Cyclists above the law
in [UK Drivers]
|
Prev: Cunting lorry drivers.
Next: Britain's scariest roads
From: JNugent on 1 Dec 2009 11:29 Peter Grange wrote: > On Tue, 1 Dec 2009 14:54:28 -0000, Conor <conor(a)gmx.co.uk> wrote: > >> In article <fus9h59nvqpsehu8gv4j8tjbo1n9sei71v(a)4ax.com>, Peter Grange >> says... >>> On Tue, 1 Dec 2009 10:39:53 -0000, Conor <conor(a)gmx.co.uk> wrote: >>> >>>> In article <thq9h59v48poocktlfvm2objdp7orclqs3(a)4ax.com>, Peter Grange >>>> says... >>>> = >>>>> More bollocks. >>>> So what direct costs do you pay to maintain the roads, bearing in mind >>>> that taxation on motor vehicles is eight times the road maintenance and >>>> buiding budget? >>> Income tax, VAT, VED on my car, to name but 3. >> As revenue from motor vehicles covers the costs of the roads more than >> eightfold, what proportion of your income tax and VAT you pay goes to >> subsidise the roads? > > I have no idea. If you ask your MP nicely he'll ask a question in > Parliament to find out if you really want to know. > > One thing I am certain of though. > The "eightfold" argument is a fallacy. VED is a tax imposed on someone > who wants to run a car. It's got absolutely nothing to do with the > cost of building or maintaining the roads. Neither has the price of a night at the Ritz got anything to do with the cost of building. But it is nevertheless the source of the funds from which the building is financed.
From: Conor on 1 Dec 2009 11:35 In article <d10bcc96-43e5-4b50-b69c-8e59983b6128 @b15g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>, SW says... > > On 1 Dec, 15:23, Conor <co...(a)gmx.co.uk> wrote: > > In article <9d33e176-16e0-4113-8190- > > 918d191b1...(a)j19g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>, SW says... > > > > > > That is a weak argument, import duty on a foreign manufactured bike or > > > > bike parts allows rights to use the UK road system paid and maintained > > > > by vehicle users. FFS. > > > > > And Council Tax payers. > > > > Nope. The road maintenance budget comes from central government. > > > > From my local council's budget report: > > COUNCIL INVESTMENT > Better roads and pavements; > a capital investment of �5.2m in the highway network, over and above > any support > from government. > Because they've chosen to. And its for both pavements and roads. In Bridlington, they spent �600,000 putting down paving stones around the newly refurbished Spa Royal Hall and they're now in the process of ripping them up less than a year later and replacing them with a different coloured stone because they've decided the new colour would look better. So that's �1.2m spent on paving one short 300 yard stretch of pavement. -- Conor www.notebooks-r-us.co.uk I'm not prejudiced. I hate everybody equally.
From: Conor on 1 Dec 2009 11:36 In article <ugdah5ppnpfpbeinvavrit9cm2gurda96i(a)4ax.com>, Peter Grange says... > >Certainly the case in Leeds and Hull where dual carriageway roads were > >turned into single lane ones in order to provide a cycle lane which > >mostly goes unused. > > I'm probably on your side on that one, although I don't know the roads > you refer to. In Hull, its the main commuter routes into the city. > > Lots of people post here to point out that as cyclists often aren't > consulted before many cycle lanes/tracks are built, many are mostly > unused. If some time was spent to ensure the cycle lane is built to > make it useful for cyclists and convenient for other road users the > money would be better spent (wherever it comes from). > Surely you'd expect ones on main routes and around the university to be used a lot. -- Conor www.notebooks-r-us.co.uk I'm not prejudiced. I hate everybody equally.
From: Conor on 1 Dec 2009 11:37 In article <7nks0mF3lm7bvU1(a)mid.individual.net>, Mark McNeill says... > > Response to Conor: > > > > > Cyclists are the problem, they & their poxy cycle lanes cause > > > > delays & traffic jams for motorists who put their hands in their > > > > pockets. > > > > > > You mean those long tailbacks of cars I overtake on my bike every > > > day are caused by cyclists ?! > > > > Certainly the case in Leeds and Hull where dual carriageway roads > > were turned into single lane ones in order to provide a cycle lane > > which mostly goes unused. > > Wow. And when you see bad road design, do you blame motorists? > Cyclists campaigned for them. -- Conor www.notebooks-r-us.co.uk I'm not prejudiced. I hate everybody equally.
From: Conor on 1 Dec 2009 11:37
In article <7nkstuF3jkdn1U23(a)mid.individual.net>, Adrian says... > Well, we _could_ get into the detail of relative road loadings of various > vehicle types, but I don't think Conor would appreciate that very much. Not really. The financial benefit to the economy that trucks provide far exceeds that collected in taxation. -- Conor www.notebooks-r-us.co.uk I'm not prejudiced. I hate everybody equally. |