What do you mean, don’t the poor have a fleet of SUVs too?
5p cut, bet we won’t see that at the pumps
It doesn’t just benefit people though and it’s weird to only apply that lens. Transport costs for businesses is a huge driver when it comes to fuel duty.
Good, not everything the government does is only for the poor
Yep. My wealthy parents drive extensively. My friends on minimum wage don’t even own cars.
Doesn’t it also benefit the poor… These click bait headlines.
I just want to ask on the thumbnail but who tf in London needs a range rover?
You live on a street with the width of a pin.
I mean, it could be said that “lower earners” having an extra £22 in their pocket will benefit them more than “well-off motorists” having an extra £60.
The new budget also keeps the windfall tax in place… So it is a way to try to appease both sides.
It isn’t a fuel duty cut – it is simply not going up. Duties don’t *have* to go up every year and had duty not been frozen in 13 years the UK would be back to the position existing in 2011 when fuel prices where among the highest in Europe. Eyeballing – they’re about the same as Spain and 5-10% less than France, Germany and Italy.
What on earth this propaganda talking about, what about the millions of white van men or the millions of people that have to commute every day to work!
So trades are wealthy people ffs, the Guardian is disgusting
“The Wealthy”: people who can afford a car?
What sort of idiot wrote this report?
What the poor don’t have cars?
Just in case any one doesn’t realise this, if you have more than two children, you are forced by necessity to buy a car that is a ridiculous size because of the amount of side impact protection cars have these days.
Yeah, how DARE those who work hard for their money be allowed to keep some of it!
The wealthy are in the luxurious position of being able to take advantage or countermeasures against, all kinds of tax policies.
Almost any tax we create will either benefit the wealthy more or drive them away.
You could’ve cut out ‘fuel duty cut’ and still been correct
Obviously the fucking Guardian doesn’t agree with poor people being able to afford transport. Regressive? Only to idiotic champagne socialists who can’t understand the life of a builder or an electrician or a groundworker.
It’s the Tories, what do you expect? They don’t like the poors.
What fuel duty cut? Fuel duty not going up is suddenly a cut? What a load of rubbish.
I’m glad I’ve went electric. Don’t have to worry about this shite anymore.
The issue is it’s one of those geographic divide things. Fuel can easily be one the largest costs for rural poor, certainly was for me growing up in the Scottish west coast.
Still one of my largest monthly expenditures but I do a lot better for myself now.
What a bonkers argument. Literally click bait article with zero substance.
It’s not a cut if you save nothing today compared to yesterday.
So glad im a poor, wouldnt want to benefiting from anything. /s
Every time something like this pops up I always tell myself “Am I fucking surprised?”
A five pence cut in fuel duty, is still a five pence cut in fuel duty. But, it means little, if it is not passed on to the consumers.
There is a bit of smoke and mirrors going on here. If you drive a fancy car, you are more likely to use premium fuel. Premium fuel is far less likely to have this five pence cut, so in some cases, those who buy the cheapest fuel will be better off, than those who buy premium fuel.
I do not drive an SUV, but I use vPower, so I will probably see no cuts in the price of fuel I purchase.
I see the point but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t do it and help the poor anyway. Consumption taxes are always like this – increase income taxes to get it back from high income people progressively.
Improving roads helps the rich because they drive more. Improving water quality helps the rich because they use more water. Making travel easier helps the rich because they travel more.
29 comments
What do you mean, don’t the poor have a fleet of SUVs too?
5p cut, bet we won’t see that at the pumps
It doesn’t just benefit people though and it’s weird to only apply that lens. Transport costs for businesses is a huge driver when it comes to fuel duty.
Good, not everything the government does is only for the poor
Yep. My wealthy parents drive extensively. My friends on minimum wage don’t even own cars.
Doesn’t it also benefit the poor… These click bait headlines.
I just want to ask on the thumbnail but who tf in London needs a range rover?
You live on a street with the width of a pin.
I mean, it could be said that “lower earners” having an extra £22 in their pocket will benefit them more than “well-off motorists” having an extra £60.
The new budget also keeps the windfall tax in place… So it is a way to try to appease both sides.
It isn’t a fuel duty cut – it is simply not going up. Duties don’t *have* to go up every year and had duty not been frozen in 13 years the UK would be back to the position existing in 2011 when fuel prices where among the highest in Europe. Eyeballing – they’re about the same as Spain and 5-10% less than France, Germany and Italy.
What on earth this propaganda talking about, what about the millions of white van men or the millions of people that have to commute every day to work!
So trades are wealthy people ffs, the Guardian is disgusting
“The Wealthy”: people who can afford a car?
What sort of idiot wrote this report?
What the poor don’t have cars?
Just in case any one doesn’t realise this, if you have more than two children, you are forced by necessity to buy a car that is a ridiculous size because of the amount of side impact protection cars have these days.
Yeah, how DARE those who work hard for their money be allowed to keep some of it!
The wealthy are in the luxurious position of being able to take advantage or countermeasures against, all kinds of tax policies.
Almost any tax we create will either benefit the wealthy more or drive them away.
You could’ve cut out ‘fuel duty cut’ and still been correct
Obviously the fucking Guardian doesn’t agree with poor people being able to afford transport. Regressive? Only to idiotic champagne socialists who can’t understand the life of a builder or an electrician or a groundworker.
It’s the Tories, what do you expect? They don’t like the poors.
What fuel duty cut? Fuel duty not going up is suddenly a cut? What a load of rubbish.
I’m glad I’ve went electric. Don’t have to worry about this shite anymore.
The issue is it’s one of those geographic divide things. Fuel can easily be one the largest costs for rural poor, certainly was for me growing up in the Scottish west coast.
Still one of my largest monthly expenditures but I do a lot better for myself now.
What a bonkers argument. Literally click bait article with zero substance.
It’s not a cut if you save nothing today compared to yesterday.
So glad im a poor, wouldnt want to benefiting from anything. /s
Every time something like this pops up I always tell myself “Am I fucking surprised?”
A five pence cut in fuel duty, is still a five pence cut in fuel duty. But, it means little, if it is not passed on to the consumers.
There is a bit of smoke and mirrors going on here. If you drive a fancy car, you are more likely to use premium fuel. Premium fuel is far less likely to have this five pence cut, so in some cases, those who buy the cheapest fuel will be better off, than those who buy premium fuel.
I do not drive an SUV, but I use vPower, so I will probably see no cuts in the price of fuel I purchase.
I see the point but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t do it and help the poor anyway. Consumption taxes are always like this – increase income taxes to get it back from high income people progressively.
Improving roads helps the rich because they drive more. Improving water quality helps the rich because they use more water. Making travel easier helps the rich because they travel more.
Doesn’t mean we shouldn’t do these things.