Let's put higher tax on diesel fuel!

The Finnish Government has just decided to increase taxation of diesel fuel.

The Finance Minister Jyrki Katainen admitted that the decision was made to maximize tax intake, now that diesel cars are more popular than ever before.

Finance Minister Jyrki Katainen

It is commonly believed that diesel cars are less polluting than petrol cars. And less pollution is exactly what Finland officially is aiming for. - Yet Finland has a long history of punishing diesel usage.

For decades there has been a punishment tax for diesel cars: If you own a diesel car, you have to pay an annual 'diesel tax', even if you never drive your car. You are quite simply punished for owning a diesel car, and not using petrol. - Petrol cars use up more fuel, you see.

So now they decided to increase the fuel tax on diesel. "To maximize fuel tax intake". Without thinking for a moment, what the decision means for the prise of goods, food, and anything that needs to transported by diesel trucks in this country of long transport distances.


"To maximize fuel tax intake". - I wonder how long Finland can continue on this extremely weird policy of taxing motor vehicles and traffic in ways that are not in unison with the EU regulations.

Policeman as witness

In one of my previous posts I wrote about my colleague's view on why van drivers are bad drivers (see 'Professionals can not drive?).

In the same discussion he told me about his own experience when driving a van:

He had stopped at a red light, and he felt a thump, as if something had hit his van. He left the van to see what it was about. And quite right: a car had hit his rear. It had split its radiator, with cooling water running on the road. A young boy was sitting at the cars steering wheel. The only damage to the van was luckily just minor scratching of the back bumper chroming.

Another car stopped behind them, and a man rushed out shouting "I saw it all. I am a policeman". My colleague was gladly surprised: how often do you get a policeman to witness your accident for you.

But the man continued "I am the boy's father!", and my colleague lost his confidence in his star witness. The policeman kept on stressing that he was a policeman, in quite an aggressive style. And my colleague felt that he was being bullied: The boy's father aggressively repeating that he was a policeman, and that he had seen it all. - You know the style. Surely you do.

Yet my colleague politely expressed his content of having such a trustworthy witness, and did not yield to be intimidated. As the policeman finally realized that he was not going to succeed in pushing my colleague, he admitted his son's guilt and offered to have the van's back bumper re-chromed.

But my colleague no longer did agree; he demanded on having the bumper replaced: re-chroming can never be totally trusted, can it? So in the end the boy's insurance company paid my colleague the money for a factory new rear bumper.

I think we can forgive my colleague. After all policemen are obliged to behave in exemplary way even in their private lives.

Yet; wouldn't it have been delighting to hear the policeman's testimony in court: "Now, everybody knows that at least 2 or 3 cars can quite safely pass a red light. That is the common practice."

That by the way is the common practice in Finland. The leading national newspaper Helsingin Sanomat just recently wrote on article on the matter. You do remember that the Finnish police does not seem to be interested in controlling traffic. And it shows.

Police admits not doing their job

Just a few blogs back I wondered if the Finnish police are up to their tasks (see 'Professionals can not drive?'). The supposition was not without factual base: the police themselves have admitted not doing their job.


Some time ago during this summer or spring a police officer was interviewed on the radio. The reporter asked him if something could be done to clean up the traffic, that has grown to be rather reckless. He asked why do the policemen not stop the speedsters and other offensive rule breakers.

- But then we'd have to stop virtually everybody, the police officer replied.

So the police are well aware that the traffic culture has already grown out of control, but yet they seem to have no intention to do anything about it in their everyday work.


According to a recent newspaper writing one police officer has told the writer, that he is aware that some patrol units accept tasks only by the police radio. They do not react on incidents that they see in the traffic.

If the police are patrolling, but doing nothing, they are patrolling for nothing, and we are paying their salaries for nothing. When people have seen that the police do not care of anything, they have learned that they can drive as recklessly as they like. Traffic legislation no longer is valid in Finland; the Finnish police have in practice authorized the reckless driving.


If the police did do their job, they certainly would have to start it by stopping virtually everybody. Similarly if I did leave my job undone for a lengthy period, I'd simply have to do a hell lot of work to clear the piled up work to get back to normal work level. Sitting still like the police do, would only make the pile grow even higher.

So 'stopping virtually everybody' is exactly what the police should now do. We are paying them for doing their job, not for idling in their patrol cars or giving excuses for not doing their job.

Professionals can not drive?

I started this blog with a posting on traffic behavior. See 'Cars are flock animals'.

Actually it is not necessarily cars whose behavior goes beyond all comprehension. It is mostly vans, trucks and other 'professional' vehicles. Like in the picture below, taken at the speed of 100 km/h on one of the main roads leading out from Helsinki.


I discussed the matter with a colleague of mine, and he saw nothing unexpected in it:
Vans are driven by young men, boys almost; They have no understanding yet of laws of physics, or traffic psychology. The vans are not their own; It doesn't matter to them if the van gets damaged. And they must show that they are macho men.

Maybe so. Yet these boys have agreed to common game rules when getting their driving licenses. When continuously breaking the game rules, they show that they are not up to their profession, and they should lose their licenses.

But the police, whose job it is to control that rules are respected, do not care. Are they too young boys, with not enough wits for their job?

Cars are flock animals

Cars are like birds. Or fish. They move in tight flocks, maneuvering in harmonic unison. Each car following tightly the movements of the whole flock: When the flock turns, each car turns; when the flock stops, each car stops. - Right? How else could cars run just a couple of meters apart at over 100 km/h?


What the birds and fish can easily do, the cars can not do. So they collide when something unexpected happens. Causing death, injury and damage. Yet each driver has agreed to play by common rules when receiving their driver's license. But on the road the promises are forgotten, and this strange flock behavior is assumed.

And even though the drivers are clearly breaking their license conditions, the police does nothing: in Finland it is quite acceptable to threaten, kill, injure and damage, if you do it with your vehicle.