From: Mark McNeill on 14 Dec 2009 08:53
Response to MasonS(a)BP.com:
> I have never said I don't use hi-vis, but it is cycling specific
> clothing, not a Navvy's vest.
Last time this subject came up I meant to wonder aloud if it was
entirely wise for cyclists to wear clothing associated with road
workers who typically don't travel at 15mph or so.
From: MasonS on 14 Dec 2009 08:59
On 14 Dec, 13:53, Mark McNeill <markonnewsgro...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> Response to Mas...(a)BP.com:
> > I have never said I don't use hi-vis, but it is cycling specific
> > clothing, not a Navvy's vest.
> Last time this subject came up I meant to wonder aloud if it was
> entirely wise for cyclists to wear clothing associated with road
> workers who typically don't travel at 15mph or so.
> Mark, UK.
Especially as most of those vests and jackets seem to overhang the
back light obscuring it, making a mockery of the whole idea.
From: MasonS on 14 Dec 2009 09:01
On 14 Dec, 09:38, Peter Grange <pe...(a)plgrange.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 08:39:32 GMT, "The Medway Handyman"
> <davidl...(a)nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> >Adrian wrote:
> >> "The Medway Handyman" <davidl...(a)nospamblueyonder.co.uk> gurgled
> >> happily, sounding much like they were saying:
> >>>> 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.
> >>> No, not really. They would have to pay a fee to cover the
> >>> inconvenience of admin.
> >> Why does that apply to one form of zero-charge VED, yet not to others?
> >Because zero rated cars still have number plates, so the pokice can check
> >they have insurance & trace them when they break traffic laws.
> >> Or do you think that all zero-charge VED should pay an "inconvenience
> >> of admin" fee?
> >No, they pay enough in VAT & fuel duty to cover it.
> Hang on, we had the VAT argument already. In your strange world VAT on
> bikes doesn't count, so wht does it on cars?
> Pete - The Tax Paying Driving Licence Owning Cyclist- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
or beer at £6-50 a litre.
From: ChelseaTractorMan on 14 Dec 2009 09:12
On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 08:11:20 +0000, johnwright <""john\"@no spam
>> Taxes by definition are not hypothecated.
>I suspect its not a matter of definition more one of policy.
No, "taxes" are raised across the community, usually according to
ability to pay.
Services are provided from taxes, broadly according to need. (that's
where policy comes in)
If a "tax" is used to offset the costs of providing a service to those
who pay the "tax" only, its not a "tax" its a "charge".
Hypothecated tax is unusual here, National Insurance comes closest.
Mike. .. .
Gone beyond the ultimate driving machine.
From: Peter Grange on 14 Dec 2009 09:13
On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 04:21:04 -0800 (PST), NM <nik.morgan(a)mac.com>
>On 14 Dec, 11:01, Peter Grange <pe...(a)plgrange.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 01:52:52 -0800 (PST), NM <nik.mor...(a)mac.com>
>> >On 14 Dec, 01:46, Phil W Lee <phil(at)lee-family(dot)me(dot)uk> wrote:
>> >> "The Medway Handyman" <davidl...(a)nospamblueyonder.co.uk> considered
>> >> Sun, 13 Dec 2009 23:34:48 GMT the perfect time to write:
>> >> >Mas...(a)BP.com wrote:
>> >> >> 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.
>> >> >No, not really. �They would have to pay a fee to cover the inconvenience of
>> >> >admin. �I'd suggest a strip on top of the melon helmet, rather like a
>> >> >mohican, �showing the number so they can be traced when they frequently
>> >> >ignore traffic rules.
>> >> >You have to earn respect. �If you want respect from van drivers, stop acting
>> >> >like a prat.
>> >> You can have compulsory registration of foam hats if you want.
>> >> It's about time that something was done to discourage them.
>> >A better idea would be a small transfer fixed to the bike frame with a
>> >bar code that shows details of the cyclists usage permit (or you could
>> >call it a riders license) and the CED (cyclists excise duty) payment
>> >also you could incorporate a COI (certificate of inspection) that
>> >would have to be renewed annually by a responsible approved repair and
>> >maintainence facility. Wardens/Police could have barcode readers that
>> >work in a similar fashion to number plate recognition systems already
>> >fitted to police cars.
>> So a barcode reader is going to pick up this small transfer as the
>> cyclist whizzes by? One of the arguments for cycle registration from
>> the loony motorist fringe is that each of the thousands of pedestrians
>> injured by cyclists each year can note the number plate of the errant
>> cyclist. Some chance with your small transfer. When I got hit by a car
>> I foolishly omitted to note the registration number of the car as I
>> passed over the bonnet, so that works well too.
>> >These measures would go a long way to making cycling safer for all
>> >which is of course what we all want isn't it?
>> >In time all this will come, via the EU.
>> Oh yes, lots of EU countries have such a scheme. Can't think of one
>> offhand, but I'm sure they do.
>> <bump> oh, back on earth again.
>That's the problem you can't think. there are those who lobby for
>legislation on these matters it will only be a matter of time before
>controls will be introduced on the grounds of safety of course.
Who are "those", you & Judith?