Cost of borrowing a Boris bike to double

On Friday, November 23, 2012 5:41:59 PM UTC, Dave VOR wrote:

Of course they are vehicles, I've never said they weren't. That is why
they should pay tax.


Like those cars that have zero road tax, do you mean (or do you disagree with that too)?

On 26/11/2012 08:44, PhilO wrote:
On Friday, November 23, 2012 5:41:59 PM UTC, Dave VOR wrote:

Of course they are vehicles, I've never said they weren't. That is why
they should pay tax.


Like those cars that have zero road tax, do you mean (or do you disagree with that too)?

Psycholists clearly have trouble understanding concepts like 'majority'
and things like fuel tax.

--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton, of Lancaster
University, wrote in an interim assessment of the Understanding Walking
and Cycling study. "For them, cycling is a bit embarrassing, they fail
to see its purpose, and have no interest in integrating it into their
lives, certainly on a regular basis."

On Monday, November 26, 2012 6:52:11 PM UTC, Dave VOR wrote:
On 26/11/2012 08:44, PhilO wrote:

On Friday, November 23, 2012 5:41:59 PM UTC, Dave VOR wrote:



Of course they are vehicles, I've never said they weren't. That is why
they should pay tax.



Like those cars that have zero road tax, do you mean (or do you disagree with that too)?


Psycholists clearly have trouble understanding concepts like 'majority'
and things like fuel tax.

Are you saying that zero rated road tax cars are in the minority and therefore their lack of tax paying is irrelevant?

Because the same could be said of cyclists.

Or let's tax them by today's standards:
Their emmissions mean their road tax would be zero.
No petrol, so no fuel tax.

What do you want, Dave?

On Nov 9, 8:36*am, "Mrcheerful" wrote:
Unfortunately even doubling the cost (which will reduce takeup) will not
make them break even. *Apparently the breakeven point at present is 5 times
the number of hirings.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/9660...Boris-Bikes-to...

Good - I hope that now there'll be less tourists riding the damn
things on crowded pavements, through red lights (remember those?), and
the wrong way along one way streets.

Ah - but regular bike riders are just as bad.

CJB

PhilO wrote:
On Monday, November 26, 2012 6:52:11 PM UTC, Dave VOR wrote:
On 26/11/2012 08:44, PhilO wrote:

On Friday, November 23, 2012 5:41:59 PM UTC, Dave VOR wrote:



Of course they are vehicles, I've never said they weren't. That is why
they should pay tax.



Like those cars that have zero road tax, do you mean (or do you disagree with that too)?


Psycholists clearly have trouble understanding concepts like 'majority'
and things like fuel tax.

Are you saying that zero rated road tax cars are in the minority and
therefore their lack of tax paying is irrelevant?

Because the same could be said of cyclists.

Or let's tax them by today's standards:
Their emmissions mean their road tax would be zero.
No petrol, so no fuel tax.

What do you want, Dave?

I cant speak for Dave but I can tell you that I want accountability,
registration is a way of achieving that and forcing proper insurance cover,
the amounts garnered in taxes would be piffle but would go some way to
cover the costs.

Should this occur cyclists would also benefit as now they would be seen to
be contributing, relieving somewhat the bad feeling they currently
engender.
--
ennemm

On Tuesday, November 27, 2012 11:56:36 AM UTC, nik. morgan wrote:
the amounts garnered in taxes would be piffle but would go some way to
cover the costs.


How much would you charge? Could you justify it being more than some cars pay in Road Tax (ie zero)?



Should this occur cyclists would also benefit as now they would be seen to
be contributing, relieving somewhat the bad feeling they currently
engender.


Contributing how much? More than a zero rated road tax car?

Just think of a cyclist as one less car on the road, and you'll see how much thay contribute to relieving congestion and reducing pollution already.

PhilO wrote:
On Tuesday, November 27, 2012 11:56:36 AM UTC, nik. morgan wrote:
the amounts garnered in taxes would be piffle but would go some way to
cover the costs.


