Am I hearing this correctly.... or am I plain thick ?

Just said on ITV news that the petrol price rise (whatever it's called) in the chancellor's budget, is not happening, so guess what.... it will SAVE drivers about one hundred pounds per year.
WHAT THE F..... !!

 

so would you prefer the rise to go ahead then.?

every little helps matey.

 

oh and yes you are plain thick

so I am told





only kidding

 

It's the tax element.

That's about what 60 percent of the price already or summat.

It's been froze again. Which I think he said was for the 6th year running....

Nay mind. Like anything else in the country it will soon fly up as corporate greed for shareholders continues unabated.

We must protect and increase profits at all costs.

**** the customers and withe ones who really pay for it like

 

Poor choice of words but guessing that's would have cost extra with the increase.

Just done a quick calculation and it would only have to go up by less than 2 pence a litre to cost me an extra £100 a year and I don't do that many miles.

The "average" is meant to be 12000 miles a year but I don't buy into that at all - as it would suggest people average over 35 miles a day. I reckon for the majority it's much less than that, and for a few it's much higher.

 

I think it might even be more than that, we've just come out of a 15 year low for the oil price (when petrol was about 75p a litre) so I'm surprised they've not taken the opportunity to slap a bit more duty on fuel which may have been absorbed by the suppliers anyway.

I'd be happy to see them put more tax on fuel if it would end car tax - those with the biggest, polluting engines that do the most miles would pay more, those that just nip to a local place of work and the supermarket would pay less overall. Must be too simple.

 

No chance

Why merge in to one when they can continue to shaft everyone twice.

Even 3 times when you also pay VAT on top of the duty that's already applied.

 

No, you are hearing correctly. Typical politician speak presenting the avoidance of an additional cost as a saving/cost reduction - straight out of the Blair/Cameron/Osborne slimy spin lie manual. Spreadsheet Phil's no different to the rest of 'em.

 

Sounds like he works in Procurement!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Surely its no different a play on words as a reduction in housing benefit being payable because of spare bedrooms being called a "bedroom tax", a phase often and loudly repeated on here.

 

The "save the average motorist" comment is completely different. It's not a saving but one that days we won't charge any more. Everyone still pays the same.

The bedroom tax is totally different. Taking away money from plenty that still need it. Actually reducing money they are given. And in a lot of circumstances because they can't downsize due to lack of properties. Ironically due to the tories giving the country a free for all to buy the homes.

2 entirely different things. And one hasn't had money taken away.

 

That's just asking for it.

 

Nope - I'm not seeing the difference.

One is not a saving, but just means not paying out any more money than you are now

The other is not a tax, but getting less money less than you are now. People are not getting the money and then paying a tax on it, they are getting less money given to them.

They are both clearly a play on words.

But never mind, I thought they would be different somehow.