What is the reasoning behind reasonable speed limits.
Speed is a gigantic factor of road deaths, which cost billions / year.
On our roads we have unlicenced drivers, drugged drivers drunk drivers, and drivers from 16 to 96 years of age. Your suggestions will go nowhere
it would be looked at as a cult with no respect for the law.

Why can't we have an honest discussion about this subject?

One of the major reasons we need speed limits is so that people can be fined for exceeding them. This creates a significant income stream for the State Government.

No-one wants to pay taxes. No-one wants existing taxes raised, but everyone is always coming up with new things the government should spend money on.

Therefore a significant proportion of state taxes are sin taxes, on speeding, driving whilst intoxicated, gambling etc. Many of these taxes have advocates pushing for abolition of the tax (i.e. speeding), or abolition of the activity (i.e. gambling).

What disappoints me is that none of these advocates ever suggest how the loss in revenue should be made up. I believe that the reason for this is that many advocates make a very pleasant living advocating things that have very little likelihood of happening. They don't want the things to happen, as this would destroy their reason for existence. As a famous European politician said: "We must make demands that cannot be satisfied".

What we really need are more forms of voluntary taxation. Gambling taxes are one form, but we need many more.

I think we can all agree that what we want are heavy taxes that we personally don't have to pay.

I'll go with your voluntary taxation plerdsus. I'll happily pay triple the licensing & registration fees, If I'm allowed to triple the speed limits.

Actually I have never done 300Km/H on land. The number of times when I exceeded 280 Km/H felt quite hairy, particularly when overtaking things trundling along at not much over 150 Km/H.

So I'll settle for a mere doubling of the speed limits for triple fees. Surely that should interest out state treasurers. With such sensible limits, I could return to averaging 75 MPH, [120 Km/H] on my Sydney Brisbane/Melbourne trips, as I did quite legally back in the 60s.

These average speeds were quite normal, in 50s & 60s cars, on 1960s roads, in the days when there were no professional driving instructors. I wonder why the drivers of today are so much less capable than those of the 60s?

The author's blanket statement "The public thinks otherwise." is based on his bald interpretation some unreferenced survey 5 years ago.

Looks like the author's party, the Liberal-Democrats is about as close to the libertarian US Tea Party, a tiny minority of Australians finds acceptable.

See the author's Party website http://www.ldp.org.au/index.php/policies indicating the authors party supports the following Policies:

- "assisted suicide" Is that where the theme of this article - the right to drive at higher speeds - comes from?

- legalised "Cannibis"

- many more Policies

See his Party's http://www.ldp.org.au/index.php/philosophy "Libertarianism" can mean anything a Party claims but is increasingly associated in the US with the Tea Party's Bugger you I'm OK.

and the Tea Party's - lets close down the Government when it spends more than we think, - with small government, lower taxes for the rich, fewer social services for the poor.

Considering the favourable reception for my proposal for voluntary taxation, I thought I would submit for comment a voluntary taxation proposal that could raise $8 billion a year for the NSW government.

The proposal is that the government would offer for sale sex licences, which could be purchased by people aged between 18 and 60 for $2,000 per year.

They would also offer virgin permits to the same group at the same price.

Holders of either could convert to the other instantaneously any number of times.

Holders would decide whether or not they were going to have sex in the year and hold a sex licence or virgins permit as appropriate.

There would be no compulsion at all to purchase either licence.

However, a woman who did not hold a virgins permit could not prosecute a charge of rape, and any man without a sex licence who approaches within 100 metres of any woman would be liable to imprisonment for six months.

@ plantagenet
indicating the authors party supports the following Policies:

- "assisted suicide" Is that where the theme of this article - the right to drive at higher speeds - comes from?

- legalised "Cannibis"

- many more Policies"
- - - -

The above are some of the reason I VOTED for the LDP in NSW.

Current Drug policy in Australia is repugnant.
Assisted Suicide is supported by some 80% of Australians from everything I read It's definitely something I support after seeing my father dribbling from both ends wasted out of his brain pleading to die from an aggressive cancer, while douche bags like you want to see him tortured presumably ?

As to the OP itself, I completely support it. There was Danish study I remember reading where they removed all speed signs and many other "distracting" road signs in urban areas and people slowed down, they drive to the conditions.

As to the taxes post, not all of us want more service for less tax, some of us understand they when we want less tax we also want less service. I support lower taxation BUT I support lower Government spending as well. Perhaps not so many cops enforcing speed limits ? remove 3/4 of them, there's a saving :) Ditch 50% of the military budget, there's a saving. Remove the Upper house from all States (not just QLD), there's a saving... I could go on.