Taxing bikes

[smithcorp]

Interesting article here about Seattle considering a $25 sales fee on bicycles that cost more than $500. Interestingly, one of the user groups, Bicycle Transportation Alliance, "sees the fees as a potential political tool with the chance to begin a dialogue with legislators about the best ways to achieve an equitable system of road funding."

Nice take - small hit to overcome the 'cyclists don't pay road tax' bullshit and get a bigger voice at the table - might be useful in NSW.

http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/ ... gexml.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[norbs]

Interesting article here about Seattle considering a $25 sales fee on bicycles that cost more than $500. Interestingly, one of the user groups, Bicycle Transportation Alliance, "sees the fees as a potential political tool with the chance to begin a dialogue with legislators about the best ways to achieve an equitable system of road funding."

Nice take - small hit to overcome the 'cyclists don't pay road tax' bullshit and get a bigger voice at the table - might be useful in NSW.

http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/ ... gexml.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Don't start me on the road tax BS.

Smiss, you heaving beast of a man, I reckon you might like Carlton Reid's site... http://www.roadswerenotbuiltforcars.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Very interesting take on things. The book is due in about 6 months according to Carlton.

[richo]

Ok i will bite , i think bikes should pay to ride on roads and be subject to the same rules .

And i ride a bike.

[Duke]

Pay, explain to me how you currently pay for using the roads?
Don't tell me it's via Rego & licenses either.

You Rego is to allow use of a vehicle on the road, it is for safety & 3rd party protection for all road users not for paying for road use. Their called tolls.

Your vehicle license is a one time demonstration that you know how to operate a vehicle within the rules that govern road use.

Roads we use are paid by taxes, which we all pay regardless of if we use them or not.

Cyclists are already governed by the rules of the road. Thats a discussion around enforcement of rules. Sheesh!!!

I'm all for cyclists being able to be identified so consequently held accountable for their actions but taxes like this topic propose isn't the answer.

[CLP]

Nice take - small hit to overcome the 'cyclists don't pay road tax' bullshit and get a bigger voice at the table - might be useful in NSW.

probably be best come back to the 'cyclists don't pay road tax' bullshit is to point out that no one pays "road tax" in Australia .. such a tax simply doesn't exist. Anyone claiming to pay such a tax should be asked to produce a receipt of said payment.

i think bikes should pay to ride on roads and be subject to the same rules .

which rules are they currently not subject to?

[richo]

Is a bike be it motor or pedal powered not a vehicle? And does it not function in the same manner as you have just said?

I am not trying to have a go at anyone as i ride a bike both pedal and motor powered and i find it difficult to see why one attracts rego and licences and the other does not and as i ride both i don't want to pay anymore at all anyway .

It makes me laugh a bit as my mountain bike doesn't look all to different to my old XR200 Honda

[richo]

Nice take - small hit to overcome the 'cyclists don't pay road tax' bullshit and get a bigger voice at the table - might be useful in NSW.

probably be best come back to the 'cyclists don't pay road tax' bullshit is to point out that no one pays "road tax" in Australia .. such a tax simply doesn't exist. Anyone claiming to pay such a tax should be asked to produce a receipt of said payment.

i think bikes should pay to ride on roads and be subject to the same rules .

which rules are they currently not subject to?

Maybe subject to is the wrong wording but weaving in and out of traffic and riding through red lights (like some motorbike riders do oddly enough ) and maybe i,m just bitter because i got booked on my motor bike for riding beside a mate in the same lane like most pushy riders do

[Vilante]

i think bikes should pay to ride on roads and be subject to the same rules .

which rules are they currently not subject to?

Well I assume if he means they should be held accountable to the road rules, this is how I see it here in central Sydney.

'Drivers' obey approximately 70% of the road rules, the one's they see fit and the one's that will stop them from getting into trouble. Most often they don't bother with silly things like indicators and aren't worried about things like no right turn signs or no stopping zones.

Scooter riders are at about 40-50% of the road rules and love to ride up between the traffic lane and parked cars or a more and more common occurrence, on the wrong side of the road to get to the front of the cue at traffic lights. I've seen one cleaned up doing both of those things.

Bicycle rides are around 20%, wrong side of the road, between cars and parked cars, through red lights, wrong way down one way streets. I assume what richo means is bicycles seem to do whatever they want. Of course there are exceptions but here in Syd there aren't many.

I've never seen a cyclist, or a bloody scooter rider pulled up for these life threatening acts. Possibly because there are hardly any cops on the streets.

