NB4L production buses
 

On Wed, 24 Jul 2013 09:49:55 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:

And unless there are lots of bikes costing £5k, then the majority of
drivers paid more VAT than the cyclists, when the items were new.

I'd suggest that the vast majority of drivers paid no VAT at all on their
cars. I've certainly never paid VAT on a car purchase - and I've had
several brand new cars.

NB4L production buses
 

On 23 Jul 2013 15:01:50 GMT
Neil Williams wrote:
wrote:

Cyclists pay sod all to use their bikes on the roads therefore their
opinions
are irrelevant.

So you'd rather be stuck behind a cyclist in your car/on the bus because
the cyclist doesn't pay road tax, than to suck it up and get them off the
road meaning your car/bus journey is not delayed?

A motorcycle is different because it doesn't obstruct other traffic as it
both has high acceleration and a high top speed.

So a bike pays tax *because* it doesn't obstruct traffic?

Have you perhaps never been to London and seen how much of a problem this
is for all road users?

No, never been to London, aside from living and working here most of my life.

--
Spud

NB4L production buses
 

On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 16:32:31 +0000 (UTC)
Adrian wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 13:43:17 +0000, spud-u-dont-like wrote:

When cyclists pay road tax for their bikes then they can have a say in
how the roads are laid out and what they share them with. Until then
they can put up or shut up.

Since "paying road tax" is the important factor, do low-CO2 cars, older
cars, and disabled drivers somehow carry lower priority in your view?

No.

--
Spud

NB4L production buses
 

On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 12:42:43 -0500
wrote:
In article , d
() wrote:

On 23 Jul 2013 12:23:05 GMT
Neil Williams wrote:
wrote:

They're used like that all over europe (in plenty of cities with narrow
streets I might add) without the issues the cycling lobby and Boris
claimed they had in london. So either the europeans are all idiots or
someone was telling porkies to further their own agenda.

Many other European cities with them have better dedicated cycle
infrastructure rather than having them in bus lanes. Two types of
vehicle less compatible with one another are hard to imagine.

When cyclists pay road tax for their bikes then they can have a say in how
the roads are laid out and what they share them with. Until then they can
put up or shut up.

There has no such thing as road tax for decades. Many motor vehicles pay no
more than cycles to be put on the road.

Don't start the silly semantics ******** about road tax vs road fund license.
You have no choice than to pay it if you want to use your vehicle on the
road , ergo its a tax regardless of what cuddly fluffy name it currently has.

--
Spud

NB4L production buses
 

On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 21:22:50 +0100
Mizter T wrote:
On 23/07/2013 15:29, d wrote:

On 23 Jul 2013 14:19:50 GMT
Neil Williams wrote:
wrote:

When cyclists pay road tax for their bikes then they can have a say in how
the roads are laid out and what they share them with. Until then they can
put up or shut up.

What a stupid statement, given that getting the cyclists out of your way
(as a driver or bus passenger) would also be to your benefit.

They'd also be out of my way if they were on motorbikes. Perhaps we shouldn't
bother taxing and insuring those either then eh?

Cyclists pay sod all to use their bikes on the roads therefore their opinions
are irrelevant.

Moronic.

Yes, a lot of them are.

--
Spud

NB4L production buses
 

In message , at 09:06:16 on Wed, 24 Jul
2013, Adrian remarked:
And unless there are lots of bikes costing £5k, then the majority of
drivers paid more VAT than the cyclists, when the items were new.

I'd suggest that the vast majority of drivers paid no VAT at all on their
cars. I've certainly never paid VAT on a car purchase - and I've had
several brand new cars.

How did you manage that?
--
Roland Perry

NB4L production buses
 

wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 16:32:31 +0000 (UTC)
Adrian wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 13:43:17 +0000, spud-u-dont-like wrote:

When cyclists pay road tax for their bikes then they can have a say in
how the roads are laid out and what they share them with. Until then
they can put up or shut up.

Since "paying road tax" is the important factor, do low-CO2 cars, older
cars, and disabled drivers somehow carry lower priority in your view?

No.

So you just hate cyclists, rather than those who don't pay road tax for
other reasons. Why, then, aren't you happy for them to be out of your way
on a cycle path so you can use the road freely for your car? Rather biting
your nose off to spite your face (to use my Mum's old phrase), is it not?

Neil
--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK. Put first name before the at to reply.

