The GBC is recruiting as of now. We need your help. We need your input. We need intelligent people on our side.

The Goblin Broadcasting Corporation is committed to fair and unbiased investigation of the Fuel Tax situation. Currently all evidence has pointed out that Fuel Tax is currently very fair - infact most people wish to see farmers and hauliers paying increased rates to help subsidise the disabled.
Other ideas have suggested redirecting farming/haulage industry grants into the community to help bring disabled people out and become active members of society.
It is expected that good hearted hauliers will not disagree with this saintly idea.

But we are not here to take sides. We must observe without bias. We wish to hear all sides of the arguments.

What of the recent figures posted by the GBC, independantly gathered evidence that most people wish to see Fuel Tax raised?
Are the protestors really just selfish b*stards?

Please, discuss.

Your goblin in the field,
TPG - FIGHTING FOR FUEL TAX STAGNANCY.

Most visitors to the poll on my site vote for a reduction in petrol duties (which is levied at the same extortionate 340% on rich and poor alike, and so hit the poor, such as most disabled, hardest) and an increase in income tax, which extracts more from the rich.

However some people do support the status quo, and they all seem to stick together.  A while back 50 of them turned up all together, and voted for no change.

And now you post this PG, and all of a sudden another bunch vote the same way, all at the same time.  But only 14 this time.

What's up, couldn't you keep it up, Goblin?

I've never voted on your site bogush.

I had never visited this site or your message board
until yesterday. Now I am here (and there) to make sure good old fashioned common sense prevails amongst you PFL/FTF/WTF fuel-protest nutters.

I have only visited one other page run by yourself except the message board, and that was the guest book thingy you posted a message about.

Funny thing is - you are quick to point fingers about this kind of thing. Are you sure you arent going to your own poll and voting 50 times to lower taxes?

TPG - FIGHTING TO KEEP FUEL TAXES SANE!

In petrol duties (which are levied at the same extortionate 340% on rich and poor alike, and so hit the poor, such as most disabled, hardest) rather than increasing income tax, which extracts more from the rich.

Bogush.

We can't keep reducing the taxes for the poor. Eventually you will end up with neo-communism and you know where that will get you.

There has to be an incentive for the harder workers to pull ahead of the crowd, or "motivation" will cease to operate in the economy, like it did in Russia and the state will collapse.

There has to be penalties for the lazy buggers, or they will always take the easy option.

Should milk and bread be cheaper for the poor than the rich? Neither should their petrol be subsidised by those in society who put in more effort.

The majority of the "poor" are poor because they are lazy and damn stupid. As a managing director I have employed huge numbers of people over the past twenty years and I am convinced that that is true.

As a nation we just cannot afford cheap fuel. That is the bottom line. The country just does not have the money for it. We cannot afford to build the roads to take the extra cars that cheap petrol will bring. We cannot afford the foreign currency to buy the extra oil required if fuel were cheaper, or the pound will sink and inflation will take off. If the rich are taxed overmuch, we will buy our way into Australia, Canada or the States and continue to make our fortunes there and pay nothing to the British. So you "tax the rich" lunies can go boil your heads It ain't going to happen, because we can easily outwit you lazy jerks.

So fuel will have to stay highly taxed to keep the British economy balanced and the poor will either have to get out of the pub, put out their cigarettes, stop buying stupid lottery tickets and smarten up their act, or manage without the fuel that they cannot afford. They will of course, do the latter.

We do more than enough for the "poor" as it is. They leave life having taken more from it than they have contributed, yet they accuse people like me, (who provide for them), of being "greedy."

TPG and I don't give a sh*t, because we have got our cake and we are eating it and we have lots more in the cupboard, which we are not going to share with the "poor." We'll throw it away before we give it to them.

As for you, I could always believe that it was just an amazing coincidence.

> We can't keep reducing the taxes for the poor. Eventually you will end up with neo-communism and you know where that will get you.

What do you mean by "reducing taxes" and "for the poor"?

> There has to be an incentive for the harder workers to pull ahead of the crowd, or "motivation" will cease to operate in the economy, like it did in Russia and the state will collapse.

No, in Russia you had to be in with the party bosses, here .....you have to be in with the party bosses.

The average punter hasn't got a cat in hell's chance of becoming a millionaire unless he strikes lucky with the lottery.

