UK Government Taxation to Deter Air Travel.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ask OPS!
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are lots of flies in the GW ointment at the moment.
The data released by the earth satellite temperature monitoring organisation in America states that the earth has cooled slightly over the last decade. Bit of a snag for the GW brigade.
UK Aviation will be destroyed by a Government punitive taxation program aimed squarely at fail social engineering. How dare those who work, pay taxes, own their own homes, have the audacity NOT to use public transport, take a few weeks off and fly?
If ICAO, as an overarching organisation, arranged 'taxation' in a global effort then maybe, just maybe, it would be fair. To tax UK based airlines, transit passengers don't pay the APD or airport taxes, is just an knife in the back to those airlines.
BALPA backed studies and polls have shown that, on a long haul flight to Australia, 80% of passengers would rather take a SH connecting flight to Europe then the LH flight to avoid Gordon Browns taxes.
If, and it is a very tentative if, the taxes were 'ring fenced' for the purpose of tackling the supposed 'effects' of the demonic airline industry then I could have a little sympathy. However, as the taxes go to top up the black hole created after 12 years of failed social engineering I, along with most of my colleagues, see this as nothing more than another money grabbing technique to add to the raft of UK stealth taxes.
Time for the Eurocrats to get off their collective ar$es and sort out the aviation industry. As much as the beardy ones would love to portray our industry as Bealzebubs spawn, without it the world wide economy would grind to a halt. When the 'campaigners' show off their nice, shiny new electric trains, where does the UK electricity come from? When they showcase their wind turbines, how much carbon goes into the manufacture and transport?
Do we see 'Ship Stupid' outside of the gates of Felixstowe and Harwich? Nope, but in there you have huge ships powered by 1960's design heavy fuel oil reciprocating diesel engines. Emissions? Anyone who has flown low level through the sulphur smut out of Tokyo knows what I mean. How much tax does the shipping industry pay? Very little as their fuel is the heavily contaminated bottom of the cracking tower fluid that no one else wants.
Wake up UK, Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling are robbing you blind to cover up for their mistakes now that the private pension fund tax cash cow has died. We will all be paying in the future, only the target industry will change when the current one is dead.
Rant over!
The data released by the earth satellite temperature monitoring organisation in America states that the earth has cooled slightly over the last decade. Bit of a snag for the GW brigade.
UK Aviation will be destroyed by a Government punitive taxation program aimed squarely at fail social engineering. How dare those who work, pay taxes, own their own homes, have the audacity NOT to use public transport, take a few weeks off and fly?
If ICAO, as an overarching organisation, arranged 'taxation' in a global effort then maybe, just maybe, it would be fair. To tax UK based airlines, transit passengers don't pay the APD or airport taxes, is just an knife in the back to those airlines.
BALPA backed studies and polls have shown that, on a long haul flight to Australia, 80% of passengers would rather take a SH connecting flight to Europe then the LH flight to avoid Gordon Browns taxes.
If, and it is a very tentative if, the taxes were 'ring fenced' for the purpose of tackling the supposed 'effects' of the demonic airline industry then I could have a little sympathy. However, as the taxes go to top up the black hole created after 12 years of failed social engineering I, along with most of my colleagues, see this as nothing more than another money grabbing technique to add to the raft of UK stealth taxes.
Time for the Eurocrats to get off their collective ar$es and sort out the aviation industry. As much as the beardy ones would love to portray our industry as Bealzebubs spawn, without it the world wide economy would grind to a halt. When the 'campaigners' show off their nice, shiny new electric trains, where does the UK electricity come from? When they showcase their wind turbines, how much carbon goes into the manufacture and transport?
Do we see 'Ship Stupid' outside of the gates of Felixstowe and Harwich? Nope, but in there you have huge ships powered by 1960's design heavy fuel oil reciprocating diesel engines. Emissions? Anyone who has flown low level through the sulphur smut out of Tokyo knows what I mean. How much tax does the shipping industry pay? Very little as their fuel is the heavily contaminated bottom of the cracking tower fluid that no one else wants.
