From: NM on
On 5 Dec, 17:21, Peter Grange <pe...(a)> wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 08:56:21 -0800 (PST), NM <nik.mor...(a)>
> wrote:
> >On 5 Dec, 13:57, SW <allbrankeepsyougo...(a)> wrote:
> >> On 5 Dec, 12:22, webreader <websiterea...(a)> wrote:
> >> > The simple truth is that a motorist will pay more into the system that
> >> > a cyclist, who is not a motorist, will pay (given the same personal
> >> > circumstances)
> >> The important point being that the vast majority of cyclists *are*
> >> contributing towards the costs of maintaining the highways, regardless
> >> of the method of taxation.
> >> SW
> >Not in proportion to the usage they enjoy.
> Do you perchance ever eat chocolate? If so, do you pay a chocolate
> tax?
> --
> Pete

No, can't stand the stuff.
From: dan on
NM <nik.morgan(a)> writes:

> On 5 Dec, 14:06, SW <allbrankeepsyougo...(a)> wrote:
>> Round here, £55/year of the average council tax bill is spent on the
>> highways.
> And this would be paid regardless of whether the taxpayer was a
> cyclist or not, cyclist enjoy the facillities for free thus gaining an
> advantage over other taxpayers, which makes cyclists freeloaders.

The money that I save from not running a car (£2000? £3000?) I spend on
living in a more expensive house (= bigger council tax) and buying more
toys and more beer (= more money in govt coffers from VAT and duties).

Your "all other things being equal" analysis is utterly facile, because
they never are.

From: MasonS on
On 3 Dec, 23:53, "The Medway Handyman"
<davidl...(a)> wrote:
> d...(a) wrote:
> > "The Medway Handyman" <davidl...(a)> writes:
> >> FFS.  If you want to drive a car on the road you have to have a tax
> >> disc - simple.
> > No.  If you want to drive (or keep) a car on the road, that *car* must
> > have a tax disc.  It is the vehicle keeper's responsibility to make
> > sure of this, not the driver's.
> > If it's that simple, stop getting it wrong.
> So how much is a tax disc for a push bike?
> --
> Dave - The Medway

Same as for an electric car?
Currently £0 I think.
From: mileburner on

"The Medway Handyman" <davidlang(a)> wrote in message
> mileburner wrote:
>> "The Medway Handyman" <davidlang(a)> wrote in
>> message news:NJTRm.11459$Ym4.1202(a)
>>> mileburner wrote:
>>>> But I suspect that given his remark and other comments that
>>>> cyclists are sponging freeloaders he actually has some difficulty
>>>> grasping the fact that some cyclists are also keepers of motor
>>>> vehicles and pay a variety of taxes (including VED) just like
>>>> everyone else.
>>> Which is completely & utterly irrelevant - because you don't pay a
>>> 'specific' taxe to cycle.
>> Just like a driver does not pay a 'specific' taxe to drive [sic].
> Oh what a clever boy. You spotted a minor spelling error. I'm sure mummy
> would be proud of you.

I was not actually mocking your spelling, I was mocking your point.

From: mileburner on

"NM" <nik.morgan(a)> wrote in message
> On 5 Dec, 11:34, "mileburner" <milebur...(a)> wrote:
>> "Huge" <H...(a)nowhere.much.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:7nuum0F3m7nm7U2(a)
>> > Much too long. What you mean is "Cyclists will never accept that they
>> > are
>> > freeloaders."
>> Possibly because that statement is incorrect.
>> Ho Hum...
> Looks correct from where I'm sitting

S'funny isn't it? How when you look a bit deeper, things are not always as
they first seem. The key is to look a bit deeper.