-
As M. Greenbank said, it's just incentivising lower polluting cars. Sound policy
Dunno. I kind of feel that if the cars really are that gross (and are they any more gross than say other types of conspicuous consumption like frequent long distance air travel / super motorbikes / lambos / bitcoin etc?) they should be regulated out completely. Going nuts on the tax on them is icky. Looks like a cash grab, not a policy implementation.
Ultimately it's not going to get folks out of cars, so I'm not sure why we'd be cheering it.
Howard-
Do you not think having to pay £2k p/a for say a Defender vs £400 for a something else would push a lot of people into something else?
-
If you can get enough cash out of it to fund policies driving change from those willing to pay steep prices for status, I don't see why the govt shouldn't capitalise on the opportunity to redirect funds where they might directly counteract the issue.
-
Dunno. I kind of feel that if the cars really are that gross (and are they any more gross than say other types of conspicuous consumption like frequent long distance air travel / super motorbikes / lambos / bitcoin etc?)
They are more ubiquitous and cause more social harms than any of those things.
they should be regulated out completely.
Yup, high tax is a logical first step. If the ban is done in stages there is less impact on jobs and economy. E.g we needed to ban coal but it was done in a way that caused unnecessary hardship. If all the wankpanzer plants shut down overnight alot of jobs would be lost. If sales gradually dip companies can adjust.
Ultimately it's not going to get folks out of cars, so I'm not sure why we'd be cheering it.
It reduces the number of people who can afford large cars.
hugo7
youClown
William.
As M. Greenbank said, it's just incentivising lower polluting cars. Sound policy