Should 4WDs be banned from the city? (3 Viewers)

[absorber]

1. FUEL?
Compared to what? Lambos have higher fuel consumption, lets ban them.
Modern common rail diesels have better fuel consumption that commodores. suck on that cunt
2. Yeah i guess, if you're a fucking gronk who doesnt know how to drive.

Did I say I supported those cars? Also older 4WD models eat fuel like hell, and like it or not, even today smaller cars are going to consume less. Just concede my point, it's undeniable.

 

[Ancly]

Safety features, like weighing twice as much as a car?

Um commodores weigh almost twice as much as my car, should we ban them too?

I dont know of many 4WDs that weigh 3600kg either btw.

Great arguments you have m8

 

[Ancly]

Did I say I supported those cars? Also older 4WD models eat fuel like hell, and like it or not, even today smaller cars are going to consume less. Just concede my point, it's undeniable.

So what do you support? The most common car in the country doesnt compy with your standards?
Sure older ones do, so do older passenger cars cunt. Of course smaller passenger cars are going to use less fuel, but when large passenger cars (the most popular in the country) use more fuel than modern 4WDs, your point is null and void.

Shut the fuck up

 

[Ancly]

Toyota LC200 GXL landcruiser turbo diesel V8

Kerb weight - 2600kg

800 more than commodore

Fuel consumption - 10.3L per 100km, better than commdore v6 iirc

standard
Anti-Skid Brakes (ABS) - All wheels STD
Electronic Brake Distribution (EBD) STD
Brake Assist (BA) STD
Traction Control (TRC) STD
Vehicle Stability Control (VSC)

340 and 345mm ventilated disc brakes, pretty big, with brake assist and EBD, pretty much closes the gap created by the extra weight

 

[ubernuton]

more people will die in the oil wars than in car crashes, ban them and well your at it ban modern socity

 

[Freedom_]

Tax? lol. lol LOL

 

[Freedom_]

 

[Freedom_]

Taxation would be simple: Additional registration charge for 4WDs registered at certain postcodes. If people have farms then they can register their 4WD at the farm address and avoid the tax.

Thats your worst post ever.

 

[Ancly]

Small passenger cars are more likely to cause injury to the other road users (cyclists, motorcylists, pedestrians) than to the occupants.

They use more fuel and are heavier. They are also harder to see around.

Tax and or Ban them.

 

[loquasagacious]

Thats your worst post ever.

Nah worst post ever is several years ago when I said that minimum wages were a good idea (and was quoted in the old NCAP newsletter).

As much as I disagree with taxes, I think that taxing 4WD owners (to internalise the negative externalities currently being experienced) is better than an outright ban. It is also a slight-reflection of user-pays principles because heavier/larger verhicles like 4WDs wear the road surface more.

In an ideal world I wouldn't suggest a tax, but accepting the assumption that 4WDs have negative externalities and accepting the constraints of the real world a tax is the best intervention I can think of.

 

[DavidBenGurion]

just ban cunt bully road rage drivers from the road

 

[Ancly]

Nah worst post ever is several years ago when I said that minimum wages were a good idea (and was quoted in the old NCAP newsletter).

As much as I disagree with taxes, I think that taxing 4WD owners (to internalise the negative externalities currently being experienced) is better than an outright ban. It is also a slight-reflection of user-pays principles because heavier/larger verhicles like 4WDs wear the road surface more.

In an ideal world I wouldn't suggest a tax, but accepting the assumption that 4WDs have negative externalities and accepting the constraints of the real world a tax is the best intervention I can think of.

Currently heavier vehicles cost more to register
how is your suggestion any different?

 

[pman]

ban them completly, one almost rear ended me today cos i stoped at a stop sign and he had so much momentum cos of his weight that he couldn't stop, also, as a cyclist they are just plain scary, i hate trucks as well but at least they are necessary, allow them for people who go off road at least 6 times per year though (by off road i mean proper 4 weel driving)

 

[lolwth]

ban them completly, one almost rear ended me today cos i stoped at a stop sign and he had so much momentum cos of his weight that he couldn't stop, also, as a cyclist they are just plain scary, i hate trucks as well but at least they are necessary, allow them for people who go off road at least 6 times per year though (by off road i mean proper 4 weel driving)

You're a moron

That is a case of bad driving and not allowing enough time to stop, will happen with any vehicle.