And if everyone became a millionaire, they'd all be back to square one.

Was your minimum wage £20 k pa, or £8k?

The guy on £8k pa is taxed bugger all (on income) because he probably does a vital and disgusting job that no one else will do, but no one will pay him a decent wage for doing it, and he has no other options.  But if he's doing it he's highly unlikely to be a lazy bugger, just very unfortunate.  And he may well need a car to get to his vital but disgusting job.  Why should he have to pay a rate of tax on his essential fuel that you would refuse to pay on any luxury you care to mention?

>  There has to be penalties for the lazy buggers, or they will always take the easy option.

What?  You have to tax them 340% on their fuel, or they will take which easy option?

> Should milk and bread be cheaper for the poor than the rich?

No, but neither should they be taxed at 340%, which is ok for the rich, but ridiculous, but totally immoral if extorted from the poor.

> Neither should their petrol be subsidised by those in society who put in more effort.

A/PG I used to work in construction, with guys who WORKED from 8.00 or 7.30 or earlier untill dusk, or later if the site was floodlit, six or seven days a week.

Most 40 year olds looked 60.

Most had missing fingers (the ones with worse injuries obviously you didn't see).

2 - 300 were killed every year.

And you couldn't usually get to work by bus.

If you really believe that you are right, try going to a building site and telling the guys there you new opinions.

By the way, apparently it's now the norm, rather than the exception for them to sleep in their vans, because they spend so much on petrol they can neither afford to drive home every night, nor pay for digs.

> The majority of the "poor" are poor because they are lazy and damn stupid. As a managing director I have employed huge numbers of people over the past twenty years and I am convinced that that is true.

It's a funny old thing, but one of the jobs I worked on was the Toyota car plant, for those industrious and dam clever japs.  Funny, because they employed Jap management and methods (actually, they were US/UK methods that British management were too lazy and damm stupid to employ) and, surprise, surprise, lazy and damm stupid British WORKERS.  Isn't it strange that they can come all the way over here, and overcome language and cultural barriers, and make a go of something British "Managers" have been failing at for half a century, and with the current bunch of even more "stupid" and "lazy" workers than the British managers had to work with?

I almost feel as if I am being baited, but I must second Arthurs vital and moving posting.

I'm with you, Art.

TPG - FIGHTING FOR FUEL TAX

p.s. do not think we are the same, we are not and never have been.

p.p.s. arthur, it was a damn funny post too.

Thanks for your support TPG.

However I was trying to be serious, not funny. Or at least only slightly funny.

I now see the error of my ways. I only supported the fuel protestors because I felt sorry for them being such a disorganised rabble and they were/are a nice bunch of people.

However the Graham postings frightened me and I realised that the time had come for common sense to prevail.

I am not going to dignify the Bogush "Old Labour" post with a reply. The country just cannot afford a fuel tax reduction, no more than it can afford a health service where the doctors don't murder you and sell your organs to the Swiss, or a decent road system, or an education system that teaches children to read, or guns for the troops that don't jam, or anything else for that matter.

The British refuse to work hard or smart and they gave away millions of trillions of pounds worth of natural resources to a tiny handful of British emigrants when they gave Canada and Australia independence, so they can just manage without a decent standard of living.

Money has to come from somewhere and right now a chunk of it is coming from fuel tax and there is no better alternative.

I missed these.

Are they still up somewhere?

TPG - FIGHTING FOR YOUR FUEL TAX

See on a back page of the Bogushboard, page two. "The situ in Scotland" by Graham Wilson. See further replies from the same person.

Two hours after I read it, I changed sides and wrote "Memo to Bogush" in the same thread.

Also read "An answer to critics" by the same Graham. (No one had criticised him when he wrote that.)

You may be off your trolly TPG, I can cope with that, I am too, but Graham reasoning does my head in.

Did I ever say you WERE PG?  I thought I'd only asked IF!  Apologies if I did.

APOLOGIES OVER, NOW THE RANTING AND RAVING BEGINS!

OLD LABOUR??????????????????????????????????????????

And: "I am not going to dignify the Bogush "Old Labour" post with a reply."

Now when have you ever done that when you could and should, .....or even....?

"The country just cannot afford a fuel tax reduction,"

No it can't afford a TAX reduction.  The question is should the taxes be raised fairly and practically, or unfairly, and impractically.

