Why the hate for Cyclists?

[Creedmoor]

It is a myth that roads are fully paid for by fuel and user taxes and that the general fund covers none of road infrastructure costs.

“Many Americans believe that drivers pay the full cost of the roads they use through gas taxes and other user fees. That has never been true, and it is less true now than at any other point in modern times.”

“Today, general taxes paid by all taxpayers cover nearly as much of the cost of building and maintaining highways as the gas tax and other fees paid by drivers. The purchasing power of gasoline taxes has declined as a result of inflation, improved vehicle fuel economy, and the recent stagnation in driving. As a result, so-called “user fees” cover a shrinking share of transportation costs.”

“The time has come for policy-makers to recognize something that has been true for years, but is especially true today: we all pay for America’s roads.”

https://frontiergroup.org/resources/who-pays-roads/

Straw Men yet again, Thats not what I said, I said they should have plates on them so Road Tax has been paid.

 

[Ingomike]

Straw Men yet again, Thats not what I said, I said they should have plates on them so Road Tax has been paid.

What should road tax on a bike be? I was pointing out that road funding is not 100% fuel and user tax, general taxpayers participate as well. How much more than that should a bicycle pay to use roads?

Are you good with gun specific taxes?

 

[AndreusMaximus]

What are you seeing that is “name-calling”?

Did you read the article, or just google and post it based on the headline? Here are just a few small samples of the over-the-top rhetoric:

"...bike-hater..."
"...moronic agenda that preempts critical thinking..."
"...gratuitous subjugation measures..."

Are the “cyclists must stop at every stop sign it’s the law” people going to get their children licensed and their kids bikes licensed and not allow them on the street without the legal licenses? That’s the law! Where does it stop.

In the happy hour thread I posted that I was ok with government restricting the sale of alcohol based on time and get blasted as being a communist restricting freedom and in this thread a bunch of people are wanting to create tax and licensing schemes that restrict the freedom of movement by the most efficient means of self power. Sounds a lot like anti-gunners and their license and restrictions schemes on guns.

I'm not in favor of requiring licenses for bicycles. I already said that. I'm just saying that "little kids who don't know squat about traffic rules might be kept of the roads!!!" is not exactly the best way to make the case against licensing.

 

[Creedmoor]

What should road tax on a bike be? I was pointing out that road funding is not 100% fuel and user tax, general taxpayers participate as well. How much more than that should a bicycle pay to use roads?

Are you good with gun specific taxes?

I don't know what road tax should be for a bicycle, how about the same as the cheapest motorcycle.

You're a gun owner?
We do pay gun specific taxes, you've never heard of The Pittman Robinson Federal tax?

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

What should road tax on a bike be?

Proportionate to the percentage of the roadway they use up compared to the projected surface area of the bike and the rider?

 

[Ingomike]

I don't know what road tax should be for a bicycle, how about the same as the cheapest motorcycle.

You're a gun owner?
We do pay gun specific taxes, you've never heard of The Pittman Robinson Federal tax?

Speaking of straw men. A road use tax is not the same as a general sporting goods tax.

 

[Creedmoor]

Speaking of straw men. A road use tax is not the same as a general sporting goods tax.

Whatever makes you feel right.

 

[Ingomike]

Did you read the article, or just google and post it based on the headline? Here are just a few small samples of the over-the-top rhetoric:

I did read it but I guess I am not that sensitive.

"...bike-hater..."

Are they not the topic here? The word “hate” is I the thread title.

"...moronic agenda that preempts critical thinking..."

I believe it pure selfishness but others have other opinions. It was an opinion article.

"...gratuitous subjugation measures..."

Sounds like a good name for a tax and licensing schemes…

 

[Creedmoor]

Proportionate to the percentage of the roadway they use up compared to the projected surface area of the bike and the rider?

And it should also be relevant to its cost.
Is it a $99.00 Walmart to a Butterfly Trek Madone.
Like having a 20 yr old Honda Civic or a 2 year old 5 series Mercedes.
Drive big, pay big.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

And it should also be relevant to its cost.
Is it a $99.00 Walmart to a Butterfly Trek Madone.
Like having a 20 yr old Honda Civic or a 2 year old 5 series Mercedes.
Drive big, pay big.

