The 'cyclists should pay road tax' folks
Discussion
Hi guys,
Foreword: I'm aware this is a provocative topic so please can we be sure not to let this degrade in to a slagging match.
Ok, so I was just listening to Jeremy Vine while at work and the topic of cycling came on. Some guy was describing how a car left him little room when overtaking despite the highway code mentioning bikes are to be given as much room as other vehicles. The disgruntled cyclist explained that this is dangerous because it seriously limits his ability to negotiate pot holes and should one arise while the car is next to him then he is over the handlebars. A fair point I thought.
Suddenly from across the desk one of my colleagues (ironically he cycles regularly on the road and I cycle every now and then- both of us drive and tax two or more cars) shouts 'BUT THEY DON'T PAY ROAD TAX!'.
Immediately we got in to a debate but after about 1 min or so he said we should agree to disagree and get on with work. We did. A shame, I like a good debate!
So my question to those who agree with Mat, my colleague, is: how on earth can this be a point against cycling? It is not a legal requirement for them to pay road tax and as the law stands they are free to use the roads in the same way that cars do (with the exception of motorways etc), so what is wrong with a bike using the road? To say 'but they don't pay road tax' is equivalent to saying 'but they don't have buildings insurance!', they neither require road tax nor buildings insurance by law.
As for my opinion: I agree that it's a topic that we should debate and the law could well be changed. We should undeniably be encouraging cycling in our cities particularly so I'm reluctant to make it expensive. However I do think insurance is important. But I don't support a tax on it personally.
EDIT: an interesting stat that came up in this debate is that road wear is proportional to axle weight to the fourth power. If we assume (for easy figures) that a average bike + rider is 100kg, and the average car is 1600kg... then the wear over one mile of a car due to a bike is 65,536 times higher.
Foreword: I'm aware this is a provocative topic so please can we be sure not to let this degrade in to a slagging match.
Ok, so I was just listening to Jeremy Vine while at work and the topic of cycling came on. Some guy was describing how a car left him little room when overtaking despite the highway code mentioning bikes are to be given as much room as other vehicles. The disgruntled cyclist explained that this is dangerous because it seriously limits his ability to negotiate pot holes and should one arise while the car is next to him then he is over the handlebars. A fair point I thought.
Suddenly from across the desk one of my colleagues (ironically he cycles regularly on the road and I cycle every now and then- both of us drive and tax two or more cars) shouts 'BUT THEY DON'T PAY ROAD TAX!'.
Immediately we got in to a debate but after about 1 min or so he said we should agree to disagree and get on with work. We did. A shame, I like a good debate!
So my question to those who agree with Mat, my colleague, is: how on earth can this be a point against cycling? It is not a legal requirement for them to pay road tax and as the law stands they are free to use the roads in the same way that cars do (with the exception of motorways etc), so what is wrong with a bike using the road? To say 'but they don't pay road tax' is equivalent to saying 'but they don't have buildings insurance!', they neither require road tax nor buildings insurance by law.
As for my opinion: I agree that it's a topic that we should debate and the law could well be changed. We should undeniably be encouraging cycling in our cities particularly so I'm reluctant to make it expensive. However I do think insurance is important. But I don't support a tax on it personally.
EDIT: an interesting stat that came up in this debate is that road wear is proportional to axle weight to the fourth power. If we assume (for easy figures) that a average bike + rider is 100kg, and the average car is 1600kg... then the wear over one mile of a car due to a bike is 65,536 times higher.
Edited by Freddy88FM on Tuesday 3rd March 16:28
Great idea. Let's create more beurocratic red tape and price kids and people who can't afford to run a car off the road. Be sure to make insurance compulsory for them too. After all, why should the masses be left with access to a cheap mode of travel when somebody important has a meeting to get to in their Vauxhall?
Actually forget all that. Can we just leave the f
king bikes alone for just one whole week?
Actually forget all that. Can we just leave the f
king bikes alone for just one whole week?It's a stupid argument invariably used by people attempting to justify their awful driving. If 'road tax' weren't a thing, they'd trot out some other specious crap when called out for their aggression.
The correct response to being told "you don't pay road tax", leaving aside the high-horse there's-no-such-thing-and-in-any-case-roads-are-paid-for-from-general-taxation-and-you-should-see-my-payslip argument which is too nuanced to convey in shouted words, is "HOW THE fk DO YOU KNOW?!"
The correct response to being told "you don't pay road tax", leaving aside the high-horse there's-no-such-thing-and-in-any-case-roads-are-paid-for-from-general-taxation-and-you-should-see-my-payslip argument which is too nuanced to convey in shouted words, is "HOW THE f
k DO YOU KNOW?!"kiseca said:
Great idea. Let's create more beurocratic red tape and price kids and people who can't afford to run a car off the road. Be sure to make insurance compulsory for them too. After all, why should the masses be left with access to a cheap mode of travel when somebody important has a meeting to get to in their Vauxhall?