How much would you charge? Could you justify it being more than some cars
pay in Road Tax (ie zero)?


No, I don't think that is the way to go, a minimum charge to register the
bike and its ownership and an annual charge to renew, bikes without current
registration and more importantly without third party insurance would not
be allowed on the road and be subject to confiscation and crushing if they
contravene. A small registration plate could be affixed to the cycle
similar to the 50cc snorfiets (sp) in The Netherlands where you purchase
the registration with the insurance component in the Post Office for about
sixty euros and get a tiny registration plate.


Should this occur cyclists would also benefit as now they would be seen to
be contributing, relieving somewhat the bad feeling they currently
engender.


Contributing how much? More than a zero rated road tax car?

Just think of a cyclist as one less car on the road, and you'll see how
much thay contribute to relieving congestion and reducing pollution already.

Sadly they do not contribute to relieving congestion that is a myth, if all
the special facilities that we motorists have funded to promote cycling
were removed the roads would be free of the obstructions they generate thus
traffic would flow more freely. I agree with you on the pollution front,
ignoring the CO2 and Methane.
--
ennemm

On 27/11/2012 13:55, PhilO wrote:
On Tuesday, November 27, 2012 11:56:36 AM UTC, nik. morgan wrote:
the amounts garnered in taxes would be piffle but would go some way to
cover the costs.


How much would you charge? Could you justify it being more than some cars pay in Road Tax (ie zero)?



Should this occur cyclists would also benefit as now they would be seen to
be contributing, relieving somewhat the bad feeling they currently
engender.


Contributing how much? More than a zero rated road tax car?

Much less.

On Tuesday, November 27, 2012 2:59:27 PM UTC, nik. morgan wrote:

No, I don't think that is the way to go, a minimum charge to register the
bike and its ownership and an annual charge to renew


Annual charge to renew means bikes would be paying more road tax than some cars.
Did you mean that?


Sadly they do not contribute to relieving congestion that is a myth, if all
the special facilities that we motorists have funded to promote cycling
were removed the roads would be free of the obstructions they generate thus
traffic would flow more freely.

Really. Most roads outside of central London have no special facilities.
Anyway, it is a myth that motorists have paid for these.
Higher rate tax payers are not entitled to better provision.

On 27/11/2012 08:50, PhilO wrote:
On Monday, November 26, 2012 6:52:11 PM UTC, Dave VOR wrote:
On 26/11/2012 08:44, PhilO wrote:

On Friday, November 23, 2012 5:41:59 PM UTC, Dave VOR wrote:



Of course they are vehicles, I've never said they weren't. That is why
they should pay tax.



Like those cars that have zero road tax, do you mean (or do you disagree with that too)?


Psycholists clearly have trouble understanding concepts like 'majority'
and things like fuel tax.

Are you saying that zero rated road tax cars are in the minority and therefore their lack of tax paying is irrelevant?

Zero rated cars are a tiny minority of motorised road users, a
concession to appease the green weird beards. Do you really think the
Guvmint would allow themselves to lose much revenue?

A tiny few cars are zero rated, many, many more cars pay higher Road Tax
- something psycholists 'conveniently' forget.

They are already starting to talk about reducing the zero rating anyway.

Because the same could be said of cyclists.

No it couldn't.

Or let's tax them by today's standards:
Their emmissions mean their road tax would be zero.

Nice to see you refer to it as Road Tax. Road Tax has nothing to do
with emissions, it's about raising revenue.

In 2008-09 motorists paid £30.2 billion in specific motoring taxes. How
much did cyclists pay? Naff all.

No petrol, so no fuel tax.

Which makes them sponging freeloaders. Even the tiny minority of zero
rated cars still pay to use the roads in fuel tax.

What do you want, Dave?

Cyclists to pay their way & be regulated like all other motorists.

--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton, of Lancaster
University, wrote in an interim assessment of the Understanding Walking
and Cycling study. "For them, cycling is a bit embarrassing, they fail
to see its purpose, and have no interest in integrating it into their
lives, certainly on a regular basis."