work if the underlying rationale was really about pollution - instead of about raising taxes to replace fuel duty as fossil fuels are phased out.
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Europe
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I find it very worrying for my paycheck to see how many people in here seem to be okay with increased taxes, whatever they might call it.
Do we not pay enough taxes already? Why should the government be entitled to more of my money?
Do we not pay enough taxes already? Why should the government be entitled to more of my money?
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Join Date: May 2018
Location: London/Fort Worth
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
And I did, for some years, pay more tax than I could have got away with, having chosen not to indulge in the full range of NI fiddles available to the self employed. And whilst a councillor I reduced the costs on the public purse by mostly not claiming the expenses to which I was entitled (to some extent, it must be admitted, because I couldn't be arsed with the paperwork, rather than solely because the council needed the money more than I did).
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Europe
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Every month the government takes about 1/3 of my pay cheque before it even reaches my account. Add the council tax, VAT on everything I purchase plus various other taxes and well over half my money goes to the government in taxes each month. How is that justifiable and why would people want to pay even more is beyond me.
People are complaining about the public services because they feel (or at least I do) that they are paying too much for the services they receive. Before Obama had his way with the health insurance I lived in USA for a while and I was paying 99$ a month for health insurance. While I was there I had the misfortune to require medical assistance, I received a 5 star service and I was very impressed with the whole thing. Now move forward few years and I am paying for the national insurance in UK a lot more than that for a service that is average at best. Where is the value for money?
Every month the government takes about 1/3 of my pay cheque before it even reaches my account. Add the council tax, VAT on everything I purchase plus various other taxes and well over half my money goes to the government in taxes each month. How is that justifiable and why would people want to pay even more is beyond me.
Every month the government takes about 1/3 of my pay cheque before it even reaches my account. Add the council tax, VAT on everything I purchase plus various other taxes and well over half my money goes to the government in taxes each month. How is that justifiable and why would people want to pay even more is beyond me.
As for value for money, then, in terms of cost per head of population the NHS isn't bad. I posted this link a while ago when the subject of the relative cost of health care in various countries came up in another discussion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ure_per_capita
TL;DR : Doesn't look to me as if the NHS is really that bad, it seems to be around average, at the 17th most expensive health care system in that list, and less than half the cost of health care in the USA, and even slightly less costly than health care in France.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: mids
Age: 58
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Currently a load of tax is generated at the fuel pumps and is a consumption tax.
With a move away from hydrocarbons (which is a good thing) that cash has to be recovered somehow. Fuel receipts were just under 28 billion last year in the UK.
How to do that with something you can plug into a domestic supply.
Only way really is another consumption tax with some form of logging.
The varying the rate between location and time of day is just pure social engineering. Trying to stop school runs and trying to spread traffic load out.
But that really that was just an excuse for this project. It could have been done with any global positioning system. Military users that required the accuracy really only France and UK and now the UK is gone.
Precision industrial users, I think the business projection are way way over the mark. In its conception in 2004 then yes it would have been ground breaking. These days DGPS is readily available, cheap and easy to use.
Ignoring the arguments about if the sats that are up there which were meant to be good for 20 years plus will have to be replaced inside 20% of the planned lifetime. The fixed running costs are estaimated at 750 million per year which I suspect along with all the other predictions on cost will more than likely end up in the region of 1 billion. So 5 euros for each car in Europe per year with UK gone.
So personally I am glad we are well away from it, it has a stink about it and political is overriding technical and business cases.
Should UK get a system of its own? Gut feeling no. Do I think if it does go for it that it will be cheaper and more useful for what UK wants, then yes.
Tech has come along way since 2004 more options and we can use the falconX to get stuff up instead of Araine which the EU is politically and contractually tied into using.
And the point about the security, apparently the security stuff does need license to be handed over to the project. It is black box tech there are multilayers some are changeable form the ground some are hard coded. I presume there is also back door keys for a final resort to reclaim the network. 2004 china was still involved and no talk about countries leaving the EU. With the current state of play of paper work it is highly unlikely legal terms were created for such an event. So its a complete minefield and while there is UK produced tech in the system they will never be confident it is secure.
With a move away from hydrocarbons (which is a good thing) that cash has to be recovered somehow. Fuel receipts were just under 28 billion last year in the UK.