It's only going to get worse too, with more people getting the spandex on for fitness and more idiots buying scooters to ride with no knowledge or respect for the damage they can do to you while you're holding a latte in one hand and wearing shorts and a singlet.

[ysu]

I reckon there's merit in the idea, but it seems like a whole lot of mess.
I mean bikes get a set of very nice, maintained bike roads, plus they use the road as well.
But then along the same lines, pedestrians should pay for pedestrian walkpaths (as little as they exist, hehe)

Plus I think first they'd need to sort out where's the current vehicle road tax (isn't it included in the rego? I thought it was. Or in the fuel. Fuck if I know.)
and also; I don't get why bikes over $500 would pay only, and a fixed $25 one-off. This is just weird in too many ways. Slap a percentage on it.

While it's a simple enough proposal, and let's be honest no-ones bank account will be broken by it, it's a small inconvenience at best, it does seem a more than a bit weird. Or more like a small tax grab just for the sake of it.
Eg. it'll apply to upmarket downhill bikes as well, and will they ever be used on roads?

And of course the rules should be enforced for bikes, too. But how? They've got no licence, nor plate...

So yeah, it's a big friggen mess IMHO.

And the big against thing for me: we should encourage ppl using bikes more often, not discourage it by such bs.

[smithcorp]

Road user charges are mainly intended to offset some of the impacts of vehicles on the infrastructure and service levels - ie heavy vehicles damage pavements and charges applied to trucks aim to help pay for repairs and upgrades, as well as health and safety impacts. Cars contribute to congestion and so suites of charges and taxes (fuel, rego, parking charges etc) are designed to fund PT improvements, manage demand, road safety requirements etc.

Pedestrians and cyclists are seen as contributing positively to transport, health and safety and so shouldn't attract user charges. However, because they are perceived as not contributing directly to the infrastructure they use, some folk think they shouldn't be entitled to use those facilities (though this never seems to apply to pedestrians). However, I am not averse to some direct charge or tax to overcome that view.

[CLP]

i think bikes should pay to ride on roads and be subject to the same rules .

which rules are they currently not subject to?

Well I assume if he means they should be held accountable to the road rules, this is how I see it here in central Sydney.

'Drivers' obey approximately 70% of the road rules, the one's they see fit and the one's that will stop them from getting into trouble. Most often they don't bother with silly things like indicators and aren't worried about things like no right turn signs or no stopping zones.

Scooter riders are at about 40-50% of the road rules and love to ride up between the traffic lane and parked cars or a more and more common occurrence, on the wrong side of the road to get to the front of the cue at traffic lights. I've seen one cleaned up doing both of those things.

Bicycle rides are around 20%, wrong side of the road, between cars and parked cars, through red lights, wrong way down one way streets. I assume what richo means is bicycles seem to do whatever they want. Of course there are exceptions but here in Syd there aren't many.

I've never seen a cyclist, or a bloody scooter rider pulled up for these life threatening acts. Possibly because there are hardly any cops on the streets.

Pretty much all the published research finds that the level of road law infringement between drivers and cyclists is pretty much on par, if not slightly worse for drivers. "Silly little things" like indicating is still law. Same goes for not coming to a complete stop at a stop sign. It's fairly common to overlook these things because "we all do those things" or some other lame justification, but then hold another group to a higher standard than we're prepared to hold ourselves to.

Riding between cars is legal for a bicycle. so if you're counting that against your total of law breaking cyclists, then your percentage is incorrectly skewed. Also, some one way streets are designated as contraflow for bicycles (not all, but some). I won't defend those cyclist that break the law, and sincerely i wish that they'd be pulled up on it, for no other reason than they threaten my safety. Same goes for driver since they're only fined for a small fraction of the offences committed. Perhaps drivers should start being fined for not completely changing lanes when overtaking a cyclist like they are supposed to? Or for using a horn to intimidate a cyclist?

[ysu]

I think you're right, CLP, I reckon the reason cyclists are regarded as worse, is because they are doing more severe stuff - like going through red lights - more often.

Also maybe because if they cut across lanes, they do it at a low speed, so the danger of someone running into them is bigger due to the speed difference...

[CLP]

I mean bikes get a set of very nice, maintained bike roads, plus they use the road as well.

I assume you haven't actually seen the state of much of the bicycle infrastructure? usually it's in a pretty average state of repair.
In Adelaide, i believe there is the sum total of 1 bike specific road (The veloway). not really what i'd call a "set".

