dave hearnden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I must use Adrian reasoning about marginal costs when I dealing with the > >> Council Tax department.
Well, that would fail. Council Tax is, er, a tax. BW's charges are the price of a service. The two concepts are totally different, so there is no logic in the suggestion that they should be calculated on the same basis. >Because council tax has NOTHING to do with the size of the house its down to >the value.Now do we want to go down the route of licences related to the value >of the boat and hence the ability of the owner to pay...........This is in >fact the way BW are going i.e. the larger the boat the more it must have cost >therefore the more the owner can pay I can think of many narrow boats that >cost way more than my barge, I wont name any as some of their owners subscribe >to this list! > >Moose Replies, > >Sorry If I work through the figures yes you are right it is by value, but in >the same area a three bedroom house will be a higher banding than a 1 bedroom >flat so if that is not depandent on size! Not so. A very poor condition house on an undesirable site may well be worth a lot less than a nearby waterfron condo with a great view. >But the discussion was about the extra cost to BW to having wide beams against >Narrow Beams? Adrian advises no, but that must be the same for a 1 bedroom >flat against a 3 bedroom house does it give the council anymore work? but we >know which will be charged at a higher rate! Again, the comparison is simply invalid. Why not suggest that the BW charges should vary with the weight of the vessel? I mean, that's the way vegetables are sold, isn't it? "Bob Wood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Some might think it is a more sensible option than the 'willingness to >pay' criteria that BW seems hell-bent on adopting. That is fine for a marketplace with a significant number of suppliers competing with each other. It is inappropriate for a monopoly supplier. In the latter case, the charges for a service should be a combination of an equal share component based on the time of access to the service and the amount accessable (i.e. a standing charge) and a marginal cost component (i.e. a usage charge). However, because the marginal cost to BW of a craft navigating is negligible, the latter isn't justified on waterways. Adrian . Adrian Stott 07956-299966