Wake up UK, Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling are robbing you blind to cover up for their mistakes now that the private pension fund tax cash cow has died. We will all be paying in the future, only the target industry will change when the current one is dead.
Rant over!
It looks like word that Global Warming is the biggest scam since Max Bygraves sang "The Emperor has no clothes" is getting round 
:
BBC NEWS | Science & Environment | UK climate scepticism more common
"Twice as many people now agree that claims that human activities are changing the climate are exaggerated".
:BBC NEWS | Science & Environment | UK climate scepticism more common
"Twice as many people now agree that claims that human activities are changing the climate are exaggerated".
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Ireland
Posts: 627
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But it's notable that the tone of that article and others related is that people are skeptical because they don't really understand the issue with the implication that they need to be convinced that man made climate change is real. Typically the BBC website ignores the elephant in the room. The simple fact that more and more people don't believe in it could be something to do with the fact that most people have worked out that the theory is not such a clear cut 'fact' and the reality that true or not, it's being used as an excuse to pile even more taxes on them, not to mention further curtailing their freedom of choice.
What's the saying, 'You can fool all of the people some of the time...........'
What's the saying, 'You can fool all of the people some of the time...........'
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: London
Age: 60
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Theres those of us who know the GW theory is rubbish and theres those who think its a religion and get a fuzzy feeling about being 'green', and neither will get close to agreement. I wish I was going to be around to see who was right!
However, I learned a long time ago that climate change and taxation are two issues that it is pointless trying to debate on an internet forum because no-one (on either side) will ever be persuaded to change their position.
I should add, though, that my personal opposition to the expansion of aviation in the UK is not related to climate change. It is simply that I would prefer to see airlines migrate to Schiphol and Frankfurt than see another hectare of this mostly green and pleasant land disappear beneath tarmac, and I think that our aim should be to make the UK's airports the best in the world rather than the biggest. That does not make me anti-aviation - quite the opposite, I think.
What's the saying, 'You can fool all of the people some of the time...........'
In fact they don't all agree!
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: south east UK
Posts: 375
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
there's those who, in the face of overwhelming scientific evidence, refuse to believe it and seemingly get a fuzzy feeling about being a "denyer"
I'm not a 'denyer' - the world implies I'm denying a fact. I'm not. There is no 'overwhelming scientific evidence'. In fact there is some very underwhelming pseudo science, and even that doesn't answer the question at the heart of the matter which is, that even if mankind is having a catastrophic effect on the planet, is it reversible? 'coz if it ain't then there is no point changing anything!
Anyone that travels outside of the UK (which i guess excludes the greenies - because they'd never be 2 faced and fly would they?) will know that this CO2 obsession and hatred of aviation is entirely UK specific. In the rest of the world CO2 features fairly low in the agenda and aviation, as befits an industry that generates such a small amout, hardly registers. In the UK of course we have a very unbalanced media with the government and green propoganda agency (i.e the BBC) giving very unbalance reports, and hogging most of the airtime.
Anyhoo, if we are going to have green taxes, then can they be fair? In which case, this forum , facebook, email and all those other lovely IT things would sudenly get very expensive, cos IT emits more CO2 than aviation. Goddammit, theres another nasty fact in the way of the green dogma. best ignore it and just get on with the cult chanting "aviation is evil, aviation is evil, ignore the facts, ignore the facts, aviation is evil, aviation is evil" etc etc.
And if aviation moves to Schipol then so do the jobs, and the tax - so you'd better get used to stumping up more cash, cos the aviation industry, and most of its employees are massive net contributors to the governments coffers.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ask OPS!
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I should add, though, that my personal opposition to the expansion of aviation in the UK is not related to climate change. It is simply that I would prefer to see airlines migrate to Schiphol and Frankfurt than see another hectare of this mostly green and pleasant land disappear beneath tarmac, and I think that our aim should be to make the UK's airports the best in the world rather than the biggest. That does not make me anti-aviation - quite the opposite, I think.
Oh no, cows produce methane which is worse for the environment than a Range Rover.