"or a decent road system,"

Does no one read my "M25" posts - another of the bees in my bonnet!

"The British refuse to work hard or smart and they gave away millions of trillions of pounds worth of natural resources to a tiny handful of British emigrants when they gave Canada and Australia independence, so they can just manage without a decent standard of living."

So you agree that it was those in charge that have ruined this country - you old Labourite you!

PS  You are actually a "neo liberal" - put that in your search engine and see what "THEY" (the people behind "global warming" and high fuel taxes) have planned for you.

Will place a secret message to your reply on your board later today.

This message will be deleted after you have read it.

If she deletes it before you have read it, let me know, and I will post it again.

Well Arthur,

All I can say is you spammed the PFL board out of existence and now you are trying to do the same the this board. Hey if you don't like what we are trying to do, WHY ARE YOU ALWAYS ON THE BOARDS!! I wish I could spend all day and night on them, but some of us have work to do.

If you are trying to wear us down that won't work, we are here for the duration.

LESS TAX OF FUEL.

PUT A YELLOW RIBBON ON YOUR VEHICLES TO SHOW SUPPORT.

Either say something funny or say something sensible, but parading your ignorance will get you nowhere.

You say I "spammed the PFL board out of existence."

The PFL board is still in existence and my last message reads as follows:

< I AGREE WITH MARK FRQANCIS (HONESTY MESSAGE) Everyone is going to be blazing mad at me, but I agree wholeheartedly with this guy, whoever he is.

Its what I have been saying for months on the PFL board and what I said last week on the Bogushboard in reply to “welcome to my forum.”

Fuel is just the beginning. The Brits deserve a better deal on many, many other issues as well. Traditionally we have touched our caps to our masters, (to quote Tony Benn), and taken the sh.t that politicians, big businesses and cooks threw at us. Well we are not going to eat that food any more. Fuel tax must come down, cars must cost the same as the Europeans pay, our kids must be educated properly by the state, our hospitals must clean up their act, our soldiers must not be killed by their own DU shells and a thousand other things need to be addressed.

Clever, non-political people must take on the government, with the support of the majority of the public.

This is not “anti-democratic” thinking. It is a reaction to a democratic system that politicians and big businesses have learned to abuse to their own advantage. Democracy in the “New Age” of the twenty first century must evolve again. The people are increasingly empowered by the Internet and other technology and their voice must and WILL be felt.

“People power” has toppled communist and totalitarian systems over the past decade. No one is advocating toppling the British government. But I am advocating that “the people” be allowed to have greater checks and controls over what they pay for and over what is done in their name. This is exactly what Mark Francis is saying. Bogush is saying the same thing, if you read his site http://www.bogush.fsnet.co.uk/

I also now agree with Funkii and Mark Francis that the “dogs of war” must be leashed or we will have big trouble and the protests will fall on deaf ears.

I agree with what Bogush has said about this ……… (you could hardly call it a message could you, we wouldn’t know if Mercedes had not told us, PFL supporters are the last people to find out what the hell is happening), on the Bogushboard: http://network54.com/Hide/Forum/96157 also his long message in reply to “Arthur Gibson” by Rhys on the same board, that is very relevant to this discussion of the way forward.

Its early days, but I wish the new plan every success.

Arthur Gibson>

My comment:

You call that "spamming"?

The header of this board states:
<Please feel free to post messages whatever your opinion.>

Please ask Shirley to remove this invitation, if you don't have the nerve to debate with me.

My message to agent 62.254 (Bogush) tells him that I am going to reply to him on HIS board, because it is my opinion that Shirley's deletion policy yesterday was not acceptable to free discussion and I want to move my discussion with Bogush to a better place.

The Shirleyboard and the Sharkboard are as devoid of any constructive contributions by the anti tax people. It is the pro tax people like me, Funki, Robert, TPG and others who keep the whole debate alive, albeit mostly on the Bogushboard because Shirley has no more idea how to run a forum than Rhys Park did. That is why this board and the Sharkboard are DEAD.

If you had the slightest interest in the subject you would have noticed that I do not "spend all night" on the boards. Look at the message times, which you obviously do not.

I joined the anti tax side because I felt sorry that they only had one intelligent person supporting their side of the debate, (Bogush). However the words and actions of people like Rhys, Graham and others made me embarrassed that I was on the side of such people and convinced me that I should follow the smart money and back the other side of the debate, which was my original stance.

I have also come to the conclusion that this "Fuel Protest" nonsense is simply a manifestation of "Old Labour" hard left, "money grows on trees" thinking and I am completely against it.

It would be nice to have fuel tax reduced in the UK, but as I have explained elsewhere, in reasoning that would have gone way over your head, the country just cannot afford to foot the bill for such a reduction.

If I have spent extra time on the boards this week, it is because we take the Chinese New Year holiday and run the office on a skeleton staff. The Chinese are back at work from next Monday and so am I, so you will not have to read much from me on the Bogushboard next week, or thereafter, until my next holiday which is half term, in about three weeks.

That's the great thing about the global economy, you get both the European and Chinese holidays and as they get more holidays than us, life is good.

Have fun at work today. When you get in tonight, tired and exhausted, you can read what I contribute to the Bogushboard today. I shall try to avoid long words, so that you can understand what I am saying.

Arthur says
>The PFL board is still in existence<

OK so the board is still there, but how many use it now ( regulars )

>Fuel is just the beginning.<
The beginning, I thought you were against lowering the price of fuel. Or have you changed sides once again?

>Clever, non-political people must take on the government, with the support of the majority of the public.<

What you call clever some people might think is idiotic ( or lacking in common sense ). The PFL is a non-political group of people who have a common goal to LOWER THE TAX ON FUEL!. The majority of the British public still support this, no matter what TPG and others say. Just go out in the street and ask.


>This is not "anti-democratic" thinking. It is a reaction to a democratic system that politicians and big businesses have learned to abuse to their own advantage. Democracy in the "New Age" of the twenty first century must evolve again. The people are increasingly empowered by the Internet and other technology and their voice must and WILL be felt.<

I agree with that statement.

>People power" has toppled communist and totalitarian systems over the past decade. No one is advocating toppling the British government. But I am advocating that "the people" be allowed to have greater checks and controls over what they pay for and over what is done in their name. This is exactly what Mark Francis is saying. Bogush is saying the same thing, if you read his site /<

This 'People Power' as you call it used DIRECT ACTION which you are against. So how do we use ' PEOPLE POWER' ?.

> also now agree with Funkii and Mark Francis that the "dogs of war" must be leashed or we will have big trouble and the protests will fall on deaf ears.<

So now you want DIRECT ACTION, make up your mind.

>>The header of this board states:
<Please feel free to post messages whatever your opinion.><<
Doesn't it also say something about messages being deleted if posted just to incite?

>Please ask Shirley to remove this invitation, if you don't have the nerve to debate with me.<

Why should I do that?

>It is the pro tax people like me, Funki, Robert, TPG and others who keep the whole debate alive,<

MMM a few minutes ago you were for Direct Action ( unleash the dogs of war ). You really must try to keep to one side at least in a posting.

>If you had the slightest interest in the subject you would have noticed that I do not "spend all night" on the boards. Look at the message times, which you obviously do not.<

Subject what subject, you keep changing your mind!! No I don't look at the times of the postings you're right on that, ( it's just most of the day and sometimes in the early hours of the morning as well that you are on ).

>I joined the anti tax side because I felt sorry that they only had one intelligent person supporting their side of the debate, (Bogush).<

Hey Bogush he called you intelligent ( now is that an insult or a compliment?)

>I have also come to the conclusion that this "Fuel Protest" nonsense is simply a manifestation of "Old Labour" hard left, "money grows on trees" thinking and I am completely against it.<

You will find that most of the people who post on these boards are not political, all they want is a fair deal.

>It would be nice to have fuel tax reduced in the UK, but as I have explained elsewhere, in reasoning that would have gone way over your head, the country just cannot afford to foot the bill for such a reduction.<

This is where we differ ( again ). The money that New Labour waste on Quango's, Hiring trees for a couple of years, decorating their offices, The Dome ( yes I know this wasn't tax money, but the money could have gone to The Nhs or Education, please don't say this was a Tory idea Labour did not have to use it ), and how about cutting down on their own staff in Westminster etc etc ( anyone else think of more to add to this list ). This country can afford the tax cuts in fuel, if so much wasn't wasted.

>Have fun at work today. When you get in tonight, tired and exhausted, you can read what I contribute to the Bogushboard today. I shall try to avoid long words, so that you can understand what I am saying.<

What makes you think I'm tired and exhausted when I get in from work. Maybe my job is as cushy as yours ( but I doubt that very much ). Long words ( what does avoid mean ? )

One more thing Arthur you can stop throwing a tantrum, now pick up all your toys that you threw out of your pram when you read my posting.

<A/PG I used to work in construction, with guys who WORKED from 8.00 or 7.30 or earlier untill dusk, or later if the site was floodlit, six or seven days a week.>
What a coincidence, I worked in the building trade for 20 years, 10 of them as a ganger with Wimpey.

<Most 40 year olds looked 60.>

Hmmmmm, I'm 43 and I'm often told I look much younger.

<Most had missing fingers (the ones with worse injuries obviously you didn't see).>

No they didn't!!!

<2 - 300 were killed every year.>

Unfortunately true, usually because of site agents trying to cut corners by getting unqualified people to erect things like scaffolding. I know this to be true, I was instructed to get my squad to shift some scaffolding (hop-ups, if you know what they sre) from one side of a house to another. 3 weeks before on a site not 10 miles away a young roofer had been killed because someone had done just this. I refused and our overtime was immediately cut.

<And you couldn't usually get to work by bus.>

There was usually a van!

<If you really believe that you are right, try going to a building site and telling the guys there you new opinions.>

I found ordinary building workers to be like ordinary anything else workers, you're not into stereotypes are you?

<By the way, apparently it's now the norm, rather than the exception for them to sleep in their vans, because they spend so much on petrol they can neither afford to drive home every night, nor pay for digs.>

Now you're talking pish, Bogey. I made good money as a ganger, I had to work every hour I could, but the money was good at the end of the week. If I had to work away from home the company paid for my digs and I got a subsistence allowance as per the Working Rule Agreement, you should know what that is

Robert

Thank you Robert.

Bogush is a civil engineer who has WATCHED guys working but never had a splash of mud on his suit in his life.

He is using typical fuel protester tactics of inventing sob stories to replace reasoned argument. That is why I never bothered to answer him properly.

When I find out what a "neo-liberal" is, I might answer that, as it sounds as if there might be a whiff of intelligence in his message.

<<Most had missing fingers (the ones with worse injuries obviously you didn't see).>

<   No they didn't!!!

Yes they did!!!!!!, well at least most of the chippies.

<<2 - 300 were killed every year.>

<   Unfortunately true, usually because of site agents trying to cut corners by getting unqualified people to erect things like scaffolding. I know this to be true, I was instructed to get my squad to shift some scaffolding (hop-ups, if you know what they are) from one side of a house to another. 3 weeks before on a site not 10 miles away a young roofer had been killed because someone had done just this. I refused and our overtime was immediately cut.

Ahhhhhhhhhh, (house) building site!

<<And you couldn't usually get to work by bus.>

<   There was usually a van!

And your point is?  That we can scrap "private" transport as the public system caters for all our needs??  Or that it's ok to tax at 340%, because that's only 39% per passenger, lower even than our glorious leader tony pays??

<<If you really believe that you are right, try going to a building site and telling the guys there you new opinions.>

<   I found ordinary building workers to be like ordinary anything else workers, you're not into stereotypes are you?

Sorry, you've lost me there!  I'm stereotyping ordinary building workers as ordinary anything else workers who would object to being called lazy stupid spongers?

<<By the way, apparently it's now the norm, rather than the exception for them to sleep in their vans, because they spend so much on petrol they can neither afford to drive home every night, nor pay for digs.>

<  Now you're talking pish, Bogey. I made good money as a ganger, I had to work every hour I could, but the money was good at the end of the week. If I had to work away from home the company paid for my digs and I got a subsistence allowance as per the Working Rule Agreement, you should know what that is

Now your talking dried up, festering pish Robby.  When was that?  And of course you made "good money" after working every hour you could.  I bet if you showed Arthur one of your old pay slips he'd turn green with envy at how much you earned, for such easy work.

But you worked for Wimpey as a ganger.  I worked for a "respected" middle to major ranking company.  But on one job (a magistrates court between a police station and the council offices) all the sub contractors subcontractors vanished when the IR and SS came calling.  How many of those do you think had contracts and were paid according to the WRA.