Plus I think first they'd need to sort out where's the current vehicle road tax (isn't it included in the rego? I thought it was. Or in the fuel. Fuck if I know.)

not sure about other states, but in SA the breakdown of where the rego fee goes is listed on the rego papers. No "road tax" in there. Similarly, while there are taxes on fuel (GST, fuel excise), there's still no "road tax".

And of course the rules should be enforced for bikes, too. But how? They've got no licence, nor plate...

Easy. Police pulls you over and issues you a fine.

[Vilante]

Pretty much all the published research finds that the level of road law infringement between drivers and cyclists is pretty much on par, if not slightly worse for drivers. "Silly little things" like indicating is still law. Same goes for not coming to a complete stop at a stop sign. It's fairly common to overlook these things because "we all do those things" or some other lame justification, but then hold another group to a higher standard than we're prepared to hold ourselves to.

Riding between cars is legal for a bicycle. so if you're counting that against your total of law breaking cyclists, then your percentage is incorrectly skewed. Also, some one way streets are designated as contraflow for bicycles (not all, but some). I won't defend those cyclist that break the law, and sincerely i wish that they'd be pulled up on it, for no other reason than they threaten my safety. Same goes for driver since they're only fined for a small fraction of the offences committed. Perhaps drivers should start being fined for not completely changing lanes when overtaking a cyclist like they are supposed to? Or for using a horn to intimidate a cyclist?

Well I'm only going on my experience in Sydney and I do a lot of driving. I see far more stupid things done by people on bikes than in cars and I'm a firm believer that no one knows how to drive here anymore. I have nothing against bike riders, these are just my observations.

I was being facetious when I said blinkers are a silly little thing, I definitely think they are not. Nothing angers me more than people that think they know no one will benefit from their use of the blinker so just go without. That or their just lazy.

I agree with your last 2 points, they should also be fined for not pulling into the left lane to turn left and my super pieve, driving onto the wrong side of the road when it's not safe just because a car is reverse parking or someone is blocking their lane. grr.

But listen to me, I'm sounding like ysu!

[Enforcer-J]

There's only one way to solve this......erradication.

Run 'em all over.

[Exar Kun]

There's only one way to solve this......erradication.

Run 'em all over.

I almost did last night! I was wondering why a couple of cars ahead of me swerved wildly into the other lane when I came up on a cyclist with no rear light or reflector or anything riding on an unlit road. The dude must have had a death wish! He was in full gear on a road bike too so not just a random riding their bike home from the pub or something.

Basically there's wankers on bikes and in cars. Even if it's only a minority that do the wrong thing, it's the minority that stand out and give the rest a bad name. You'd just think that the cyclists (and motorbike riders) that are doing the wrong thing would be more aware that they're going to come off second best.

Rego etc aside, the main difference is that whilst cyclists have to obey the same road rules, they're not actually tested on them. It'd be incredibly difficult to police if there were a licensing system in place, however. I still believe car license holders should be forced to at least do a re-sit of a written test every 5 years to keep them up to date too.

[Righteous]

my super pieve, driving onto the wrong side of the road when it's not safe just because a car is reverse parking.

I HATE that! I've made a habit of just reversing in to my spot and not stopping for the people who pull around, despite my better judgment. I know one day someone is going to take the front of my car off. I don't know if it's a Sydney only thing, but I've noticed it a lot more down here than what it was like in Bris. It can't be that inconvenient to wait 20 seconds while someone reverse parks their car.

Having said that, the old reverse park seems to be a skill a lot of people around here don't have either. I've had a good laugh on occasions watching people trying to reverse park their car.

[ysu]

But listen to me, I'm sounding like ysu!

gtfo

Nah, I believe everybody has their little pet hates, and sometimes quite a few. But some people (like me) are just more vocal, more forthcoming and honest with their opinions.
I know that a few friends of mine would just very mildly hint at something they don't like, and only if/when someone asks them at gunpoint. But they still feel the same.

[bengatta]

in 2011 which is the latest year where statistics are available for both...

Source - Royal Life Saving Society Annual Report 2011 (which has a 2012 report also available)
BITRE Road Deaths Australia Summary 2011 (last year available)

Swimming Pool Deaths (statistics are not held to determine ratio between public (including hotels/motels/caravan parks/council pools) or private swimming pools) - 37
Road Cycling deaths - 35

as of Oct 2013 I am required to register my backyard swimming pool online, and within 2 years (or anytime after April 2014 if I am to sell the property) have it inspected (for a fee) and issued a certificate which will remain current for 3 years then a new inspection and certificate will be required...

I am however not required to allow access to my pool to any members of the general public... i can choose to allow family and friends access if I am feeling generous...