"Traffic noise kills"

JNugent wrote:

...yawn

Heard it all before.

Yes, I have thank you.

....zzz

On 8 Oct, 16:12, JNugent wrote:
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:

On Wed, 7 Oct 2009 23:04:18 -0700 (PDT), PeterG
wrote:

Because i'm sure cyclists contribute as much motorists, don't they?

Rather more, as it happens. *Cyclists are more likely to have above
average income and the damage done by vehicles to the road goes with
the fourth power of axle weight.

What?

Roads are funded out of general taxation. *Cyclists pay just like
anybody else...

...yawn

Heard it all before.

It's always rubbish and everyone always knows it.

The fact that person A (who happens to be a cyclist) pays income tax,
national "insurance", VAT, council tax, air travel duty, insurance tax,
alcohol duty, tobacco duty, road tax (on a motor vehicle) or fuel duty and
VAT (for fuel for a motor vehicle) does *not* mean that he has paid a penny
in tax as a cyclist. In fact, some cyclists quite lawfully pay no taxes
whatsoever.

So you mean that when a cyclist is cycling they are not in fact a
cyclist, contrary to what some motorists here try to make me believe?

Explain how someone can lawfully pay no taxes whatsoever.

That fact that person B (who, whether or not he is a cyclist, is the owner
and/or driver of a motor vehicle) *automatically* means (in the absence of an
offence) that he is paying taxes as a vehicle-owner or as a vehicle-user.
That of course, will be in *addition* to all the normal, everyday
non-nmotoring taxes that everyone in a taxable position has to pay.

The additional taxes that motorist pay, over and above the taxation
that non-motorists also have to pay, barely if at all cover all the
harm they cause, if you take into account free 24/7 street garaging,
congestion, pollution, their crash victims and road wear and tear.

--
World Carfree Network
http://www.worldcarfree.net/
Help for your car-addicted friends in the U.K.

JNugent writes:

The fact that person A (who happens to be a cyclist) pays income tax,
national "insurance", VAT, council tax, air travel duty, insurance
tax, alcohol duty, tobacco duty, road tax (on a motor vehicle) or fuel
duty and VAT (for fuel for a motor vehicle) does *not* mean that he
has paid a penny in tax as a cyclist. In fact, some cyclists quite
lawfully pay no taxes whatsoever.

That fact that person B (who, whether or not he is a cyclist, is the
owner and/or driver of a motor vehicle) *automatically* means (in the
absence of an offence) that he is paying taxes as a vehicle-owner or
as a vehicle-user. That of course, will be in *addition* to all the
normal, everyday non-motoring taxes that everyone in a taxable
position has to pay.

And this makes any difference to anything how? One, the tax that B pays
as a motorist is not hypothecated; two, you don't know how or whether or
on what person A is spending the money which he may have saved by not
paying motorist taxes and whether any tax is due on that spending;
three, the bare fact that A has contributed £x and B has contributed £y
where y *may* exceed x to the tax system no more entitles B to claim any
more right to use the road network than A than get his bins emptied
twice as often. Would you say that a company director has more right to
use the roads than a minimum-wage shelf stacker?

We have, as you commented, done this before. It's a complete irrelevance


-dan

JNugent wrote:
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:

On Wed, 7 Oct 2009 23:04:18 -0700 (PDT), PeterG
wrote:

Because i'm sure cyclists contribute as much motorists, don't they?

Rather more, as it happens. Cyclists are more likely to have above
average income and the damage done by vehicles to the road goes with
the fourth power of axle weight.

What?

Roads are funded out of general taxation. Cyclists pay just like
anybody else...

...yawn

Heard it all before.

It's always rubbish and everyone always knows it.

I only have to find one person who does not know it to falsify that
statement. Ping. done. It was easy as the statement is not rubbish just
like many things you just don't like the answer.



The fact that person A (who happens to be a cyclist) pays income tax,
national "insurance", VAT, council tax, air travel duty, insurance tax,
alcohol duty, tobacco duty, road tax (on a motor vehicle) or fuel duty
and VAT (for fuel for a motor vehicle) does *not* mean that he has paid
a penny in tax as a cyclist. In fact, some cyclists quite lawfully pay
no taxes whatsoever.


That fact that person B (who, whether or not he is a cyclist, is the
owner and/or driver of a motor vehicle) *automatically* means (in the
absence of an offence) that he is paying taxes as a vehicle-owner or as
a vehicle-user. That of course, will be in *addition* to all the normal,
everyday non-nmotoring taxes that everyone in a taxable position has to
pay.

and your point is?

Roads are still funded from general taxation.

Chris Gerhard wrote:
JNugent wrote:

snip


The fact that person A (who happens to be a cyclist) pays income tax,
national "insurance", VAT, council tax, air travel duty, insurance
tax, alcohol duty, tobacco duty, road tax (on a motor vehicle) or fuel
duty and VAT (for fuel for a motor vehicle) does *not* mean that he
has paid a penny in tax as a cyclist. In fact, some cyclists quite
lawfully pay no taxes whatsoever.


That fact that person B (who, whether or not he is a cyclist, is the
owner and/or driver of a motor vehicle) *automatically* means (in the
absence of an offence) that he is paying taxes as a vehicle-owner or
as a vehicle-user. That of course, will be in *addition* to all the
normal, everyday non-nmotoring taxes that everyone in a taxable
position has to pay.

and your point is?

Roads are still funded from general taxation.

I think his point is that we (cyclists) are parasitic scum like the
drivers of low emission vehicles, passengers in cars and buses, horse
riders and pedestrians.

--
Roger Thorpe

....Wait a minute, It's stopped raining/
Guys are swimming, guys are sailing.....

On 9 Oct, 10:24, Roger Thorpe
wrote:
Chris Gerhard wrote:
JNugent wrote:

snip





The fact that person A (who happens to be a cyclist) pays income tax,
national "insurance", VAT, council tax, air travel duty, insurance
tax, alcohol duty, tobacco duty, road tax (on a motor vehicle) or fuel
duty and VAT (for fuel for a motor vehicle) does *not* mean that he
has paid a penny in tax as a cyclist. In fact, some cyclists quite
lawfully pay no taxes whatsoever.

That fact that person B (who, whether or not he is a cyclist, is the
owner and/or driver of a motor vehicle) *automatically* means (in the
absence of an offence) that he is paying taxes as a vehicle-owner or
as a vehicle-user. That of course, will be in *addition* to all the
normal, everyday non-nmotoring taxes that everyone in a taxable
position has to pay.

and your point is?

Roads are still funded from general taxation.

I think his point is that we (cyclists) are parasitic scum like the
drivers of low emission vehicles, passengers in cars and buses, horse
riders and pedestrians.

Be fair, it must be difficult for people who pollute and congest so
much, while posing a significant risk to other people. They have to
have someone to blame in order to continue living with themselves.
After all, what would you do if you were in their position? They can
hardly kick their habit just like that overnight and there is no rehab
for car addicts. Actually, that is not a bad idea! And before anyone
tries to scoff, you can become addicted to almost anything. Try
Googling for Aquaholics, so why not Autoholics?

Just found this, http://www.autoholics.org/ which is a step in the
right direction though hardly a drop-in clinic, as yet.

--
World Carfree Network
http://www.worldcarfree.net/
Help for your car-addicted friends in the U.K.