anti-cycling rants

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
axel_knutt
Posts: 2869
Joined: 11 Jan 2007, 12:20pm

Re: anti-cycling rants

Post by axel_knutt »

Traction_man wrote: 23 Oct 2021, 10:34am Seen on Twitter

IMG_20211023_103334.jpg
The 'no such thing as road tax' argument irritates me intensely, it's just making us look silly. They don't care what the name of the tax is, they care that they're paying it and we aren't. I've found that whenever there's a comment about road tax, telling them that non-motorists are subsidising motorists, and hitting them with this shuts them up first time every time:
Cost Coverage Ratio Cropped.jpg
I suspect that it might be the sight of Denmark that makes them go all quiet.
“I'm not upset that you lied to me, I'm upset that from now on I can't believe you.”
― Friedrich Nietzsche
cycle tramp
Posts: 3482
Joined: 5 Aug 2009, 7:22pm

Re: anti-cycling rants

Post by cycle tramp »

axel_knutt wrote: 23 Oct 2021, 2:25pm
The 'no such thing as road tax' argument irritates me intensely, it's just making us look silly. They don't care what the name of the tax is, they care that they're paying it and we aren't.
H'mm... actually everyone is paying it, it's just that powered vehicles attract vehicle exercise duty...
...so all roads which are not trunk roads or motorways are maintained by your local county council. If you are paying council tax then a proportion of this will go to its maintenance and new construction (barring new road developments under section 106, or grants, loans or other monies provided by central government)...
..trunk roads and motorways are paid by Central Government from its fund payments to which include VAT which you pay on all taxable goods. Vehicle exercise duty also goes into this fund. However because these payments are not ring-fenced the money paid for this duty could also be spent on nuclear submarines, civil servant wages, or anything else the government decides....
So any VAT paid on cycling goods might actually be used to fund motorway repairs and equally any money spent on vehicle exercise duty may be spent by the government as a grant to local authorities to build cycle lanes :-)
It's time to go :-)
ChrisButch
Posts: 1187
Joined: 24 Feb 2009, 12:10pm

Re: anti-cycling rants

Post by ChrisButch »

axel_knutt wrote: 23 Oct 2021, 2:25pm

The 'no such thing as road tax' argument irritates me intensely, it's just making us look silly. They don't care what the name of the tax is, they care that they're paying it and we aren't. I've found that whenever there's a comment about road tax, telling them that non-motorists are subsidising motorists, and hitting them with this shuts them up first time every time:
Cost Coverage Ratio Cropped.jpg
I suspect that it might be the sight of Denmark that makes them go all quiet.
It would be helpful to have an explanation of the parameters in that chart. What are the 'internalisation measures' referred to? What are the 'external costs'?
User avatar
simonineaston
Posts: 7993
Joined: 9 May 2007, 1:06pm
Location: ...at a cricket ground

Re: anti-cycling rants

Post by simonineaston »

Here's how it is.
Some folks see that it's possible to follow a gentle, flexible, sustainable - and usually slow - way. Most folks want their needs to be met quickly.
The consequence is that all resources will be used up quicker than they can be replaced. Get used to that - or think of an alternative.
S
(on the look out for Armageddon, on board a Brompton nano & ever-changing Moultons)
User avatar
gazza_d
Posts: 452
Joined: 30 Oct 2016, 8:20am

Re: anti-cycling rants

Post by gazza_d »

I agree about arguing about name of "road tax". Whether we like it or not the term is in common use and refers to car tax, or more accurately VED. Most realise electric cars don't pay any, but a lot of fossil fuel cars don't including mine.

The "road tax" argument usually falls into one of two camps.
1. I pay tax and you don't *stamps feet* jealousy mode. Who are usually just complete idiots. Some can be educated but it's a lot of effort for little gain

2. The "If cyclists paid road tax and insurance they'd be safe" camp. This scares me a little as it is bullies basically advocating for a protection racket on our roads. It is quite worrying when the "celeb" professional haters get wheeled out on telly to spout this guff

I don't think it's worthwhile engaging with almost any of these clowns as their views are usually very entrenched and not at all limited to just tax as they often just hate that the person in front is on a bike. The best defence is to ignore. Do not let them live rent free in your head!