NB4L production buses
 

On 24 Jul 2013 10:33:06 GMT
Neil Williams wrote:
wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 16:32:31 +0000 (UTC)
Adrian wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 13:43:17 +0000, spud-u-dont-like wrote:

When cyclists pay road tax for their bikes then they can have a say in
how the roads are laid out and what they share them with. Until then
they can put up or shut up.

Since "paying road tax" is the important factor, do low-CO2 cars, older
cars, and disabled drivers somehow carry lower priority in your view?

No.

So you just hate cyclists, rather than those who don't pay road tax for

I don't hate all cyclists, I have a bike myself. I just have a problem with
the commuter types who seem to think the rules of the road don't apply to them.
But of course suddenly the rules of the road are a Big Deal if they think
a driver has infringed upon THEIR space.

other reasons. Why, then, aren't you happy for them to be out of your way
on a cycle path so you can use the road freely for your car? Rather biting
your nose off to spite your face (to use my Mum's old phrase), is it not?

Except their not out of the way on a cycle path - they're on the road. A bit
of paint doesn't change that.

--
Spud

NB4L production buses
 

wrote:

Except their not out of the way on a cycle path - they're on the road. A bit
of paint doesn't change that.

That's a cycle lane. A cycle path is a segregated track for use by
cyclists (and sometimes pedestrians) only. Google the Milton Keynes
Redways for a UK example.

Neil
--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK. Put first name before the at to reply.

NB4L production buses
 

On 24 Jul 2013 12:08:17 GMT
Neil Williams wrote:
wrote:

Except their not out of the way on a cycle path - they're on the road. A bit
of paint doesn't change that.

That's a cycle lane. A cycle path is a segregated track for use by
cyclists (and sometimes pedestrians) only. Google the Milton Keynes
Redways for a UK example.

Fair point. I have no issue with cycle paths, the more the merrier as it
keeps them off the road. Better for all concerned.

--
Spud

NB4L production buses
 

In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

In message , at 09:06:16 on Wed, 24
Jul 2013, Adrian remarked:
And unless there are lots of bikes costing £5k, then the majority of
drivers paid more VAT than the cyclists, when the items were new.

I'd suggest that the vast majority of drivers paid no VAT at all on their
cars. I've certainly never paid VAT on a car purchase - and I've had
several brand new cars.

How did you manage that?

That was puzzling me too. I have never paid VAT on a car but then I have
never bought a new car in nearly 40 years.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

NB4L production buses
 

In article , d
() wrote:

On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 12:42:43 -0500 wrote:
In article ,
() wrote:

On 23 Jul 2013 12:23:05 GMT
Neil Williams wrote:
wrote:

They're used like that all over europe (in plenty of cities with
narrow streets I might add) without the issues the cycling lobby and
Boris claimed they had in london. So either the europeans are all
idiots or someone was telling porkies to further their own agenda.

Many other European cities with them have better dedicated cycle
infrastructure rather than having them in bus lanes. Two types of
vehicle less compatible with one another are hard to imagine.

When cyclists pay road tax for their bikes then they can have a say in
how the roads are laid out and what they share them with. Until then
they can put up or shut up.

There has no such thing as road tax for decades. Many motor vehicles pay
no more than cycles to be put on the road.

Don't start the silly semantics ******** about road tax vs road fund
license. You have no choice than to pay it if you want to use your vehicle
on the road , ergo its a tax regardless of what cuddly fluffy name it
currently has.

There hasn't been any road fund licence for decades either. The renewal
reminder sitting in front of me says "tax disc".

I am fed up with potato heads assuming that cyclists don't also pay car
taxes.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

NB4L production buses
 

wrote:
In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

In message , at 09:06:16 on Wed, 24
Jul 2013, Adrian remarked:
And unless there are lots of bikes costing £5k, then the majority of
drivers paid more VAT than the cyclists, when the items were new.

I'd suggest that the vast majority of drivers paid no VAT at all on their
cars. I've certainly never paid VAT on a car purchase - and I've had
several brand new cars.

How did you manage that?

That was puzzling me too. I have never paid VAT on a car but then I have
never bought a new car in nearly 40 years.

Have you never bought a second-hand car from a dealer?

NB4L production buses
 

In article
,
(Recliner) wrote:

wrote:
In article ,
(Roland Perry) wrote:

In message , at 09:06:16 on Wed, 24
Jul 2013, Adrian remarked:
And unless there are lots of bikes costing £5k, then the majority of
drivers paid more VAT than the cyclists, when the items were new.

