R
Rod Speed
- Jan 1, 1970
- 0
terryc wrote
I never said a word about what I would prefer, I was JUST rubbing your
stupid pig ignorant nose in the FACT that we did see those cross subsidies.
Thats just plain wrong too with the line rent. They have in
fact hiked very dramatically indeed, more than tripled in fact.
Another pig ignorant lie with the line rent.
Pity it aint mining ROYALTYS that are paying for that.
Wrong again. Nothing like most of even just the petrol excise is spent on roads.
Corse they do, and a hell of a lot more than just roads too.
Irrelevant to your pig ignorant lie about it being subsidized.
Rod Speed wrote
You would have preferred all taxpayers to pay for it, rather than users?
I never said a word about what I would prefer, I was JUST rubbing your
stupid pig ignorant nose in the FACT that we did see those cross subsidies.
The cost of basic phone services has shrunk significantly any way,
Thats just plain wrong too with the line rent. They have in
fact hiked very dramatically indeed, more than tripled in fact.
so it can hardly be argued that there was any huge revenues unless your use was high.
Another pig ignorant lie with the line rent.
Well, actually they are.
Nope.
Failed to notice how much public funds are used to pay for infrastructure
to enable mining companies to ship their products overseas?
Pity it aint mining ROYALTYS that are paying for that.
Correct, but it is insignificant to the amount of resources that
are taken for fat arses to drive their own motor vehicles.
Wrong again. Nothing like most of even just the petrol excise is spent on roads.
Rego & fuel tax does not pay for roads.
Corse they do, and a hell of a lot more than just roads too.
It can also be argued that public transport returns significant benefits to the community as a whole.
Irrelevant to your pig ignorant lie about it being subsidized.