From: Adrian on
"mileburner" <mileburner(a)btinternet.com> gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying:

>>>>> Re-read the whole original sentence (the one you cut short) which
>>>>> you are trying to make an argument out of.

>>>> Yes, gladly.

>>> You failed

>> That'll be why you snipped the relevant bit, then?

> You still failed - keep digging...

Fine. Perhaps you'd be so kind as to enlighten me as to how use of a
bicycle affects income tax, council tax and the VAT you pay on non-
directly-cycling purchases?

>> >> > Not true. As a cyclist I pay income tax, council tax, VAT

>> NO, YOU DO NOT PAY THOSE AS A CYCLIST. Your cycling is IRRELEVANT to
>> those.

>> >> > and specifically for cycling, import duty on the components of my
>> >> > all bikes in addition to the VAT.

>> Correct - and I've already asked you roughly how much that comes to in
>> an average year - which you don't appear to have answered yet.
From: NM on
On 1 Dec, 10:07, Peter Grange <pe...(a)plgrange.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 23:49:50 -0800 (PST), NM <nik.mor...(a)mac.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On 1 Dec, 07:11, "mileburner" <milebur...(a)btinternet.com> wrote:
> >> "The Medway Handyman" <davidl...(a)nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote in messagenews:uwZQm.10410$Ym4.451(a)text.news.virginmedia.com...
>
> >> > SW wrote:
> >> >> On 30 Nov, 01:02, "The Medway Handyman"
> >> >> <davidl...(a)nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> >> >>> Peter Grange wrote:
> >> >>>> On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 22:25:03 +0000, %ste...(a)malloc.co.uk (Steve
> >> >>>> Firth) wrote:
>
> >> >>>>> Peter Grange <pe...(a)plgrange.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >> >>>>>>> Here's something you could try to test the theory. Stop the next
> >> >>>>>>> pavement cyclist that you see and ask them to ride where they
> >> >>>>>>> belong.
>
> >> >>>>>> Try telling the next motorist parked on the pavement to get his
> >> >>>>>> hulking great car off the pavement and on the street where it
> >> >>>>>> belongs.
>
> >> >>>>> When I see a driver driving down the pavement at 25mph I shall tell
> >> >>>>> them off.
>
> >> >>>> Good luck with stopping him.
>
> >> >>> Wouldn't need to. Cars have registration plates & can be easily
> >> >>> identified if they break the law. Cyclists don't, because they don't
> >> >>> pay to use the roads.
>
> >> >> Unless they pay council tax.
>
> >> > Motorists also pay council tax - and road tax.
>
> >> Whoop-de-do!
>
> >> Although on the local housing estate where plenty of the residents are
> >> unemployed and live on benefits and do not pay council tax, they still
> >> manage to run untaxed cars on the road.
>
> >Clearly all the residents you mention are breaking the law with the
> >same impunity as most cyclists.
>
> How come, aren't they all easily traceable?

According to mileburner all cyclists are tracable.
From: Peter Grange on
On Tue, 1 Dec 2009 05:56:11 -0800 (PST), NM <nik.morgan(a)mac.com>
wrote:

>On 1 Dec, 10:07, Peter Grange <pe...(a)plgrange.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 23:49:50 -0800 (PST), NM <nik.mor...(a)mac.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >On 1 Dec, 07:11, "mileburner" <milebur...(a)btinternet.com> wrote:
>> >> "The Medway Handyman" <davidl...(a)nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote in messagenews:uwZQm.10410$Ym4.451(a)text.news.virginmedia.com...
>>
>> >> > SW wrote:
>> >> >> On 30 Nov, 01:02, "The Medway Handyman"
>> >> >> <davidl...(a)nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>> >> >>> Peter Grange wrote:
>> >> >>>> On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 22:25:03 +0000, %ste...(a)malloc.co.uk (Steve
>> >> >>>> Firth) wrote:
>>
>> >> >>>>> Peter Grange <pe...(a)plgrange.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> >> >>>>>>> Here's something you could try to test the theory. Stop the next
>> >> >>>>>>> pavement cyclist that you see and ask them to ride where they
>> >> >>>>>>> belong.
>>
>> >> >>>>>> Try telling the next motorist parked on the pavement to get his
>> >> >>>>>> hulking great car off the pavement and on the street where it
>> >> >>>>>> belongs.
>>
>> >> >>>>> When I see a driver driving down the pavement at 25mph I shall tell
>> >> >>>>> them off.
>>
>> >> >>>> Good luck with stopping him.
>>
>> >> >>> Wouldn't need to. Cars have registration plates & can be easily
>> >> >>> identified if they break the law. Cyclists don't, because they don't
>> >> >>> pay to use the roads.
>>
>> >> >> Unless they pay council tax.
>>
>> >> > Motorists also pay council tax - and road tax.
>>
>> >> Whoop-de-do!
>>
>> >> Although on the local housing estate where plenty of the residents are
>> >> unemployed and live on benefits and do not pay council tax, they still
>> >> manage to run untaxed cars on the road.
>>
>> >Clearly all the residents you mention are breaking the law with the
>> >same impunity as most cyclists.
>>
>> How come, aren't they all easily traceable?
>
>According to mileburner all cyclists are tracable.

I guess I should come out with some random piece of latin at this
point but it would be wasted.
From: mileburner on

"Adrian" <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7nkh1sF3jkdn1U10(a)mid.individual.net...
> "mileburner" <mileburner(a)btinternet.com> gurgled happily, sounding much
> like they were saying:
>
>>>>>> Re-read the whole original sentence (the one you cut short) which
>>>>>> you are trying to make an argument out of.
>
>>>>> Yes, gladly.
>
>>>> You failed
>
>>> That'll be why you snipped the relevant bit, then?
>
>> You still failed - keep digging...
>
> Fine. Perhaps you'd be so kind as to enlighten me as to how use of a
> bicycle affects income tax, council tax and the VAT you pay on non-
> directly-cycling purchases?

I am unable to help you with the answers to your rather bizarre and twisted
argument.

Keep digging :-)


From: mileburner on

"NM" <nik.morgan(a)mac.com> wrote in message
news:a59ea90c-71e4-42b8-9875-f9865a57f39b(a)v30g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
>
> According to mileburner all cyclists are tracable.

According to NM all cyclists live on council estates, are unemployed and
live on benefits.