I'd suggest that the vast majority of drivers paid no VAT at all on
their cars. I've certainly never paid VAT on a car purchase - and I've
had several brand new cars.

How did you manage that?

That was puzzling me too. I have never paid VAT on a car but then I
have never bought a new car in nearly 40 years.

Have you never bought a second-hand car from a dealer?

No, come to think of it.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

As far as I know, there are two ways of doing that legally. One is to export
the vehicle: VAT is not paid on exports. The other is to be VAT registered
which enables you to offset all the VAT you have paid in a tax year against
the VAT you have received from your customers/clients etc.

NB4L production buses
 

In message

, at 15:23:58 on Wed, 24 Jul 2013, Recliner
remarked:
And unless there are lots of bikes costing £5k, then the majority of
drivers paid more VAT than the cyclists, when the items were new.

I'd suggest that the vast majority of drivers paid no VAT at all on their
cars. I've certainly never paid VAT on a car purchase - and I've had
several brand new cars.

How did you manage that?

That was puzzling me too. I have never paid VAT on a car but then I have
never bought a new car in nearly 40 years.

Have you never bought a second-hand car from a dealer?

Irrespective of where bought, the price of a secondhand car will include
an element of 'handing down' a portion of the VAT paid when it was new.
--
Roland Perry

NB4L production buses
 

Roland Perry wrote:
In message
, at 15:23:58 on Wed, 24 Jul 2013, Recliner remarked:
And unless there are lots of bikes costing £5k, then the majority of
drivers paid more VAT than the cyclists, when the items were new.

I'd suggest that the vast majority of drivers paid no VAT at all on their
cars. I've certainly never paid VAT on a car purchase - and I've had
several brand new cars.

How did you manage that?

That was puzzling me too. I have never paid VAT on a car but then I have
never bought a new car in nearly 40 years.

Have you never bought a second-hand car from a dealer?

Irrespective of where bought, the price of a secondhand car will include
an element of 'handing down' a portion of the VAT paid when it was new.

Indeed, and in a sense, the second-hand price will reflect the current 20%
VAT rate, not the possibly lower rate levied on the car when t was new.

NB4L production buses
 

In message , at 06:51:19 on Thu, 25
Jul 2013, Robin9 remarked:
And unless there are lots of bikes costing £5k, then the majority of
drivers paid more VAT than the cyclists, when the items were new.-

I'd suggest that the vast majority of drivers paid no VAT at all on

their
cars. I've certainly never paid VAT on a car purchase - and I've had
several brand new cars.-

How did you manage that?

As far as I know, there are two ways of doing that legally. One is to

export
the vehicle: VAT is not paid on exports. The other is to be VAT

registered
which enables you to offset all the VAT you have paid in a tax year

against
the VAT you have received from your customers/clients etc.


"When you buy a car you generally can't reclaim the VAT."

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/vat/managing/...g/motoring.htm

Perhaps the OP runs a driving school, in which case his comment wasn't
very useful to the rest of us.
--
Roland Perry

NB4L production buses
 

On Wed, 24 Jul 2013 14:25:04 -0500
wrote:
In article , d
() wrote:
Don't start the silly semantics ******** about road tax vs road fund
license. You have no choice than to pay it if you want to use your vehicle
on the road , ergo its a tax regardless of what cuddly fluffy name it
currently has.

There hasn't been any road fund licence for decades either. The renewal
reminder sitting in front of me says "tax disc".

Let me know when you're finished playing semantics there's a good chap.

I am fed up with potato heads assuming that cyclists don't also pay car
taxes.

I don't give a flying **** if you already pay for a car. You DONT pay for
your bike. Perhaps I should use that same logic with the DVLA - "Hey, I
already pay for one car, why should I have to pay for the other, I can only
drive one at a time!"

You moron.

--
Spud

NB4L production buses
 

In article
,
(Recliner) wrote:

Roland Perry wrote:
In message

,
at 15:23:58 on Wed, 24 Jul 2013, Recliner
remarked:
And unless there are lots of bikes costing £5k, then the majority
of drivers paid more VAT than the cyclists, when the items were
new.

I'd suggest that the vast majority of drivers paid no VAT at all on
their cars. I've certainly never paid VAT on a car purchase - and
I've had several brand new cars.

