US tops 'congestion charge debt'
POSTED BY: citizen
UPDATED: Thursday, May 4, 2006 22:43
VIEWED: 5753
PAGE 5 of 6
Citizen
I never said "your wrong". I did not dismiss what you said out of hand. I said the context was wrong.
Now I am really getting a bit tired of this entire discussion. I will not respond further. It does nothing constructive and frustrates anyone trying to use this thread.
Believe whatever you feel you need to believe. Take offense at whatever you choose.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
It is funny.
Of Course, the diplomats are exempt from the traffic tickets, so they don't pay. The thing about it is, anyone driving a diplomatic vehicle is exmept, so the diplomat is, the spouse is, the kid is.
Not sure how that works. But, it may be the same in all countries. I don't know.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by FutureMrsFIllion:
I would ask that in future you attempt to respond in a less agressive way. You might find that you are having less arguments and more debates.
That's fair and I'll do so.
Though you could have also asked me to clarify what I said before telling me I simply didn't have a point.
Quote:
I continued to argue that your original post, that we had been in Germany for SIXTY YEARS was not valid.
I think having an armed force in Germany for sixty years does have relevance. We want bases in the Middle East, and we'll want those bases 60 years from now as much as we do in Europe now. That was part of my point.
I did not try to say we were 'shoring up' Germany for all that time.
Edit:
And yeah I'm getting a bit tired of this discussion, especially your attempts to prove it's ‘all my’ fault. You chose your own responses, you chose your condescending attitude from the off.
So you too believe what ever you wish, it's all my fault your the hero and it's all because I'm sexiest (which is exactly what you said).
If when you don't understand what someone is trying to say rather than just get condescending and tell them they aren't making any sense you ask them for clarification you will get in less arguments as well.
So yeah, good bye.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
And as you know, these are open forums, you're able to come and listen to what I have to say.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Future- Uh, the person I see playing semantics is.... you? There are all kinds of reasons to charge tolls, including (but not limited to) upkeep.
The congestion charge is per use and monitored at the point of entry. As such it is a fee ie. a toll, not a tax. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Congestion_Charge
---------------------------------
Don't piss in my face and tell me it's raining.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Well I was going with the definition of a toll being for direct charging for a specific purpose and a tax as an indirect charge. But you can call it whatever you want. Its a matter of opnion.
My opinion is that it is a tax. That is also the opinion of the Attorney General, the State Department and the DOD. Thats why they aren't paying. According to the agreement, the diplomats and some US forces don't have to pay the tax.
Of Course, they may in time revise that opinion, which they have every right to do.
I will hold that it is a tax. Maybe not unfair, maybe unfair.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The US embassy only stopped paying when it went up to $8 a time anyway, they were happy enough to pay before, but stopped when it became more expensive.
For my ha'pence worth i think its a toll, its pay per use, rather then set rate for a specific time period like road tax is.
As Citizen says they seem to be keeping good company as well.
More a question of how do you want your representatives to behave when they're in my city... rater then quibbling about wheter its a tax or a toll.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:The "congestion charge" IS a "direct charge" because it's levied on a per-use basis.
Well I was going with the definition of a toll being for direct charging for a specific purpose and a tax as an indirect charge. But you can call it whatever you want. Its a matter of opnion.
The fact that you agree with the DOD etc etc doesn't make them- or you- correct. Per use fees collected for transportation facilities (road, tunnels, bridges, waterways) are tolls. Neither the stated purpose of the toll (relieve congestion, upkeep of facilities, general revenue) nor the eventual disbursement of the funds alters that fact. I direct your attention to the United States Federal Highway website, which lists the bridges, tunnels, and roadways that are defined as "toll road and crossing" facilities. More specifically, I direct your attention to the list of disbursements of "toll" funds. Many disbursements show a rather large (sometimes the largest) share called "transfers". Tranfers of monies
Quote:Nonetheless, the fees were, are, and will continue to be "tolls". The DOD et al are simply engaging in "semantics".
Includes direct expenditures for nonhighway purposes and transfers to other agencies for both highway and nonhighway purposes. The amount used for nonhighway purposes can be determined by taking total tolls from SF-3B and subtracting tolls used for highways on Tables SF-21 and tolls used for mass transportation on table MT-1.
www.fhwa.dot.gov/policy/ohim/hs04/htm/sf4b.htm#foot2
---------------------------------
Don't piss in my face and tell me it's raining.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
SigNym - I didn't say I was correct, I said it was my opinion.
RPlacket, They actually went back and forth - they told us not to pay, then they said yes you should pay, then they went back to no, we will deal with it as the summons come for none payment. I never paid it, my spouse never paid it, nor did anyone in either of our departments. I am not sure if they went back to telling us to pay. I left in the last year.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Im really not supprised, mismagement central...
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
You realise that Ken Livingstone, the London Mayor, is a Labour Party member...
But anyway. US embassies in other countries pay congestion charges without making a fuss.
British embassy staff in the US pays toll road charges (which is what the Congestion charge in London IS).
So the mayor of London expecting the US embassies staff to pay their dues is obviously all about the Iraq war.
I'll ask one question, if British embassy staff refused to pay toll road charges, would you assume anyone who told them to do so were doing it because of the Iraq war?
BTW, here's a link to the story I heard. Apparently BBC rebroadcast here on NPR. It's audio only.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5310101
If you want to take up the BBC's interpretation of Mr. Livingstone's actions with them, rock on.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME