Suicidal Cyclist

Nick_C

Strider590 wrote: »

I hate to state the obvious, but cyclists need fuel too, in the form of nutrition, energy and water. All of which they pay tax on, in the form of VAT.

I'm assuming you eat lots of take away foods, or sugary/snack foods, and drink bottles water.

You pay no VAT on tap water or proper food from the supermarket.

Nick_C

adouglasmhor wrote: »

If I buy a cake I am contributing to the costs of roads. If I drive a low emision car I pay no tax on that so amn't.

You won't be paying VED on a low emission vehicle, but you will be paying tax on the fuel.

Tobster86

Wow, we really are becoming a nation of stupid, ignorant fatties; like the one I had to deal with last night who decided to overtake me on a roundabout in order to cut me up and turn left, just to immediately catch up with a traffic jam, who's explanation was "because I was taking up a whole lane".

I cycle and am also a petrolhead who drives a V8; and no, motorists are not unreasonably taxed.

Idiophreak

Nick_C wrote: »

You won't be paying VED on a low emission vehicle, but you will be paying tax on the fuel.

I don't think that's really the point.

The point is, simply, that anyone who pays tax contributes to the roads, whether they use them or not. Some cyclists may well pay more than some motorists. Some people (imagine!) are both. As a motorist, I pay my share of fuel tax, but am quite pleased that some of that money goes to the NHS. As a cyclist, I pay council tax, PAYE, VAT etc and am happy that some of that goes toward the roads.

BeenThroughItAll

Nick_C wrote: »

You won't be paying VED on a low emission vehicle, but you will be paying tax on the fuel.

Unless it's electric... but then you're paying VAT on your electricity bill.


One way or another they'll get you.

Altarf

Idiophreak wrote: »

You could have the best, most shiney, perfect cycle path in the whole wide world (which you clearly do, well done) and I wouldn't use it - because *most* cycle paths are rubbish so I ignore all of them.

Cyclist 'logic' - Rather be dead than use a cycle path.

Idiophreak

Altarf wrote: »

Cyclist 'logic' - Rather be dead than use a cycle path.

Sorry, why would me cycling on the road equate to me being dead?

I've done a few thousand miles on the road in the last couple of years and am still not dead. It's perfectly safe...I'm perfectly entitled to ride there...So I'll ride there. Seriously, what's the problem with that 'logic'?

Idiophreak

JustinR1979 wrote: »

Both in and out of central London this morning, both at rush hour times.
Dedicated cycle paths smoother than the road, but oh no we're all having to use lane 2 as there's some complete muppet cycling along the road causing all the traffic to back up.
Thick as pigshit, deserve getting knocked off.

Thick as pigshit, deserve getting held up.

JustinR1979

Idiophreak wrote: »

Thick as pigshit, deserve getting held up.

Along with all the other 100's of people while a cockmuncher refuses to use the safer smoother cycle path?
Yeah right.


Too daft to use cyclepath, too daft to get a decent paying job and buy a car - goes hand in hand really.

Cycrow

JustinR1979 wrote: »

Both in and out of central London this morning, both at rush hour times.
Dedicated cycle paths smoother than the road, but oh no we're all having to use lane 2 as there's some complete muppet cycling along the road causing all the traffic to back up.
Thick as pigshit, deserve getting knocked off.

sounds like a motorist i had to deal with who was having a go at me for not using the "amazing" cycle lane and holding up traffic instead.

ignore the fact that the cycle lane was barely wider than my bike and full of parked cars. This driver i was holding up was actually ahead of me