howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
all seems very interesting alexander, i cannot see any obvious catch.
i would like to hear the views of our trucking members(yes i did say trucking) on the any effects it would have to their livelihoods.
Good stuff eh Andy. I'm enjoying your conversation with Alexander, possibly more than you are! Amused that Howard has been sucked in too. Whatever we think about these madcap ideas, they do get the juices flowing.
Guest 693- Registered: 12 Nov 2009
- Posts: 1,266
Whatever, Sid......
True friends stab you in the front.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Howard. I really do like to thank you for reading what I took the time to write here, which is not the first time I've explained it on the Forum. Also, your comment is very pleasing, in fact there is no catch, it's not that I'm trying to persue anything less than pubblic good here! Please do consult the transport firms, but take into account that, if these put the added expense on their invoice to the importers of the products transported, they will not feel the pinch, where-as the importers, being companies, will certainly not go bankrupt due to 50 pounds port-expense tolls, as they do use the ports, and would not be paying anything undue, in the sense that they also pay tolls in Europe, as I have explained, and do use British ports. And also, that if we are supposed to maintain our port and build new berths, for transport firms to use, then it's also fair that we finance this through a toll.
And also, please note that, any gov. that is elected will anyway axe jobs to lowers expenditure nationwide AND increase tax left right and centre! So this what I proposed is really a way of imposing a payment for the pubblic good, AND for the benefit of PORT-USERS such as truckers, who evidently require us to be up to standard with our ports. But it's a payment that would be paid by those who USE the facilities, and not by all the people in Britain!
Howard, please keep up your interest in this, and again, thank you for it!
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Andy. It's hard to reply to you on your last note, as I think you may be somehow inverting the whole specifics. What I wrote about port tolls, from the start concerns port tolls and not churches. What I wrote about churches concerns churches.
That there might one day be a correlation between a port toll financing a Council and a Council using a little part of this money to build or repair a church, does not make my post in any way contradictive.
Also, I received today a very pleasant letter from Dover Town Council concerning the pollution along the Biggin Street London Road area, and the former church building that I proposed be repaired and re-instated. A very pleasent letter, that does not cut short my hopes, but leaves open a possibility that something may be done after all, with further address for me to contact!
Do you know, if there were two, we'd have our very own Dover Chuckle Brothers.