What taxes on other people would you support?

MisterMotivated

Mistermeaner wrote: »

I have a mountain bike so don't need roads. Get rid of cars pls and also roads. Money saved

Utterly ridiculous! The cost to get rid of the roads and build mountains everywhere instead would be phenomenal!

Norman_Castle

cells wrote: »

Oh its very possible to judge. The car industry and its links pay in the region of £40 billion a year in taxes. Those who cycle avoid that cost but its a cost to society.

Its not possible to judge someones contribution based on their choice of transport. Many adult cyclists are also car owners. A large proportion of the £40b will be from commercial enterprises paid indirectly by customers. These will include cyclists.
Will pedestrians be included in the £1300 annual charge or are they exempt?

custardy

Norman_Castle wrote: »

Its not possible to judge someones contribution based on their choice of transport. Many adult cyclists are also car owners. A large proportion of the £40b will be from commercial enterprises paid indirectly by customers. These will include cyclists.
Will pedestrians be included in the £1300 annual charge or are they exempt?

Individual doesn't pay the same tax as an entire industry, in shock news.

Norman_Castle

westernpromise wrote: »

In the same way, cycling is only virtuous provided you accept that every inch of road space they use is funded by others .

If you're living in the 1930s when Road Tax existed and theoretically funded highways then you might be right but since 1937 when Road Tax was abolished and highways became funded through general taxation, paid by all, including cyclists, then you would be wrong.

People who fail to understand highways are funded through general taxation should be taxed.

Norman_Castle

Leaf blowers, strimmers and jet washers should be taxed whenever they are used by people who are trying to look hard working or busy when in fact they are just lazily playing with a noisy machine.

Anyone who thinks summer days were created so that they can stand outside burning things or playing blaring music should be taxed. Taxed hard in the balls.

westernpromise

Cyclists are very anxious not to understand that vehicle tax is charged as a condition of access to the roads and is as such constructively a road tax. You could call it an X chromosome tax if you wanted to and you could levy it based on how many teeth you have in your head or on the girth of your unit. But the fact it is that it is a tax charge cyclists are very keen to avoid despite the huge sums spent on felching up to their selfish habit.

No cycle lane, bike rack, or accident payout has ever been funded by a levy on cyclists. They simply parasite off existing infrastructure and then argue that denying it to other people is somehow free of cost. Of course if you create a cycle lane - which cyclists never, ever pay for, either to build or use - then you clearly are as good as destroying it so far as all other road users are concerned. It's as unavailable as if it had been physically destroyed.

Tax them. Hard. It's the fair and moral thing to do.

custardy

westernpromise wrote: »

Cyclists are very anxious not to understand that vehicle tax is charged as a condition of access to the roads and is as such constructively a road tax. You could call it an X chromosome tax if you wanted to and you could levy it based on how many test you have in your head. But the fact it is that it is a tax charge cyclists are very keen to avoid despite the huge sums spent on felching up to their selfish habit.

No cycle lane, bike rack, or accident payout has ever been funded by a levy on cyclists. They simply parasite off existing infrastructure and then argue that denying it to other people is somehow free of cost. Of course if you create a cycle lane - which cyclists never, ever pay for, either to build or use - then you clearly are as good as destroying it so far as all other road users are concerned. It's as unavailable as if it had been physically destroyed.

Tax them. Hard. It's the fair and moral thing to do.

So what about vehicles that pay £0 VED?

westernpromise

No vehicle should pay £0. But cars should pay less than pushbikes because the latter are a grossly selfish and wasteful type of road user.

Norman_Castle

westernpromise wrote: »

Cyclists are very anxious not to understand that vehicle tax is charged as a condition of access to the roads and is as such constructively a road tax. You could call it an X chromosome tax if you wanted to and you could levy it based on how many teeth you have in your head or on the girth of your unit. But the fact it is that it is a tax charge cyclists are very keen to avoid despite the huge sums spent on felching up to their selfish habit.

No cycle lane, bike rack, or accident payout has ever been funded by a levy on cyclists. They simply parasite off existing infrastructure and then argue that denying it to other people is somehow free of cost. Of course if you create a cycle lane - which cyclists never, ever pay for, either to build or use - then you clearly are as good as destroying it so far as all other road users are concerned. It's as unavailable as if it had been physically destroyed.

Tax them. Hard. It's the fair and moral thing to do.

Highways are funded through general taxation paid by all including cyclists. Claiming otherwise demonstrates your ignorance.

custardy

westernpromise wrote: »

No vehicle should pay £0. But cars should pay less than pushbikes because the latter are a grossly selfish and wasteful type of road user.

Quoted for shear awesomeness.