And surely you must know why the "majority of construction accidents involve newcomers to strange building sites, still finding their way around in their first fortnight".

I remember one guy (when I worked with a major-major company - perfect timing - joined just before a major-major crash) who suffered a broken jaw, arm, ribs, pelvis, and a leg broken in seven places, ...... and you should have seen the leg he landed on (fortunately I didn't).

It must have been his twin I'd seen around the site for months.

Yeah, and I bet the "good money" he'd been on for months was more than adequate compensation.

And maybe things are cushy in Scotland, but a relative works (not manages) in London, and he reckons it's the norm.  So who do I believe about the situation down there?

> Bogush Rubbish

February 2 2001, 1:49 PM

> Thank you Robert. > Bogush is a civil engineer Which means we are "civil" > who has WATCHED guys working but never had a splash of mud on his suit in his life. > He is using typical fuel protester tactics of inventing sob stories to replace reasoned argument. That is why I never bothered to answer him properly. So, to uphold the honour of "civil" engineers, and honourable fuel protesters: You can wear a suit, and still have a "hard" job, even dangerous.  In fact, on one (in fact two, now I come to think of it - I must be jinxed - or the green lobby were already out to get me) of the few sites where I normally wore (a dirty) suit with my muddy boots part of a building collapsed onto a spot I'd been standing on a few minutes before (ok, in the other incident, it was that night). But then again on other sites (when I worked for a minor-minor contractor) the suit might only come out for an hour or two a week when I had to deal with the clients representatives.  The rest of the time, if there wasn't enough "mangerial" work to do (which was most of the time), I'd have my sleeves rolled up and be mucking in with the concrete gang or whatever. And that was closer to the "norm" than your version. Exactly how quickly did you rise from poverty Arthur, because you don't seem to have noticed much on your way up the ladder (which reminds me of the time I was in a rush, in my callow youth)  to inspect some work on the underside of a 100' watertower, and didn't notice that the last section of ladder had been moved and not secured.  Fortunately a tiny work platform that had not been relocated from the previous level of work happened to be exactly below.  I learn't that lesson a long time ago! > When I find out what a "neo-liberal" is, I might answer that, as it sounds as if there might be a whiff of intelligence in his message.

I've already told you what one is Arthur.  Your mission, if you choose to accept it, is to track down T.H.E.Y.

<Exactly how quickly did you rise from poverty Arthur?>
Twenty eight years the first time, two years the second time. My first wife cleaned me out the first time, in my early thirties. I ended up £110,000 in debt, in a rented one bedroom flat in a violent area of the city and had to borrow money to buy myself secondhand furniture. I told fortunes at £20 a time to get money for food until I could get business going again. Two years later I bought two new Mercedes on the same day, one for me and one for the girlfriend (not Allison). The rest is history, so is the girlfriend. I sold her Merc. Shirley will probably delete me for doing that and Woody will send me a rude e mail. Mercedes will probably send me her photo. (That guarantees me a vitriolic Mercedean reply. I haven't had one for a while, I miss them.)

You think that I "didn't notice much on the way up"?

You just wouldn't believe me if I told you what I have "noticed".

Could you afford to get your suit dry-cleaned?

You will have to meet me one day Bogush. You might get a suprise. I haven't worn a suit to the office for twelve years. We all come in jeans and sports shirts. Shorts in the summer. All very New Age, except we started it in the late eighties.

I only have one suit and I am not sure where that is. It probably needs dry cleaning.

Try to get down to Devon this Summer. We'll stick some cheap red diesel in the boat and go and catch some illegal cod for tea.

Oops, wrong board

Because all the EEC factory ships are going to vacuum up all their food, plus they are allowed to (still) vacuum up FOUR times the normal British quota of cod, "by accident"?!

There's a sound, honest, environmental policy for you (and agreed to by "us")!!

Well that's the end of this thread Bogush.

I completely forget what it was all about, but we managed 25 replies about whatever it was, without being deleted, so we now hold the world Shirleyboard record. Maybe she didn't realise that we were writing stuff down here?

THIS is!

Oh no, now THIS is the end!!  ;-)  ;-) 

Don't you know that only WhiskyBob can close off threads!!!!!




Too much whisky.....

Slainte
WhiskyBob

Nobody ends a goblin-thread but a goblin.

TPG - FIGHTING TO KEEP YOUR FUEL TAX