From: ChelseaTractorMan on
On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 16:14:48 GMT, "The Medway Handyman"
<davidlang(a)nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

>Don't attempt to think, it is clearly beyond your abilities. However much
>you attampt to twist it, cyclists don't pay a specific tax to use the roads.
>Note 'specific'.

you still do not understand the meaning of "tax".
--
Mike. .. .
Gone beyond the ultimate driving machine.
From: DavidR on
<MasonS(a)BP.com> wrote > - Show quoted text -

> Would it be OK if all of country's millions of bicycles, which would
> be in VED band A (Fee = �0), got a stamped round bit of paper from the
> Post Office and stuck it on their frames? Would that do it for you? I
> wouldn't mind if it made van drivers gave me more respect on the road.

Come off it, if people riding bikes paid a "road" tax, had "proper"
insurance (given that the cover in domestic policies doesn't count in some
minds), obeyed every rule in the book and always wore helmets and hi-viz,
some "motorists" would still find something to complain about.



From: Judith M Smith on
On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 00:44:03 +0000, Peter Grange
<peter(a)plgrange.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 23:02:12 +0000, Judith M Smith
><judithmsmith(a)live.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 03 Dec 2009 00:06:45 +0000, Peter Grange
>><peter(a)plgrange.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 02 Dec 2009 23:52:52 GMT, "The Medway Handyman"
>>><davidlang(a)nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>><snip>
>>
>>
>>>>Even better, HMRC should insist you cyclists pay your way.
>>>
>>>Well, why don't you put your stupid proposals to them then insead of
>>>looking like a prat here. Post your reply, I'm sure all cyclists would
>>>be interested to hear what they said.
>>
>>
>>I have written with my suggestions and my MP is very interested - they
>>will be taken up with the DfT:
>>
>>All cyclists over 16 who wish to ride on public roads must take and
>>pass a written test based on the Highway Code and basic cycle
>>maintenance; passing the test entitles them to a cycle licence and
>>gives them a cyclist registration number.
>>
>>Cyclists over the age of 16 must not ride on public roads unless they
>>possess a cycle licence.
>>
>>Cyclists over the age of 16 must not ride on public roads unless they
>>possess third party liability insurance.
>>
>>Cyclists over the age of 16 must only ride cycles which conform to
>>some required standards when on public roads
>>
>>Cyclists over the age of 16 must not ride on public roads unless they
>>wear a hi-viz outer garment (or slip on vest) on the back of which is
>>clearly displayed their cyclist registration number.
>>
>>The cycles of habitual cycling law breakers will be confiscated and
>>crushed.
>>
>>(With many thanks to KeithT for the ideas)
>>
>And you have every right to do that, but I repeat, why don't you put
>your stupid proposals to them instead of posting like a prat here.


I am sorry - I thought that cyclists may be interested in ideas which
may affect their future.

Is this not the case?

From: mileburner on
ChelseaTractorMan wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 16:14:48 GMT, "The Medway Handyman"
> <davidlang(a)nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Don't attempt to think, it is clearly beyond your abilities.
>> However much you attampt to twist it, cyclists don't pay a specific
>> tax to use the roads. Note 'specific'.
>
> you still do not understand the meaning of "tax".

A dirty word among small time tradesmen - apparently.


From: johnwright ""john" on
ChelseaTractorMan wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Nov 2009 15:26:25 +0000, David Hansen
> <SENDdavidNOhSPAM(a)spidacom.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> That's beside the point. Some people imply (and many believe them)
>> that something wrongly called road tax is used to pay for roads.
>
> Taxes by definition are not hypothecated.


I suspect its not a matter of definition more one of policy.

--

I'm not apathetic... I just don't give a sh** anymore

?John Wright