How did you manage that?

That was puzzling me too. I have never paid VAT on a car but then I
have never bought a new car in nearly 40 years.

Have you never bought a second-hand car from a dealer?

Irrespective of where bought, the price of a secondhand car will include
an element of 'handing down' a portion of the VAT paid when it was new.

Indeed, and in a sense, the second-hand price will reflect the current 20%
VAT rate, not the possibly lower rate levied on the car when t was new.

Not really in my price range. My current car is a T reg.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

NB4L production buses
 

On Wed, 24 Jul 2013 09:18:55 +0000, spud-u-dont-like wrote:

When cyclists pay road tax for their bikes then they can have a say in
how the roads are laid out and what they share them with. Until then
they can put up or shut up.

Since "paying road tax" is the important factor, do low-CO2 cars, older
cars, and disabled drivers somehow carry lower priority in your view?

No.

So the whole "pay road tax" thing is a red herring, then. Glad we're
agreed.

NB4L production buses
 

On Wed, 24 Jul 2013 10:39:13 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:

And unless there are lots of bikes costing £5k, then the majority of
drivers paid more VAT than the cyclists, when the items were new.

I'd suggest that the vast majority of drivers paid no VAT at all on
their cars. I've certainly never paid VAT on a car purchase - and I've
had several brand new cars.

How did you manage that?

Simple.

No VAT is payable on used cars, unless they've come straight from an
unbroken chain of VAT-registered businesses from new.

I didn't buy the new cars, they were leased company cars, bought by a VAT-
registered business. So the VAT was promptly reclaimed, and would have
been charged when the car was sold again.

The only person to pay VAT on any car is the first _private_ (or non-VAT-
reg business) owner.

NB4L production buses
 

On Wed, 24 Jul 2013 14:25:04 -0500, rosenstiel wrote:

There hasn't been any road fund licence for decades either. The renewal
reminder sitting in front of me says "tax disc".

If we're going to be pedantic about terminology, it's actually called
"Vehicle Excise Duty"

NB4L production buses
 

On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 11:43:11AM +0000, d wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 11:46:03 +0100 David Cantrell wrote:
Putting them on twisty routes through a busy city centre was stupid.
They're used like that all over europe (in plenty of cities with narrow streets
I might add) without the issues the cycling lobby and Boris claimed they had
in london. So either the europeans are all idiots or someone was telling
porkies to further their own agenda.

I wasn't thinking about the cycling lobby, but about them blocking
junctions because they're too damned long.

--
David Cantrell | even more awesome than a panda-fur coat

Computer Science is about lofty design goals and careful algorithmic
optimisation. Sysadminning is about cleaning up the resulting mess.

NB4L production buses
 

On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 01:43:17PM +0000, d wrote:

When cyclists pay road tax for their bikes then they can have a say in how the
roads are laid out and what they share them with. Until then they can put up or
shut up.

They do pay taxes which get spent on road building and maintenance.
Those taxes are called income tax, national insurance, VAT, booze duty,
and a whole load of other taxes. They even pay vehicle tax, because most
of them also have cars, and those that don't still use things that have
an element of vehicle tax in their prices, such as, well, anything sold
by any shop.

Hope that helps.

--
David Cantrell | Enforcer, South London Linguistic Massive

You can't judge a book by its cover, unless you're a religious nutcase

NB4L production buses
 

On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 12:58:39PM +0000, d wrote:

Fair point. I have no issue with cycle paths, the more the merrier as it
keeps them off the road. Better for all concerned.

Of course, fitting such things into central London is ... well, we have
a special word for it.

That word is "impossible". All the space is already taken up by narrow
pavements and busy roads.

--
David Cantrell | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david

Hail Caesar! Those about to vi ^[ you!

NB4L production buses
 

On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 06:57:04PM +0000, Adrian wrote:

There are bicycles out there on which the purchaser would pay a
considerably higher amount of VAT than they could on a new car.

Really? There exists a bicycle with a price tag over a million quid?

--
David Cantrell | A machine for turning tea into grumpiness

Disappointment:
n: No results found for "priapic dwarf custard wrestling".

NB4L production buses
 

In message , at 07:09:47
on Thu, 25 Jul 2013, remarked:
Irrespective of where bought, the price of a secondhand car will include
an element of 'handing down' a portion of the VAT paid when it was new.