How to do that with something you can plug into a domestic supply.
Only way really is another consumption tax with some form of logging.
The varying the rate between location and time of day is just pure social engineering. Trying to stop school runs and trying to spread traffic load out.
But that really that was just an excuse for this project. It could have been done with any global positioning system. Military users that required the accuracy really only France and UK and now the UK is gone.
Precision industrial users, I think the business projection are way way over the mark. In its conception in 2004 then yes it would have been ground breaking. These days DGPS is readily available, cheap and easy to use.
Ignoring the arguments about if the sats that are up there which were meant to be good for 20 years plus will have to be replaced inside 20% of the planned lifetime. The fixed running costs are estaimated at 750 million per year which I suspect along with all the other predictions on cost will more than likely end up in the region of 1 billion. So 5 euros for each car in Europe per year with UK gone.
So personally I am glad we are well away from it, it has a stink about it and political is overriding technical and business cases.
Should UK get a system of its own? Gut feeling no. Do I think if it does go for it that it will be cheaper and more useful for what UK wants, then yes.
Tech has come along way since 2004 more options and we can use the falconX to get stuff up instead of Araine which the EU is politically and contractually tied into using.
And the point about the security, apparently the security stuff does need license to be handed over to the project. It is black box tech there are multilayers some are changeable form the ground some are hard coded. I presume there is also back door keys for a final resort to reclaim the network. 2004 china was still involved and no talk about countries leaving the EU. With the current state of play of paper work it is highly unlikely legal terms were created for such an event. So its a complete minefield and while there is UK produced tech in the system they will never be confident it is secure.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
The reason it still exists (it should have been amalgamated into income tax decades ago) is so that governments can promise not to increase "tax" and then when they put up NI they claim that because the tax called "national insurance" doesn't have the word "tax" in its name then they haven't put up "tax".
Join Date: May 2018
Location: London/Fort Worth
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The reason it still exists (it should have been amalgamated into income tax decades ago) is so that governments can promise not to increase "tax" and then when they put up NI they claim that because the tax called "national insurance" doesn't have the word "tax" in its name then they haven't put up "tax".
I thought the reason it had not been amalgamated into Income Tax is that we still have a basic welfare system that is based on contributions, so to do away with NI you would have to totally revamp the entire welfare system of the UK.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
There's a fair amount to sort out, yes. There has been some progress - the alignment of some thresholds so that income tax and NI bands now start at the same place is a deliberate part of the process - but at the current rate it's going to take several more decades.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: n/a
Posts: 1,425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
People are complaining about the public services because they feel (or at least I do) that they are paying too much for the services they receive. Before Obama had his way with the health insurance I lived in USA for a while and I was paying 99$ a month for health insurance. While I was there I had the misfortune to require medical assistance, I received a 5 star service and I was very impressed with the whole thing. Now move forward few years and I am paying for the national insurance in UK a lot more than that for a service that is average at best. Where is the value for money?
.
.
For reference in 2005, before the Obama reforms 45 Million Americans under 65 lacked basic health insurance.
Anyhow we are way off topic. Maybe we need a sat-nav to get back...
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: mids
Age: 58
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
you mean like the USA GPS has been transmitting a secondary unencrypted frequency since 2014 and phase 3 satellites will all be on line by 2020?
This means everyone can get atmospheric adjusted position fix down to 10 cm using a dual channel hand receiver for free?
This means everyone can get atmospheric adjusted position fix down to 10 cm using a dual channel hand receiver for free?
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Europe
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You're just plain wrong on this....the UK NHS offers much better value for money than the US system patient outcomes are broadly the same between the systems and the UK spends far less (about 10% of GDP on healthcare, the USA about 17%) Put that in cash terms what the NHS is really good at is providing cost-efficient care. It spends $3,405 per person per annum, less than half America's outlay of $8,508.
For reference in 2005, before the Obama reforms 45 Million Americans under 65 lacked basic health insurance.
Anyhow we are way off topic. Maybe we need a sat-nav to get back...
For reference in 2005, before the Obama reforms 45 Million Americans under 65 lacked basic health insurance.
Anyhow we are way off topic. Maybe we need a sat-nav to get back...
Before Obama had his way with the health insurance (I don't know if his system is better or worse, I left USA before he made the changes) I was paying 99$ a month for a comprehensive health insurance, excluding dental insurance. On a Friday afternoon I went to see a doctor because I was experiencing some pain. He was unable to make an accurate diagnosis and sent me to the emergency room. When I arrived at the emergency room and gave them the note from the doctor they gave me some liquid to drink and shortly after I had an MRI scan. Not long after they told me that I need to have a surgery. I asked when they can do it and they said now. Next thing I know I was on the surgery table. Within less than 24 hours I got there, I had a diagnosis, surgery and was discharged from the hospital with a follow up check a week later. The hospital was like a 5 star hotel, clean, private room and bathroom and the staff very friendly and helpful. I never got any bills or anything.
Last month in UK I paid 397£ and my employer payed 524£ for national insurance. The only time I tried to book an appointment with a GP I was given a date which was a week and a half later and thankfully that ends my dealings with the NHS. However someone close to me fell off their bike and was scheduled for an MRI three months later!
How is the patient outcome pretty much the same between the two system? If I ever need medical assistance I know which system I rather took care of me.
As for the last part of your reply, besides my family I do not owe anybody health care or a living. I know it sounds harsh but that is the way I see things.
I love it when people tell me I am wrong about something that I personally experienced. Let me give you more details about the experience and then you can tell me how wrong I am again.
Before Obama had his way with the health insurance (I don't know if his system is better or worse, I left USA before he made the changes) I was paying 99$ a month for a comprehensive health insurance, excluding dental insurance. On a Friday afternoon I went to see a doctor because I was experiencing some pain. He was unable to make an accurate diagnosis and sent me to the emergency room. When I arrived at the emergency room and gave them the note from the doctor they gave me some liquid to drink and shortly after I had an MRI scan. Not long after they told me that I need to have a surgery. I asked when they can do it and they said now. Next thing I know I was on the surgery table. Within less than 24 hours I got there, I had a diagnosis, surgery and was discharged from the hospital with a follow up check a week later. The hospital was like a 5 star hotel, clean, private room and bathroom and the staff very friendly and helpful. I never got any bills or anything.
Last month in UK I paid 397£ and my employer payed 524£ for national insurance. The only time I tried to book an appointment with a GP I was given a date which was a week and a half later and thankfully that ends my dealings with the NHS. However someone close to me fell off their bike and was scheduled for an MRI three months later!
How is the patient outcome pretty much the same between the two system? If I ever need medical assistance I know which system I rather took care of me.
As for the last part of your reply, besides my family I do not owe anybody health care or a living. I know it sounds harsh but that is the way I see things.
Before Obama had his way with the health insurance (I don't know if his system is better or worse, I left USA before he made the changes) I was paying 99$ a month for a comprehensive health insurance, excluding dental insurance. On a Friday afternoon I went to see a doctor because I was experiencing some pain. He was unable to make an accurate diagnosis and sent me to the emergency room. When I arrived at the emergency room and gave them the note from the doctor they gave me some liquid to drink and shortly after I had an MRI scan. Not long after they told me that I need to have a surgery. I asked when they can do it and they said now. Next thing I know I was on the surgery table. Within less than 24 hours I got there, I had a diagnosis, surgery and was discharged from the hospital with a follow up check a week later. The hospital was like a 5 star hotel, clean, private room and bathroom and the staff very friendly and helpful. I never got any bills or anything.
Last month in UK I paid 397£ and my employer payed 524£ for national insurance. The only time I tried to book an appointment with a GP I was given a date which was a week and a half later and thankfully that ends my dealings with the NHS. However someone close to me fell off their bike and was scheduled for an MRI three months later!
How is the patient outcome pretty much the same between the two system? If I ever need medical assistance I know which system I rather took care of me.
As for the last part of your reply, besides my family I do not owe anybody health care or a living. I know it sounds harsh but that is the way I see things.
The hard facts, using the latest (2016) data, are that health care in the USA costs $9,892 per head, health care in the UK costs $4,192 per head. In other words, the US health care system costs twice as much per head as the UK system, and the US is the most expensive health care system in the world. The UK is the 17th most expensive out of the 35 countries from which data is available.