In message , Huge
writes
Then we come to the next point; cyclists want to be treated like
"proper road users" (in actual fact, they mean cars, but if you mention
that, they deny it.) That's fine by me. I want them to be treated like
"proper road users", too; that is, registered, licensed, tested, carry
a registration plate, be prosecuted for their continuous infractions of
the road laws and bled white in taxes. Then they can justifably
complain about the crappiness of the facilities they are provided with,
since they will have paid for them. Whinging about things provided at
other people's expense just shows what kind of people they actually are.
I endorse this 100%.
--
Clive

In message , Alan
writes
however unnecessary just so that they can be in a taxed vehicle every
time they make any journey, instead of using another transport solution
which reduces pollution and congestion,
And fuel excise duty plus VAT on top.
--
Clive

"Huge" wrote in message
...
Chris writes:
Huge wrote:


I'm a 40% tax payer, a paid-up motorist, and a cyclist. I pay for the
roads just as much anyone.

No you don't. You're a cyclist, and therefore a freeloader, a parasite,
a hypocrite. You're a foulmouthed moron, too.

tiny (aka huge) complaining about someone else being foulmouthed! ROFL!!

You really are as thick as **** aren't you?

Err, no. Unlike cyclists in general, and you in particular, I have the
power of rational thought.

such a pity you've never bothered to demonstrate it then tiny.

"Huge" wrote in message
...
Adrian writes:
Alan ) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying :

Equally, you don't pay anything to use your bicycle on the road.

Spot on.

Except that local roads are funded by local taxation, and cyclists pay local
taxes.


As it happens, nor am I at this point. I just want cyclists to admit
that they get to use the roads for nothing.

I don't get to use the roads for nothing, I pay local taxes.

Then we come to the next point; cyclists want to be treated like
"proper road users" (in actual fact, they mean cars, but if you mention
that, they deny it.) That's fine by me. I want them to be treated like
"proper road users", too; that is, registered, licensed, tested, carry
a registration plate, be prosecuted for their continuous infractions of
the road laws and bled white in taxes. Then they can justifably
complain about the crappiness of the facilities they are provided with,
since they will have paid for them. Whinging about things provided at
other people's expense just shows what kind of people they actually
are.

So, using tiny's "rational" process, we'll be taxing, licensing and
registering pedestrians, who also use "use the roads for nothing".

tiny and rational would appear to be mutually exclusive.

In message , Rich
writes
So, using tiny's "rational" process, we'll be taxing, licensing and
registering pedestrians, who also use "use the roads for nothing".
In my neck of the woods, pedestrians have more sense than to walk in the
roads. Is it different in London?
--
Clive

Mike Bristow ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying :

They pay VAT on the purchase of their bike

I've never paid VAT on the purchase of a bike. I have several bikes.

Adrian wrote:

Mike Bristow ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying :

They pay VAT on the purchase of their bike

I've never paid VAT on the purchase of a bike. I have several bikes.

But that's because you are a poor hard done by motorist who can only
afford rusty hand-me-downs, instead of being a much more affluent and
well-off car-free cyclist ;-)

But then the last cycle I bought contributed around five times more in
tax to the country's coffers than most people pay in VED :-(

John B

JohnB ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying :

I've never paid VAT on the purchase of a bike. I have several bikes.

But that's because you are a poor hard done by motorist who can only
afford rusty hand-me-downs

Well, I'd hate it if my bike showed my cars up for the rusty hand-me-downs
they are...

But then the last cycle I bought contributed around five times more in
tax to the country's coffers than most people pay in VED :-(

Eh? You spent FIVE AND A HALF GRAND ON A BICYCLE?

ARE YOU BARKING?

"Clive" wrote in message
...
In message , Rich
writes
So, using tiny's "rational" process, we'll be taxing, licensing and
registering pedestrians, who also use "use the roads for nothing".
In my neck of the woods, pedestrians have more sense than to walk in the
roads. Is it different in London?

how the f would I know, I'm not stupid enough to live there.

BTW, I think you'll find the definition of "road" includes the pavement.
--
Clive

Adrian wrote:

JohnB ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying :

I've never paid VAT on the purchase of a bike. I have several bikes.

But that's because you are a poor hard done by motorist who can only
afford rusty hand-me-downs

Well, I'd hate it if my bike showed my cars up for the rusty hand-me-downs
they are...

But then the last cycle I bought contributed around five times more in
tax to the country's coffers than most people pay in VED :-(

Eh? You spent FIVE AND A HALF GRAND ON A BICYCLE?

Nope.

John B