They are generally a loud minority and most are not as extreme or as vocal. They're loud because they are losing mindshare and territory, albeit slowly in some areas. Fight by being pro cycling in any consultations in your area and by engaging with councillors, MPs, and officer as appropriate. We need a vocal majority who want safer space
3speednut
Posts: 73
Joined: 6 Apr 2015, 7:32pm

Re: anti-cycling rants

Post by 3speednut »

Imagine this, if all cyclist payed VED do you really think other road users would veiw us differently and treat us with respect, NOT A CHANCE, the road tax thing is just a lazy way to attack cyclist without them thinking to hard.
pga
Posts: 302
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 9:40pm

Re: anti-cycling rants

Post by pga »

Of course few motorists, and sadly few cyclists, realise that is was invention of the safety bicycle and the pneumatic tyre that led to the early cyclists campaigning successfully for the paved roads that all road users enjoy today. They also invented the motor car and the aeroplane.
Mike Sales
Posts: 7860
Joined: 7 Mar 2009, 3:31pm

Re: anti-cycling rants

Post by Mike Sales »

ChrisButch wrote: 23 Oct 2021, 8:20pm
It would be helpful to have an explanation of the parameters in that chart. What are the 'internalisation measures' referred to? What are the 'external costs'?
Here is a definition of external costs in the economic sense.
External costs (also known as externalities) refer to the economic concept of uncompensated social or environmental effects. For example, when people buy fuel for a car, they pay for the production of that fuel (an internal cost), but not for the costs of burning that fuel, such as air pollution.
Consumption, production, and investment decisions of individuals, households, and firms often affect people not directly involved in the transactions. Sometimes these indirect effects are tiny. But when they are large they can become problematic—what economists call externalities. Externalities are among the main reasons governments intervene in the economic sphere.
It is significant that road transport is often used as a good example to illustrate the concept.

These costs are high, and paid by us all.
The perennial complaint from drivers that they are excessively taxed has been challenged by a study which concludes that road accidents, pollution and noise connected to cars costs every EU citizen more than £600 a year.

The report by transport academics at the Dresden Technical University in Germany calculated that even with drivers' insurance contributions discounted these factors amounted to an annual total of €373bn (£303bn) across the 27 EU member states, or around 3% of the bloc's entire yearly GDP. This breaks down as €750 per man, woman and child.

The report recommends that such so-called externalities be factored into the cost of driving, noting that even the €373bn tally does not include costs from congestion or ill health caused by lack of exercise.
Internalisation measures are measures to charge these costs to those who benefit from the economic activity, because otherwise there is a distortion of the market.
It's the same the whole world over
It's the poor what gets the blame
It's the rich what gets the pleasure
Isn't it a blooming shame?
prestavalve
Posts: 126
Joined: 24 Dec 2020, 8:03pm

Re: anti-cycling rants

Post by prestavalve »

simonineaston wrote: 23 Oct 2021, 9:26pm Here's how it is.
Some folks see that it's possible to follow a gentle, flexible, sustainable - and usually slow - way. Most folks want their needs to be met quickly.
The consequence is that all resources will be used up quicker than they can be replaced. Get used to that - or think of an alternative.
Folk think what they are told to think by the world around them. Most folks, in the history of humanity, have never thought in this way or ever had such expectations. The superstructures that have arisen from the economics of our world are so profoundly pervasive that it will be impossible to genuinely overturn them without a violent restriction of what people think of as their freedoms. Whatever any positive forces want to do is going to get bent into the shape of the powers that be, because Facebook can filter public opinion and we are stupid and lazy and so on...