Indeed, and in a sense, the second-hand price will reflect the current 20%
VAT rate, not the possibly lower rate levied on the car when t was new.

Not really in my price range. My current car is a T reg.

I agree it's just as likely to be the VAT rate when the car was new.
--
Roland Perry

NB4L production buses
 

In message , at 12:29:54 on Thu, 25 Jul
2013, Adrian remarked:
I've certainly never paid VAT on a car purchase - and I've
had several brand new cars.

How did you manage that?

Simple.

No VAT is payable on used cars, unless they've come straight from an
unbroken chain of VAT-registered businesses from new.

I didn't buy the new cars, they were leased company cars, bought by a VAT-
registered business. So the VAT was promptly reclaimed, and would have
been charged when the car was sold again.

The only person to pay VAT on any car is the first _private_ (or non-VAT-
reg business) owner.

So your justification for saying you've never paid VAT on a car purchase
it that you've never purchased a car. That's a humdinger, even for
usenet.

ps According to the HMR&C site you'll have been paying 50% of the VAT on
the leasing charge.
--
Roland Perry

NB4L production buses
 

On Thu, 25 Jul 2013 13:46:32 +0100
David Cantrell wrote:
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 01:43:17PM +0000, d wrote:

When cyclists pay road tax for their bikes then they can have a say in how
the
roads are laid out and what they share them with. Until then they can put up
or
shut up.

They do pay taxes which get spent on road building and maintenance.
Those taxes are called income tax, national insurance, VAT, booze duty,
and a whole load of other taxes.

So what? We all pay those taxes. Are cyclists doing it out of the kindness
of their hearts and so should be given special dispensation not to have to
tax their bikes?

They even pay vehicle tax, because most of them also have cars,

God almighty , how often is this idiotic excuse going to keep coming up?
ALL vehicles should be taxed. Its the VEHICLE thats taxed , NOT the driver.
If you have 2 cars you have to tax both, so if you have a car and a bike you
should have to tax the car AND the bike. Got it?

Hope that helps.

You wish.

--
Spud

NB4L production buses
 

On Thu, 25 Jul 2013 13:53:49 +0100, David Cantrell wrote:

There are bicycles out there on which the purchaser would pay a
considerably higher amount of VAT than they could on a new car.

Really? There exists a bicycle with a price tag over a million quid?

You're not very bright, are you?

Here's a clue. What I _actually_ said equates to some expensive bicycles
cost more than some cheap new cars.

NB4L production buses
 

On Thu, 25 Jul 2013 13:58:25 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:

I've certainly never paid VAT on a car purchase - and I've had several
brand new cars.

How did you manage that?

Simple.

No VAT is payable on used cars, unless they've come straight from an
unbroken chain of VAT-registered businesses from new.

I didn't buy the new cars, they were leased company cars, bought by a
VAT-
registered business. So the VAT was promptly reclaimed, and would have
been charged when the car was sold again.

The only person to pay VAT on any car is the first _private_ (or
non-VAT- reg business) owner.

So your justification for saying you've never paid VAT on a car purchase
it that you've never purchased a car.

I've never personally purchased a new car, correct.
I have, however, had several new cars.

ps According to the HMR&C site you'll have been paying 50% of the VAT on
the leasing charge.

Umm, no, because the VAT-registered company which employed me paid the
lease bill, so reclaimed the VAT on the lease cost.

NB4L production buses
 

In message , at 13:26:59 on Thu, 25 Jul
2013, Adrian remarked:
I've certainly never paid VAT on a car purchase - and I've had several
brand new cars.

How did you manage that?

Simple.

No VAT is payable on used cars, unless they've come straight from an
unbroken chain of VAT-registered businesses from new.

I didn't buy the new cars, they were leased company cars, bought by a
VAT-
registered business. So the VAT was promptly reclaimed, and would have
been charged when the car was sold again.

The only person to pay VAT on any car is the first _private_ (or
non-VAT- reg business) owner.

So your justification for saying you've never paid VAT on a car purchase
it that you've never purchased a car.

I've never personally purchased a new car, correct.
I have, however, had several new cars.

Yes we get it. You've never purchased a new car, so of course you've not
paid VAT on one.

ps According to the HMR&C site you'll have been paying 50% of the VAT on
the leasing charge.

Umm, no, because the VAT-registered company which employed me paid the
lease bill, so reclaimed the VAT on the lease cost.

