Do you believe cyclists do not drive also, thereby paying those taxes? (Other than one friend I knew back in the day who is a unicorn.)Cyclists, in fact, do not pay taxes that go to roads.
"There are a number of programs that distribute funding to local units of governments for the purposes of assisting them in the building and maintenance of roads and streets. The sources of revenue for these programs are the state gasoline tax, the special fuels tax, vehicle license fees, state court fees and several smaller sources of revenue."
State gasoline tax: not paid by cyclists.
Special fuels tax: not paid by cyclists.
Vehicle license fees: not paid by cyclists.
State court fees: not paid by cyclists. (I assume these are traffic court-related fees.)
So, what you're saying is that motorists pay those taxes? Thanks for confirming.Do you believe cyclists do not drive also, thereby paying those taxes? (Other than one friend I knew back in the day who is a unicorn.)
Talk about points in minutiae…So, what you're saying is that motorists pay those taxes? Thanks for confirming.
Cyclists who have paid those taxes have done so by virtue of being motorists, not cyclists. It is entirely conceivable that someone may own a bicycle while also not owning a motor vehicle.
It’s better if you just don’t take the thread seriously. It’s been entertaining. I got to learn boat rulz.
How is it "minutiae" to counter the assertion that cyclists have paid for roads to be built when none of the funding for roads to be built comes from cyclists?Talk about points in minutiae…
A lot of people in cities own bikes and not cars.Do you believe cyclists do not drive also, thereby paying those taxes? (Other than one friend I knew back in the day who is a unicorn.)
Indiana is one of them. I paid about twice as much for it as I would have paid in fuel tax, and it is going up next year.Yep. That's the reason why many states add on a separate registration fee for EVs and PHEV's every year. They pay no fuel tax for the roads that they use.
Do you believe cyclists do not drive also, thereby paying those taxes? (Other than one friend I knew back in the day who is a unicorn.)
So, what you're saying is that motorists pay those taxes? Thanks for confirming.
Cyclists who have paid those taxes have done so by virtue of being motorists, not cyclists. It is entirely conceivable that someone may own a bicycle while also not owning a motor vehicle.
Now there's a non-pedantic point about bike taxes. Zero bike lanes should be paid for through road taxes paid by motorists.A lot of people in cities own bikes and not cars.
You never explained how motorists should have to pay for another lane to be built when they already paid for and are paying for the ones that are built.
It is a “specious” claim that most cyclists are also motorists thereby paying a fair share of road taxes?How is it "minutiae" to counter the assertion that cyclists have paid for roads to be built when none of the funding for roads to be built comes from cyclists?
Very odd hill to choose to die on. Given that I've stated up front that I don't have a problem with cyclists on public roads, and only expect them to follow the same traffic laws as motor vehicles, with all the same rights and responsibilities, your continual pressing of this specious claim only leads me to believe that you think cyclists should have not just the same rights as motorists, but should have more rights (and fewer responsibilities).
Consider the proportion of road use from cyclists and how that proportion might be reasonably considered minutiae. Prolly the tax angle isn't all that important. Except I hate bike lanes because they take up lanes and no one's using them.How is it "minutiae" to counter the assertion that cyclists have paid for roads to be built when none of the funding for roads to be built comes from cyclists?
Very odd hill to choose to die on. Given that I've stated up front that I don't have a problem with cyclists on public roads, and only expect them to follow the same traffic laws as motor vehicles, with all the same rights and responsibilities, your continual pressing of this specious claim only leads me to believe that you think cyclists should have not just the same rights as motorists, but should have more rights (and fewer responsibilities).
And pedestrians use streets also without paying their fair share. Who would have known that there were so many freeloaders out there…A lot of people in cities own bikes and not cars.
You never explained how motorists should have to pay for another lane to be built when they already paid for and are paying for the ones that are built.
How much is their fair share of road taxes? If we're being serious, is it worth talking about? If we're just drudging up reasons to resent the cycling dickheads, well okay then.It is a “specious” claim that most cyclists are also motorists thereby paying a fair share of road taxes?
And pedestrians use streets also without paying their fair share. Who would have known that there were so many freeloaders out there…
I have untaxed off road diesel in my tractor. Maybe I should have a can of taxed diesel lying around so whenever I need to drive it on the road I can top it off with a gallon of taxed diesel so I don't feel like I'm stealing taxpayers' road.
It's only a compact tractor. So I probably can't run over the sailboats on the roads I might drive on, like I run over cyclists. But I can crush the hell out of those crabs then scoop them up in the loader.Farm vehicles are exempt so its LeeEEEgal to steal the tax payer's money with dyed diesel in this regard. But you have to yield to sailboats and crabs.
It's like calling a RINO a real RepublicanIt is a “specious” claim that most cyclists are also motorists thereby paying a fair share of road taxes?
The proper question is do “all” cyclists drive automobiles? If not, then there are cyclists using roadways they haven’t paid for.Do you believe cyclists do not drive also, thereby paying those taxes? (Other than one friend I knew back in the day who is a unicorn.)