And a proportionate (say, min/mile) usage factor.

 

[Creedmoor]

And a proportionate (say, min/mile) usage factor.

Two Snaps Up.
Ride Fat Pay Big...

 

[AndreusMaximus]

I did read it but I guess I am not that sensitive.


Are they not the topic here? The word “hate” is I the thread title.


I believe it pure selfishness but others have other opinions. It was an opinion article.


Sounds like a good name for a tax and licensing schemes…

I'm not sensitive to it. It didn't hurt me personally; it wasn't even directed at me, since I'm not one of the licensing proponents that the article was referring to.

But I can recognize over-the-top rhetoric when I see it, whether it's directed at me or not. Yes, it was an opinion article, so if the author just wanted to have a long rant and do some mud-slinging, he certainly accomplished that, and that's nothing he doesn't have a right to do if he likes. I'm just saying that his hyperbole obscured, at least from my view, any train of logical argument that might have been there, if he was even attempting one.

 

[BugI02]

The specific circumstance under discussion involves rush hour - i.e. when crossing the double-yellow line to pass is less likely to be possible, due to an increase in traffic.

Did you miss the posted phone pic? Maybe review post #1665. It shows oncoming traffic is quite light, which makes sense if people use that road to connect with the interstate. Most traffic is probably heading toward that intersection at rush hour

But do keep avoiding any solution to your 'problem' that doesn't involve self-righteous indignation

 

[ZurokSlayer7X9]

I believe this thread perfectly encompasses another facet of INGO. I commented early in the thread's inception and checked to re-read my post. I was then confused when I clicked back on the thread to see the numbers so high. I felt like I was in the Twilight Zone as it seems the debate on this page is the same as a page made a few months earlier.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

it seems the debate on this page is the same as a page made a few months earlier.

 

[Hatin Since 87]

 

[BugI02]

I believe this thread perfectly encompasses another facet of INGO. I commented early in the thread's inception and checked to re-read my post. I was then confused when I clicked back on the thread to see the numbers so high. I felt like I was in the Twilight Zone as it seems the debate on this page is the same as a page made a few months earlier.

That's because this is another one of those divides that can't be bridged

One side believes - correctly - that cyclists have a perfectly legal right to be on any non-prohibited road they desire and that the state has so far not seen fit to require licensing or license plates or insurance to exercise that right

The other side believes that because said cyclists are doing something they disapprove of it should be made illegal or at least made more expensive to perhaps discourage participation and assuage their hurt feels

I see no middle ground, but it's like Trump hate threads. Posts hating on cyclists, just like posts hating on Trump, will be answered in kind - so it just drags on and on. It is highly likely no one's mind is changed

 

[Hatin Since 87]

perfectly legal

I hate when we discuss “legal” in this thread. Is riding on the road legal? Of course it is. Is running a stop sign legal? Of course it isnt. But a majority of cyclists do, and until cyclists hold other cyclists accountable, there will never be a bridge between the groups.

Every time this is mentioned, its responded with “but motorists”. This is no different than when biden does something and liberals respond with “but trump”.

And, its legal, but it doesnt mean its smart, considerate, or means people have to respect it. Its legal to fart in line at taco bell, but im gonna call you an ass hole. I wont, however, spend my time posting through 86 pages of a forum discussing it tho, so theres that.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

That's because this is another one of those divides that can't be bridged

One side believes - correctly - that cyclists have a perfectly legal right to be on any non-prohibited road they desire and that the state has so far not seen fit to require licensing or license plates or insurance to exercise that right

The other side believes that because said cyclists are doing something they disapprove of it should be made illegal or at least made more expensive to perhaps discourage participation and assuage their hurt feels

I see no middle ground, but it's like Trump hate threads. Posts hating on cyclists, just like posts hating on Trump, will be answered in kind - so it just drags on and on. It is highly likely no one's mind is changed

Y'all are just wound too tight. I reach a point where I just shrug and walk away from an argument. It would behoove everyone to develop that ability. Unless you just like arguing for the sake of arguing.

 

[Hatin Since 87]

Y'all are just wound too tight. I reach a point where I just shrug and walk away from an argument. It would behoove everyone to develop that ability. Unless you just like arguing for the sake of arguing.