On Wed, 24 Jul 2013 09:49:55 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:

And unless there are lots of bikes costing £5k, then the majority of
drivers paid more VAT than the cyclists, when the items were new.

I'd suggest that the vast majority of drivers paid no VAT at all on their
cars. I've certainly never paid VAT on a car purchase - and I've had
several brand new cars.

On 23 Jul 2013 15:01:50 GMT
Neil Williams wrote:
wrote:

Cyclists pay sod all to use their bikes on the roads therefore their
opinions
are irrelevant.

So you'd rather be stuck behind a cyclist in your car/on the bus because
the cyclist doesn't pay road tax, than to suck it up and get them off the
road meaning your car/bus journey is not delayed?

A motorcycle is different because it doesn't obstruct other traffic as it
both has high acceleration and a high top speed.

So a bike pays tax *because* it doesn't obstruct traffic?

Have you perhaps never been to London and seen how much of a problem this
is for all road users?

No, never been to London, aside from living and working here most of my life.

--
Spud

On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 16:32:31 +0000 (UTC)
Adrian wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 13:43:17 +0000, spud-u-dont-like wrote:

When cyclists pay road tax for their bikes then they can have a say in
how the roads are laid out and what they share them with. Until then
they can put up or shut up.

Since "paying road tax" is the important factor, do low-CO2 cars, older
cars, and disabled drivers somehow carry lower priority in your view?

No.

--
Spud

On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 12:42:43 -0500
wrote:
In article , d
() wrote:

On 23 Jul 2013 12:23:05 GMT
Neil Williams wrote:
wrote:

They're used like that all over europe (in plenty of cities with narrow
streets I might add) without the issues the cycling lobby and Boris
claimed they had in london. So either the europeans are all idiots or
someone was telling porkies to further their own agenda.

Many other European cities with them have better dedicated cycle
infrastructure rather than having them in bus lanes. Two types of
vehicle less compatible with one another are hard to imagine.

When cyclists pay road tax for their bikes then they can have a say in how
the roads are laid out and what they share them with. Until then they can
put up or shut up.

There has no such thing as road tax for decades. Many motor vehicles pay no
more than cycles to be put on the road.

Don't start the silly semantics ******** about road tax vs road fund license.
You have no choice than to pay it if you want to use your vehicle on the
road , ergo its a tax regardless of what cuddly fluffy name it currently has.

--
Spud

On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 21:22:50 +0100
Mizter T wrote:
On 23/07/2013 15:29, d wrote:

On 23 Jul 2013 14:19:50 GMT
Neil Williams wrote:
wrote:

When cyclists pay road tax for their bikes then they can have a say in how
the roads are laid out and what they share them with. Until then they can
put up or shut up.

What a stupid statement, given that getting the cyclists out of your way
(as a driver or bus passenger) would also be to your benefit.

They'd also be out of my way if they were on motorbikes. Perhaps we shouldn't
bother taxing and insuring those either then eh?

Cyclists pay sod all to use their bikes on the roads therefore their opinions
are irrelevant.

Moronic.

Yes, a lot of them are.

--
Spud

In message , at 09:06:16 on Wed, 24 Jul
2013, Adrian remarked:
And unless there are lots of bikes costing £5k, then the majority of
drivers paid more VAT than the cyclists, when the items were new.

I'd suggest that the vast majority of drivers paid no VAT at all on their
cars. I've certainly never paid VAT on a car purchase - and I've had
several brand new cars.

How did you manage that?
--
Roland Perry

wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 16:32:31 +0000 (UTC)
Adrian wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 13:43:17 +0000, spud-u-dont-like wrote:

When cyclists pay road tax for their bikes then they can have a say in
how the roads are laid out and what they share them with. Until then
they can put up or shut up.

Since "paying road tax" is the important factor, do low-CO2 cars, older
cars, and disabled drivers somehow carry lower priority in your view?

No.

So you just hate cyclists, rather than those who don't pay road tax for
other reasons. Why, then, aren't you happy for them to be out of your way
on a cycle path so you can use the road freely for your car? Rather biting
your nose off to spite your face (to use my Mum's old phrase), is it not?

Neil
--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK. Put first name before the at to reply.

On 24 Jul 2013 10:33:06 GMT
Neil Williams wrote:
wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 16:32:31 +0000 (UTC)
Adrian wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 13:43:17 +0000, spud-u-dont-like wrote:

When cyclists pay road tax for their bikes then they can have a say in
how the roads are laid out and what they share them with. Until then
they can put up or shut up.

Since "paying road tax" is the important factor, do low-CO2 cars, older
cars, and disabled drivers somehow carry lower priority in your view?

No.

So you just hate cyclists, rather than those who don't pay road tax for

I don't hate all cyclists, I have a bike myself. I just have a problem with
the commuter types who seem to think the rules of the road don't apply to them.
But of course suddenly the rules of the road are a Big Deal if they think
a driver has infringed upon THEIR space.

other reasons. Why, then, aren't you happy for them to be out of your way
on a cycle path so you can use the road freely for your car? Rather biting
your nose off to spite your face (to use my Mum's old phrase), is it not?

Except their not out of the way on a cycle path - they're on the road. A bit
of paint doesn't change that.

--
Spud

wrote:

Except their not out of the way on a cycle path - they're on the road. A bit
of paint doesn't change that.

That's a cycle lane. A cycle path is a segregated track for use by
cyclists (and sometimes pedestrians) only. Google the Milton Keynes
Redways for a UK example.

Neil
--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK. Put first name before the at to reply.

On 24 Jul 2013 12:08:17 GMT
Neil Williams wrote:
wrote:

Except their not out of the way on a cycle path - they're on the road. A bit
of paint doesn't change that.

That's a cycle lane. A cycle path is a segregated track for use by
cyclists (and sometimes pedestrians) only. Google the Milton Keynes
Redways for a UK example.

Fair point. I have no issue with cycle paths, the more the merrier as it
keeps them off the road. Better for all concerned.

--
Spud