Chat & Social > The Bar - General Chat
Daily Mail anti 4x4 article...
sparkes:
The logic behind this is the worst I have ever seen
1, chelsea tractors are a problem
2, chelsea tractors are a status symbol
3, lets tax all 4x4's higher to get at the chelsea tractors
4, chelsea tractors are now more expensive to use
5, chelsea tractors are now MORE of a status symbol because they show you have more money
6, More chelsea tractors sold
The logic just does not work. But our government is intelligent (I know, but they should be!) so all I can see is that they are:
1, making the green lot happy thus getting their vote
2, see the chance to tax us even more
3, Have no real life experience.
sleeplessparadise:
Voted NO! also wanted to add the following comments but there were errors on the page so wasn't able to but for your viewing pleasure........ I used to own a peugot 106 which qualified for the lower rate of road tax......trouble was it used more petrol that my husband's discovery so go figure.....same with my old 1.4 Escort that thing barely did 30 miles to the gallon so I know which I would rather drive. Don't think these people will ever be changed so I just ignore them the best I can :D
jnoshea:
Who reads the Daily Mail anyway? :roll:
laser_jock99:
--- Quote from: "Damo" ---They do mention that in the article:
--- Quote ---. It would also include many luxury sports cars and limousines such as the Rolls-Royce Phantom, the BMW 750i and the Jaguar 4.2 litre Super V8.
--- End quote ---
--- End quote ---
Yes- but the HEADLINE which is what people read and remember says it's anti 4x4 tax- which it isn't.
My rant to the comments section was more about the mis-reporting than the Tax itself (which as someone has mentioned only affects new cars anyway). Needless to say my comments weren't published on the Daily Mail web site when I last looked!!!!
marjan:
I love the term "Big gas guzzling 4x4's", where does my little 1.3 Suzuki Samurai drop into the Anti 4x4 argument then ? :? :? :?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version