 

[murphyad]

In an ideal world I wouldn't suggest a tax, but accepting the assumption that 4WDs have negative externalities and accepting the constraints of the real world a tax is the best intervention I can think of.

Actually, it would make more sense to equalise the tariffs of SUVs and cars. Currently, the import tariff of SUVs is only 5 percent, while for cars it is 10 percent (or 15, can't quite remember). Because of this reason, imported SUVs (read: all except the Ford Territory) are often cheaper than their road-only counterparts, making them more attractive to prospective buyers.

Furthermore, a tax on SUVs could potentially have socioeconomic implications. Could it be that such a tax would be disadvantageous to low-income earners while more affluent types can easily afford it? Clearly, for the purposes of fairness the tax should be proportional to the cost of the SUV a la the LCT. There are also other problems. You suggest a tax break for farmers, but do you realise that may so-called city-slickers own farms, in some cases for no other reason than as a 'weekend retreat'. This fact represents a loophole in the legislation for people who will register their SUV with their farm address and then drive it around the city for 99% of the time. Therefore, it seems that the tax system you suggest would be a dumb idea.

 

[absorber]

Toyota LC200 GXL landcruiser turbo diesel V8

Kerb weight - 2600kg

800 more than commodore

Fuel consumption - 10.3L per 100km, better than commdore v6 iirc

standard
Anti-Skid Brakes (ABS) - All wheels STD
Electronic Brake Distribution (EBD) STD
Brake Assist (BA) STD
Traction Control (TRC) STD
Vehicle Stability Control (VSC)

340 and 345mm ventilated disc brakes, pretty big, with brake assist and EBD, pretty much closes the gap created by the extra weight

And how much did that vehicle cost to build in comparison to a normal car? It'd be more damaging to build. Also, it's still significantly heavier. Do you know why heavy cars are bad? Not only does it take them longer to stop moving in the instance of an accident, but they do more damage to roads; I think that'd be a justification to taxing them.

 

[Azarnakumar]

yes, the cruiser is 800kg heavier than a commdore

a commodore is 800kg heavier than my car

what is your point

 

[cookkii]

what about those people who DO drive it offride, or who DO drive it safely?
what about people in rural areas, who have to drive off ride to get places?
park rangers who have to use a 4wd for work?
its unfair to these people to be taxed, or to have their cars banned

 

[pman]

even if you drive a 4wd safely, they are a hazard becouse of visability, you can't see round them, the solution to this is to by a 4wd thus perpetuating the problem.

 

[loquasagacious]

Actually, it would make more sense to equalise the tariffs of SUVs and cars. Currently, the import tariff of SUVs is only 5 percent, while for cars it is 10 percent (or 15, can't quite remember). Because of this reason, imported SUVs (read: all except the Ford Territory) are often cheaper than their road-only counterparts, making them more attractive to prospective buyers.

Furthermore, a tax on SUVs could potentially have socioeconomic implications. Could it be that such a tax would be disadvantageous to low-income earners while more affluent types can easily afford it? Clearly, for the purposes of fairness the tax should be proportional to the cost of the SUV a la the LCT. There are also other problems. You suggest a tax break for farmers, but do you realise that may so-called city-slickers own farms, in some cases for no other reason than as a 'weekend retreat'. This fact represents a loophole in the legislation for people who will register their SUV with their farm address and then drive it around the city for 99% of the time. Therefore, it seems that the tax system you suggest would be a dumb idea.

Good post.

Equalising tariffs would help however that would be a one-off tax and only effect the purchase price.

You are correct that a 'vehicle tax' would be a flat tax - but I don't really have a problem with that.

EDIT: Yes my original proposal does have a massive loophole - however the only other option would be to apply the tax to farmers, whose use of 4WDs doesn't have the same negative externalities.