Only half of it (today, anyway) according to HMR&C.

Or are you a taxi driver?
--
Roland Perry

NB4L production buses
 

In article ,
d wrote:
God almighty , how often is this idiotic excuse going to keep coming up?
ALL vehicles should be taxed.

What cost would you charge each vehicle? In proportion to the damage they
do to roads? In proportion to the pollution they emit? Equally, no matter
what the vehicle?


--
Mike Bristow

NB4L production buses
 

In message , at 16:37:38 on Thu,
25 Jul 2013, Mike Bristow remarked:
God almighty , how often is this idiotic excuse going to keep coming up?
ALL vehicles should be taxed.

What cost would you charge each vehicle? In proportion to the damage they
do to roads? In proportion to the pollution they emit?

It's normally some sort of proxy for "as much as they can afford".

eg Bigger and more expensive cars, houses etc, the more the tax is.
--
Roland Perry

NB4L production buses
 

In article , (Adrian)
wrote:

On Wed, 24 Jul 2013 14:25:04 -0500, rosenstiel wrote:

There hasn't been any road fund licence for decades either. The renewal
reminder sitting in front of me says "tax disc".

If we're going to be pedantic about terminology, it's actually called
"Vehicle Excise Duty"

I thought that which was why I looked at the missive from the DVLA. They
seem to be adding to the terminological confusion.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

. . . which is why the real way to separate cyclists from other road users is
for cyclists, as much as practicable, to use residential streets and side roads,
and to use main roads only when there is no sensible alternative. Oh, and at
busy junctions for cyclists to dismount and push their bikes.

NB4L production buses
 

On Thu, 25 Jul 2013 16:37:38 +0100
Mike Bristow wrote:
In article ,
d wrote:
God almighty , how often is this idiotic excuse going to keep coming up?
ALL vehicles should be taxed.

What cost would you charge each vehicle? In proportion to the damage they
do to roads? In proportion to the pollution they emit? Equally, no matter
what the vehicle?

Equal to the amount of specialist infrastructure they require on the highways.
If cyclists want cycle paths and routes they can pay for them, not expect them
to be funded by local councils or the london assembly.

And whats more I'd insist cyclists had some sort of formal training before
they're allowed on B roads and above. If they want to potter about in their
own backstreets fine, but if they want to ride on a numbered road they need
a license.

--
Spud

NB4L production buses
 

On 26/07/2013 06:25, Robin9 wrote:
David Cantrell;138034 Wrote:
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 12:58:39PM +0000, d
wrote:
-
Fair point. I have no issue with cycle paths, the more the merrier as
it
keeps them off the road. Better for all concerned.-

Of course, fitting such things into central London is ... well, we have
a special word for it.

That word is "impossible". All the space is already taken up by narrow
pavements and busy roads.



. . . which is why the real way to separate cyclists from other road
users is
for cyclists, as much as practicable, to use residential streets and
side roads,
and to use main roads only when there is no sensible alternative. Oh,
and at
busy junctions for cyclists to dismount and push their bikes.

The cyclists aren't usually causing a safety risk to other road users.
It would be safer to insist that motorists push their cars round junctions.


--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

NB4L production buses
 

On 26/07/2013 10:59, d wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jul 2013 16:37:38 +0100
Mike Bristow wrote:
In article ,
d wrote:
God almighty , how often is this idiotic excuse going to keep coming up?
ALL vehicles should be taxed.

What cost would you charge each vehicle? In proportion to the damage they
do to roads? In proportion to the pollution they emit? Equally, no matter
what the vehicle?

Equal to the amount of specialist infrastructure they require on the highways.
If cyclists want cycle paths and routes they can pay for them, not expect them
to be funded by local councils or the london assembly.

Cyclists don't need specialist infrastructure, other than maybe some
blue arrows on fence posts. Cyclists generally don't want cycle paths
which are designed to get them "out of the way" or exist to enable
someone to tick the "green transport" box.

There is also the risk a charge could backfire. If cyclists did pay, you
could kiss goodbye to demanding they use cycle lanes or stay in the gutter.

And whats more I'd insist cyclists had some sort of formal training before
they're allowed on B roads and above. If they want to potter about in their
own backstreets fine, but if they want to ride on a numbered road they need
a license.

Don't forget pedestrians. Even /children/ are allowed to go pretty much
where they want at the moment, with no tax, training or government
permit whatsoever.

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK