Cyclist 'knocked over and killed woman'

[Linalmeemow]

Fixed wheel bikes definitely shouldn't be road legal even with a front brake.

 

[The Baron]

Of course it goes into the general tax fund and of course some of that goes to pay for the roads, but it most definitely is not a tax for the use of the roads.

You are a typical cyclist no it no longer called road tax since 1937 as it did not provide enough money for the upkeep of the roads(hardly any cars on the roads in 1937 so it did not cover the upkeep of roads so the money for the upkeep had to come from standard taxation to supplement the upkeep)but today it is a major player in the taxation system and as it technically is not called road fund anymore so it is still a extra tax that car drivers motorcyclist etc have to pay so you morally you know it is "road tax" but are basing your argument on technical wording and have admitted some of it is used for road repairs development above the standard taxes that are collected, without it the roads would be in worse repair than they already are.Its about time cyclists stop using the technical wording of this tax "vehicle excise duty"and admit morally it is a "road tax" as it was originally brought in for

 

[Linalmeemow]

You are a typical cyclist no it no longer called road tax since 1937 as it did not provide enough money for the upkeep of the roads(hardly any cars on the roads in 1937 so it did not cover the upkeep of roads so the money for the upkeep had to come from standard taxation to supplement the upkeep)but today it is a major player in the taxation system and as it technically is not called road fund anymore so it is still a extra tax that car drivers motorcyclist etc have to pay so you morally you know it is "road tax" but are basing your argument on technical wording and have admitted some of it is used for road repairs development above the standard taxes that are collected, without it the roads would be in worse repair than they already are.Its about time cyclists stop using the technical wording of this tax "vehicle excise duty"and admit morally it is a "road tax" as it was originally brought in for

Morally schmorally, what a load of claptrap. What about the motor vehicles on the road that don't pay VED? And seriously, how much wear and tear do you think a push bike does to the road?

As for being a typical cyclist, I'm also a typical driver. I pay my "road tax" and I'm perfectly happy for cyclists to use the roads for the cost of the tax they already pay. I was before I was a driver and I will be when I'm too old to drive any more.

 

[The Baron]

Morally schmorally, what a load of claptrap. What about the motor vehicles on the road that don't pay VED? And seriously, how much wear and tear do you think a push bike does to the road?

As for being a typical cyclist, I'm also a typical driver. I pay my "road tax" and I'm perfectly happy for cyclists to use the roads for the cost of the tax they already pay. I was before I was a driver and I will be when I'm too old to drive any more.

You might be happy for cyclists to use the roads for no extra cost but most motorists that do not ride bikes on the road think different so No VED where is the money going to come from then shall we tax drinkers more to repair the roads and create cycle lanes road signs road markings etc yes cyclists may not create much wear on the road but they still need all the signs markings cycle lanes and other ancillaries that the roads need to operate

 

[Irishwizard]

Or to put it another way if you ride a bike you contribute to the upkeep of the roads through income tax. The bike does not pollute and causes negligible damage to the road. Also there are lots of classes of motor vehicle that pay no VED.

Bikes do pollute in 3 ways
1. the manufacturing process
2. all the claptrap cyclists spout
3. the extra gas we require to get past the buggers

 

[terrym]

Or to put it another way if you ride a bike you contribute to the upkeep of the roads through income tax. The bike does not pollute and causes negligible damage to the road. Also there are lots of classes of motor vehicle that pay no VED.

Your original statement on this was:-
"Any tax-paying cyclist contributes exactly the same as anyone else to road usage."
Your subsequent posts appear to conveneniently disregard the fact that VED applies to some vehicle owners but not cyclists, which makes your statement incorrect as I have pointed out.
Whether or not people pay income tax or indeed any other form of tax is irrelevant in this case. And whether bikes cause damage to the road is equally irrelevant to what you originally stated.
If you attempting to achieve WUM status you might just have achieved it.
However I can't be bothered with responding to you any more

 

[The Baron]

Your original statement on this was:-
"Any tax-paying cyclist contributes exactly the same as anyone else to road usage."
Your subsequent posts appear to conveneniently disregard the fact that VED applies to some vehicle owners but not cyclists, which makes your statement incorrect as I have pointed out.
Whether or not people pay income tax or indeed any other form of tax is irrelevant in this case. And whether bikes cause damage to the road is equally irrelevant to what you originally stated.
If you attempting to achieve WUM status you might just have achieved it.
However I can't be bothered with responding to you any more

Well said TerryM I will not respond anymore on this thread also as he is as I have said before a typical Cyclist road user and you can not educate this type

 

[Linalmeemow]

Your original statement on this was:-
"Any tax-paying cyclist contributes exactly the same as anyone else to road usage."
Your subsequent posts appear to conveneniently disregard the fact that VED applies to some vehicle owners but not cyclists, which makes your statement incorrect as I have pointed out.
Whether or not people pay income tax or indeed any other form of tax is irrelevant in this case. And whether bikes cause damage to the road is equally irrelevant to what you originally stated.
If you attempting to achieve WUM status you might just have achieved it.
However I can't be bothered with responding to you any more

And the baron stated "Its about time cyclists contribute to road usage" which all of them do. Alright, I was technically incorrect in that SOME vehicle owners pay more in a roundabout way, but VED is still not a direct taxation on road usage. Whether people cyclists pay income tax is DIRECTLY relevant as that goes towards paying for the upkeep of roads.

I look forward to not reading your response.

 

[Gunge]

Bikes do pollute in 3 ways
1. the manufacturing process
2. all the claptrap cyclists spout
3. the extra gas we require to get past the buggers

Nailed it! Bearing the above 3 points in mind, they should pay MORE tax than car drivers. We ought to add the visual distress they cause with their tight lycra bums. Yuk!

 

[Linalmeemow]

Well said TerryM I will not respond anymore on this thread also as he is as I have said before a typical Cyclist road user and you can not educate this type

Not to worry, I'll think of you next time I'm using your roads for free.

 

[Ken L]

morally it is a "road tax" as it was originally brought in for

No, it's a pollution tax and has been for decades. A bike, a car, an SUV or a 40 ton truck that produces zero emissions pays zero VED.

Even if it wasn't a pollution tax and actually was a tax for the upkeep of roads. The roads weren't built for cars, as is all to obvious in many parts of the country, they were built for horses and carts and any upkeep costs would relate to vehicle weight because the weight of a vehicle is what determines the amount of damage it does to the highway. How do you suppose my 10kg bike stacks up against your 1,500kg car?