Violent revolution would be good in my opinion. But Joanna Lumley has a point with her rationing idea (buy chicken coop futures guys - Amazon is going to sell out of henhouses, just you watch).
User avatar
SupermanVsSnowman
Posts: 36
Joined: 23 Sep 2021, 7:56am

Re: anti-cycling rants

Post by SupermanVsSnowman »

Do I dare post the swearing Clarkson rant on cyclists? (actually no). Ironically as a cyclist myself I find his moaning rather funny. Nobody can rant better than Clarkson, regardless of how big the the end part of a bell he may be.
OH CACK! I just dropped my d-lock, shattering the JWST primary mirrors! I'll just say I was on the toilet when I heard something smash.
ChrisP100
Posts: 298
Joined: 24 Sep 2020, 9:00am

Re: anti-cycling rants

Post by ChrisP100 »

There seems to be a lot of anti-cycling rants on Twitter (yes I know... Twitter :lol: ). There was one thread I was following yesterday where some guy was essentially victim blaming a cyclist who had been 'car doored'.

I follow Jeremy Vine on there and he posts some pretty horrendous video clips. He doesn't half get a lot of abuse from angry uninformed motorists though; fair play to him.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20297
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: anti-cycling rants

Post by mjr »

ChrisP100 wrote: 5 Nov 2021, 9:11am There seems to be a lot of anti-cycling rants on Twitter (yes I know... Twitter :lol: ). There was one thread I was following yesterday where some guy was essentially victim blaming a cyclist who had been 'car doored'.
I often find doorings difficult to comment on because my view is that you should basically almost never be riding in the door zone.* Of course, the driver is responsible for the door being opened into traffic, but the collision could be avoided by more careful cycling.

* and councils who paint door zone cycle lanes should be made to pay compensation to everyone who suffers as a result, to concentrate their minds on fixing them.
I follow Jeremy Vine on there and he posts some pretty horrendous video clips. He doesn't half get a lot of abuse from angry uninformed motorists though; fair play to him.
I still wonder if he attracts it as a fairly recognisible person. It's been months since I had a proper bit of abuse.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
cycle tramp
Posts: 3482
Joined: 5 Aug 2009, 7:22pm

Re: anti-cycling rants

Post by cycle tramp »

SupermanVsSnowman wrote: 2 Nov 2021, 12:02pm Do I dare post the swearing Clarkson rant on cyclists? (actually no). Ironically as a cyclist myself I find his moaning rather funny. Nobody can rant better than Clarkson, regardless of how big the the end part of a bell he may be.
Yeah but his anger and his ranting have taken a toll on his health. Have you seen him? He's in his early sixties apparently, looks like he's in his late eighties or early nineties. Whenever he speaks or rants I just feel sorry for the guy.. it's like the sound of a plaintiff dinosaur watching the oncoming comet
It's time to go :-)
User avatar
Hellhound
Posts: 756
Joined: 19 May 2021, 7:39am

Re: anti-cycling rants

Post by Hellhound »

cycle tramp wrote: 6 Nov 2021, 9:24pm
SupermanVsSnowman wrote: 2 Nov 2021, 12:02pm Do I dare post the swearing Clarkson rant on cyclists? (actually no). Ironically as a cyclist myself I find his moaning rather funny. Nobody can rant better than Clarkson, regardless of how big the the end part of a bell he may be.
Yeah but his anger and his ranting have taken a toll on his health. Have you seen him? He's in his early sixties apparently, looks like he's in his late eighties or early nineties. Whenever he speaks or rants I just feel sorry for the guy.. it's like the sound of a plaintiff dinosaur watching the oncoming comet
That could be all the years old good living,smoking,drinking and generally being unfit.
I think he's aged a lot in the last 5 years or so.
fastpedaller
Posts: 3433
Joined: 10 Jul 2014, 1:12pm
Location: Norfolk

Re: anti-cycling rants

Post by fastpedaller »

Haven't we all aged a lot in the last 2 years? the covid years (and still ongoing, lest some forget)
Post Reply