Brilliant deduction Sherlock.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Devon, England
Posts: 249
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But in England at least The Guardian believes shipping accounts for up to 30% of air pollution, and that is equal to all the worlds car pollution. So by the time you have included electricity generation and heating pollution, it strikes me there is a not a lot left for aviation despite what all the media loves to announce!
Health risks of shipping pollution have been 'underestimated' | Environment | guardian.co.uk
Health risks of shipping pollution have been 'underestimated' | Environment | guardian.co.uk
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ask OPS!
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aviation, is, has and always will be a soft target.
The rich (and politicians) have always been able to travel and will always be able to travel. Look at the carbon footprint of the latest U2 global warming warning concert! However, now that the rest of the Plebian mass wants a bite of the air travel and foreign holiday cherry the Government has seen a new income revenue stream but trying to make us all feel guilty about air travel.
They gloss over the shipping, car, bus, lorry emissions as they are already monstrous revenue generators. They can't tax fuel as airlines would just buy it abroad and fly heavier less fuel efficient aircraft in and out of the UK.
So they panda to the green lobby, use facts that are less than reliable (from Government sponsored scientific organisations) and impose these taxes on the UK that the rest of Europe have seen for the sham they are.
Enough is enough. Aviation has been at the forefront of new, lean burn, clean burn technology for years. The efficiency of a modern airliner is stunning. Why not incentivise airlines to upgrade to newer, fuel efficient airliners by offering a taxation system that takes aircraft age, engine fit and passenger loads into account. Ditch the BAA slot minimum use restriction which is forcing airlines to fly empty aircraft to retain slots and drop the APD.
The rich (and politicians) have always been able to travel and will always be able to travel. Look at the carbon footprint of the latest U2 global warming warning concert! However, now that the rest of the Plebian mass wants a bite of the air travel and foreign holiday cherry the Government has seen a new income revenue stream but trying to make us all feel guilty about air travel.
They gloss over the shipping, car, bus, lorry emissions as they are already monstrous revenue generators. They can't tax fuel as airlines would just buy it abroad and fly heavier less fuel efficient aircraft in and out of the UK.
So they panda to the green lobby, use facts that are less than reliable (from Government sponsored scientific organisations) and impose these taxes on the UK that the rest of Europe have seen for the sham they are.
Enough is enough. Aviation has been at the forefront of new, lean burn, clean burn technology for years. The efficiency of a modern airliner is stunning. Why not incentivise airlines to upgrade to newer, fuel efficient airliners by offering a taxation system that takes aircraft age, engine fit and passenger loads into account. Ditch the BAA slot minimum use restriction which is forcing airlines to fly empty aircraft to retain slots and drop the APD.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Confoederatio Helvetica
Age: 69
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why not incentivise airlines to upgrade to newer, fuel efficient airliners ...
Seriously, it doesn't matter if we believe that GW is there or not, is caused by mankind or not is irrelevant. The policols have decided that it is - that is the reality the industry has to deal with.
Seeing as the vast majority (if not all) the growth in aviation in the UK is driven by one sector, perhaps the UK should introduce a 'minimum' fare. Say £100 one-way. Any fare lower than that would be taxed until it reaches £100. No doubt that would reduce (or kill) any growth in UK aviation - which would meet the goals of the politicians. Who knows, this might have some interesting consequences - like the rebundling of 'optional' charges back into the fare.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Livin de island life
Posts: 479
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why not incentivise airlines to upgrade to newer, fuel efficient airliners ...
In practise it will incentivise the airlines who have old gas-guzzlers to upgrade their fleet while punishing those who have already done so!
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Dre's mum's house
Posts: 1,432
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And the effect of the tax is now showing as FR open 2 new bases in Italy with no new routes to the UK!
Of course, the explosion in air travel is directly attributable to de-regulation which was a political decision!!
Of course, the explosion in air travel is directly attributable to de-regulation which was a political decision!!
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: London
Age: 60
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And the effect of the tax is now showing as FR open 2 new bases in Italy with no new routes to the UK!