Actually forget all that. Can we just leave the fking bikes alone for just one whole week?
Please see foreword.Actually forget all that. Can we just leave the f
king bikes alone for just one whole week?LittleEnus said:
You pay road tax for a specific vehicle, not everything you own. I don't just buy one VED then think I can use my other cars un-VED'd. So why do cyclists think this?
Cyclists have become a huge menace in my opinion.
OK so we'll tax bikes the same as cars, by their tailpipe emissions... oh, wait. Cyclists have become a huge menace in my opinion.
Cyclists don't think they have a right to use the roads without paying VED because they alreay pay it on a car. They know they have a right to use the roads without paying VED because they have a fundamental right enshrined in law to use the roads without paying VED. Drivers do not have a right to use the road at all; they require a licence.
Of course a large number of cars are VED exempt too, presumably they shouldn't be allowed on the road either?
Edited by kambites on Tuesday 3rd March 15:02
LittleEnus said:
You pay road tax for a specific vehicle, not everything you own. I don't just buy one VED then think I can use my other cars un-VED'd. So why do cyclists think this?
Cyclists have become a huge menace in my opinion.
But you drive your car on the road without buildings insurance? This is my point. Just like you are not legally required to have buildings insurance for your car, cyclists are not legally required to pay VED. So how is the whole 'no VED so get off the road' argument relevant. Cyclists have become a huge menace in my opinion.
I walk to work (only live 3 miles away and the dog comes with me- two birds one stone by walking) and I have to cross a number of roads... should I also be required to pay VED for me and my dog?
Cyclists use the road so they should pay for it's upkeep.
In fact they should pay for it's upkeep more than a car or a van or a lorry which is earning money for the country when using it/ Instead they just doing it for a hobby and running up expenses for the NHS Accident and Emergency services whilst selfishly getting pedal powered jollies....
So I say pedal bikes on the road should pay 25p per mile cycled. That's the same as going to the gym and sitting on an exercise bike per month no doubt. Or are cyclists just cheapskates?
In fact they should pay for it's upkeep more than a car or a van or a lorry which is earning money for the country when using it/ Instead they just doing it for a hobby and running up expenses for the NHS Accident and Emergency services whilst selfishly getting pedal powered jollies....
So I say pedal bikes on the road should pay 25p per mile cycled. That's the same as going to the gym and sitting on an exercise bike per month no doubt. Or are cyclists just cheapskates?
Freddy88FM said:
LittleEnus said:
You pay road tax for a specific vehicle, not everything you own. I don't just buy one VED then think I can use my other cars un-VED'd. So why do cyclists think this?
Cyclists have become a huge menace in my opinion.
But you drive your car on the road without buildings insurance. This is my point. Just like you are not legally required to have buildings insurance for your car, cyclists are not legally required to pay VED. So how is the whole 'no VED so get off the road' argument relevant. Cyclists have become a huge menace in my opinion.
I walk to work (only live 3 miles away and the dog comes with me- two birds one stone by walking) and I have to cross a number of roads... should I also be required to pay VED for me and my dog?
Councils pay to fix the roads. If it was just cyclists on the roads and not vehicles servicing the national infra-structure and GDP, one way or another, do you think they would still pay out?
Do we really have to do this all again? It's not "cyclists", same as it's not " drivers" or "men" or "Asians". It's crap, inattentive, unskilled, poor cyclists/drivers, they're the problem.
99% of drivers go past 99% of cyclists perfectly satisfactorily (no, that number isn't correct, but nor is whatever one you're going to suggest, let's just accept that it's "some"). Sometimes a 1% cyclist catches the eye of a PHer and we get a "fking lycra clad s" thread. Sometimes a 1% driver does likewise and we get a "why are all drivers (except me, natch) fking s?" thread.
Then there are the times where a 1%er meets a 1%er and the cyclist dies. Then we have a really long thread and calls for, basically everything, to be banned.
Let's all just be nice to each other, shall we?
Simon.
99% of drivers go past 99% of cyclists perfectly satisfactorily (no, that number isn't correct, but nor is whatever one you're going to suggest, let's just accept that it's "some"). Sometimes a 1% cyclist catches the eye of a PHer and we get a "f
king lycra clad s" thread. Sometimes a 1% driver does likewise and we get a "why are all drivers (except me, natch) fking s?" thread.Then there are the times where a 1%er meets a 1%er and the cyclist dies. Then we have a really long thread and calls for, basically everything, to be banned.
Let's all just be nice to each other, shall we?
Simon.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff