Cyclists should do a theory test!

ThisRegard

jmayo wrote: »

don't be a fooking pane.

As soon as you started your post, I could see right through to what you were getting at, you couldn't be more transparent.

Spook_ie

rubadub wrote: »

Who pays for them so? surely its not volunteers building the with free materials?

I would have thought it comes from a similar source as the money for footpaths.

I don't think its exlusive to cyclists. I think pedestrians can legitimately use cycleways, not sure about cycletracks -though cycletracks are where you see most pedestrians wandering dangerously onto.

Pedestrians -the other road users who pay no motor tax, along with these


yes, most governments worldwide think so. Ever stop to think you might be the odd one out?

Who pays for them, well I'd imagine the people that pay to use the roads pay more towards them than the people who actually use them.

Mr McGrath asked Finance Minister Michael Noonan questions in the Dail on the different taxes imposed on drivers.

He then added the figures together and calculated that the total paid in various taxes last year amounted to €4.3bn.

Tax on petrol alone amounted to €850m last year, with diesel generating €1.13bn for the State. Motor tax came in at €1.1bn.

Pinch Flat

jmayo wrote: »

So are you one of the ones who clogs up the roads of North Wicklow most weekends or even some spring/summer evenings ?

Would you be of the type that decides to saunder along two or three abreast holding up traffic ?
Would you be one of the ones that reckons lights are optional on a dark evening ?
Would you be one of the eejits that reckons the lycra shouldn't make you stand out, but actually blend in ?
You know the ones that wear black or dark tops/shorts in winter, but look like a moving add for dyno rod or are off to take part in Rio's Mardi Gra during the summer.

Would you be one of the ones that refuses to pull your car in on a narrow road because the very expensive bike that sticking out at the back might get an old scrap on the bushes and briars ?

You know I now nearly applaud anyone I see out cycling to actually get somewhere.
You know the type that doesn't have shoes on that make you walk like you are newly converted to acting as a drag queen.
The type that doesn't have skin tight shorts/tights or have a top that has more adds on it than a billboard.

Some mornings I used to meet an old guy on what looked like a high nellie.
I would give him a wide berth any day of the week.
And you know some morning he would raise his hand.
Perish the thought the numpties with their very expensive ABC1 social group bikes, that they most likely bought (fraudently I would say) through the bike to work scheme, would ever do that.

And one of the worse things to now suffer is to have to listen to a bunch of weekend cyclists discuss their cleats, their shimanos, their derailers, their iphone monitoring apps.

Go for a cycle fine, but remember other people like the natives use the road and don't be a fooking pane.

Top drawer rant - they're getting better.

You missed shaving our legs. Sometimes we'll shave each others.

seamus

Spook_ie wrote: »

When its even freer because you don't pay at all, let alone follow traffic regulations

A taxi driver waxing lyrical about paying tax and obeying traffic laws :pac:

Hilarious. You should do stand-up.

CramCycle

Spook_ie wrote: »

Yes we all know that, they pay nothing extra for having facilities provided for their exclusive use, an exclusive use that they don't even have to use, good that isn't it?

Taxis use bike lanes as car parks and pick up points, you keep saying exclusive use but all evidence points to the contrary.

I have become unfazed by it but on a typical morning, the one outside my house is full of either parked cars or cars using it as a left turn lane (legally a bike lane only). The next one, again is a left turn lane and a straight ahead filter lane at several points(legally a bike lane only), and in between is somewhere for joggers to use so they don't bump into pedestrians or have to step up and down with driveway entrances. After this the next one becomes a "I am only stopping for two minutes to pop in the shops", (legally a bus lane/with bike lane painted on, so it inhibits quite a few). The next one is a typical park here if your working nearby because either you can see your car to run out or its accepted that clampers don't care in that area. Next one is another traffic lane at peak times. After that I actively avoid the next one due to Dublin Bike usage and sin e, although I have seen photos of vans parked in it although this appears to be rare enough.

Exclusive use, my @rse,

Spook_ie

CramCycle wrote: »

Taxis use bike lanes as car parks and pick up points, you keep saying exclusive use but all evidence points to the contrary.

I have become unfazed by it but on a typical morning, the one outside my house is full of either parked cars or cars using it as a left turn lane (legally a bike lane only). The next one, again is a left turn lane and a straight ahead filter lane at several points(legally a bike lane only), and in between is somewhere for joggers to use so they don't bump into pedestrians or have to step up and down with driveway entrances. After this the next one becomes a "I am only stopping for two minutes to pop in the shops", (legally a bus lane/with bike lane painted on, so it inhibits quite a few). The next one is a typical park here if your working nearby because either you can see your car to run out or its accepted that clampers don't care in that area. Next one is another traffic lane at peak times. After that I actively avoid the next one due to Dublin Bike usage and sin e, although I have seen photos of vans parked in it although this appears to be rare enough.

Exclusive use, my @rse,

The lack of enforcement isn't my concern, the fact is that they are legislated for cyclists exclusivity, go see your local inspector if taxis are making a rank on a cycle lane, if you get nowhere report it to the GSOC but don't tell me that the cycle infrastructure isn't provided FOC with exclusivity

ThisRegard

Spook_ie wrote: »

The lack of enforcement isn't my concern, the fact is that they are legislated for cyclists exclusivity, go see your local inspector if taxis are making a rank on a cycle lane, if you get nowhere report it to the GSOC but don't tell me that the cycle infrastructure isn't provided FOC with exclusivity

Someone might do that, when you lobby you local TD to bring in bike tax, I recommend Finnian McGrath if your local one laughs at you.

CramCycle

jmayo wrote: »

Perish the thought the numpties with their very expensive ABC1 social group bikes,

Spook_ie wrote: »

Who pays for them, well I'd imagine the people that pay to use the roads pay more towards them than the people who actually use them.

It would be interesting since you keep bringing up this point to see the stats on who contributes more to the economy per person.

I wonder does the CSO keep tabs on lets say, who contributes more to the economy, an average commuting cyclist or an average taxi driver.

Until we see the numbers though, its a bit of a stupid point to bring up as I suspect, you may in fact, be wrong.

Spook_ie

seamus wrote: »

A taxi driver waxing lyrical about paying tax and obeying traffic laws :pac:

Hilarious. You should do stand-up.

Really, I thank you, next show is at 6 Eden Quay, see you there

Spook_ie

ThisRegard wrote: »

Someone might do that, when you lobby you local TD to bring in bike tax, I recommend Finnian McGrath if your local one laughs at you.

Oh so me lobbying my local TD will get you to get off your backside and report illegal ranking on a cyclelane to the Garda, how peculiar, perhaps if it takes that much to get you up of your backside, you actually have nothing to complain about?

ThisRegard

Spook_ie wrote: »

Really, I thank you, next show is at 6 Eden Quay, see you there

You'll be the one with half the car stuck into the main traffic flow because there's not enough room to get a full car into the rank and fecked if your going to be civil and drive elsewhere so you don't impede others ?

Pinch Flat

ThisRegard wrote: »

You'll be the one with half the car stuck into the main traffic flow because there's not enough room to get a full car into the rank and fecked if your going to be civil and drive elsewhere so you don't impede others ?

And in fairness give them some credit - they leave the hazards on

CramCycle

Spook_ie wrote: »

The lack of enforcement isn't my concern, the fact is that they are legislated for cyclists exclusivity, go see your local inspector if taxis are making a rank on a cycle lane, if you get nowhere report it to the GSOC but don't tell me that the cycle infrastructure isn't provided FOC with exclusivity

Its not provided free of charge though, no one said it was. Personally I wish it wasn't provided at all as such a piss poor job of design and implementation has been reached that nothing short of starting from scratch will fix the cluster f*ck that is cycle lanes in our nations cities. There are a few that work but they are few and far between.

I have paid towards them, so have you, so have many people from the EU. I didn't ask for them though. I appreciate the sentiment but not the execution.

What I did say though was that they are not exclusive, take legal all you want but in the real world, cycle lanes are rarely exclusive to cyclists, and to say otherwise is being facetious. When I call the taxi regulator, do I wait there for someone to call round, if they laugh at me do I call GSOC, if they laugh at me, who next. Oh wait, I don't call them because I have a job, which I have to be at, which paid for the ****ty cycle lanes that I can rarely use, so excuse me if I don't buy your "exclusive" "FOC" cycle lanes BS.

Spook_ie

CramCycle wrote: »

It would be interesting since you keep bringing up this point to see the stats on who contributes more to the economy per person.

I wonder does the CSO keep tabs on lets say, who contributes more to the economy, an average commuting cyclist or an average taxi driver.

Until we see the numbers though, its a bit of a stupid point to bring up as I suspect, you may in fact, be wrong.

Well according to the newspaper link, it's reckoned that motorists contribute 10% of the tax take, some €4.3 billion last year

http://www.independent.ie/life/motoring/clobbered-drivers-pay-10pc-of-total-tax-take-30321308.html

Spook_ie

CramCycle wrote: »

Its not provided free of charge though, no one said it was. Personally I wish it wasn't provided at all as such a piss poor job of design and implementation has been reached that nothing short of starting from scratch will fix the cluster f*ck that is cycle lanes in our nations cities. There are a few that work but they are few and far between.

I have paid towards them, so have you, so have many people from the EU. I didn't ask for them though. I appreciate the sentiment but not the execution.

What I did say though was that they are not exclusive, take legal all you want but in the real world, cycle lanes are rarely exclusive to cyclists, and to say otherwise is being facetious. When I call the taxi regulator, do I wait there for someone to call round, if they laugh at me do I call GSOC, if they laugh at me, who next. Oh wait, I don't call them because I have a job, which I have to be at, which paid for the ****ty cycle lanes that I can rarely use, so excuse me if I don't buy your "exclusive" "FOC" cycle lanes BS.

No if the taxi regulator laughs at you you don't report them to the GSOC, you report the taxi regulator to the NTA

Spook_ie

ThisRegard wrote: »

You'll be the one with half the car stuck into the main traffic flow because there's not enough room to get a full car into the rank and fecked if your going to be civil and drive elsewhere so you don't impede others ?

Why would I be leaving my taxi on the rank outside if I'm doing the comedy show, do make your minds up!

ThisRegard

Spook_ie wrote: »

Well according to the newspaper link, it's reckoned that motorists contribute 10% of the tax take, some €4.3 billion last year

http://www.independent.ie/life/motoring/clobbered-drivers-pay-10pc-of-total-tax-take-30321308.html

You need to get with it, you keeping posting stories from a year or several ago. The figures in that story are over 2 years old at this point.

But you do realise most of us who cycle are also motorists, and also pay into this fund ? Or do you want to do your ****ty merry dance again on this ?

mathie

Spook_ie wrote: »

Well according to the newspaper link, it's reckoned that motorists contribute 10% of the tax take, some €4.3 billion last year

http://www.independent.ie/life/motoring/clobbered-drivers-pay-10pc-of-total-tax-take-30321308.html

And how much is spent on treating people suffering from unhealthy lifestyles who choose sitting in their car over exercise?

Oh lets say !0% of the tax take and link to some out of date article.

Spook_ie

ThisRegard wrote: »

You need to get with it, you keeping posting stories from a year or several ago. The figures in that story are over 2 years old at this point.

But you do realise most of us who cycle are also motorists, and also pay into this fund ? Or do you want to do your ****ty merry dance again on this ?

OMG, which bit of this sentence is so foreign to you, you PAY motor tax, petrol duties etc for the use of THAT vehicle on the road, because you have paid for THAT vehicle it does not translate that you have therefore paid to use a DIFFERENT vehicle on the road, likewise it doesn't translate that you have paid to use a cycle on a cycle lane

CramCycle

Spook_ie wrote: »

Well according to the newspaper link, it's reckoned that motorists contribute 10% of the tax take, some €4.3 billion last year

http://www.independent.ie/life/motoring/clobbered-drivers-pay-10pc-of-total-tax-take-30321308.html

I am one of those motorists, my point was an average commuting cyclist vs an average taxi driver. Most commuting cyclists will also so be motorists, it's not quite as simple as you make it out to be.

Spook_ie wrote: »

No if the taxi regulator laughs at you you don't report them to the GSOC, you report the taxi regulator to the NTA

You said GSOC, I have no idea who to report it too other than the taxi regulator would think I was prank calling them. If they work out of hours send them up to the double yellow lines in Ranelagh any evening of the week for easy targets. The bike lane at Christchurch after you come round the bull and castle. There are a hundred more examples. It never bothers me, I indicate and move round and into the flow of traffic but I long gave up on the preposterous idea that cycle lanes are exclusively for cyclists, much like a number of other road users did a long time ago.

smash

mathie wrote: »

And how much is spent on treating people suffering from unhealthy lifestyles who choose sitting in their car over exercise?

Is this a real argument?

mathie

smash wrote: »

Is this a real argument?

I'd assumed this thread had entered parody a long time ago.

CramCycle

Spook_ie wrote: »

OMG, which bit of this sentence is so foreign to you, you PAY motor tax, petrol duties etc for the use of THAT vehicle on the road, because you have paid for THAT vehicle it does not translate that you have therefore paid to use a DIFFERENT vehicle on the road, likewise it doesn't translate that you have paid to use a cycle on a cycle lane

That's not what he said, you mentioned contributions towards cycle lanes as if they are free of charge. You were challenged with the proposition that cyclists pay a reasonable amount of tax and therefore they are not free of charge.

You responded with an article on tax take from motorists, which as it turns out, most cyclists would have contributed to as well.

CramCycle

mathie wrote: »

I'd assumed this thread had entered parody a long time ago.

I don't think anyone has mentioned the theory test idea for a couple of hundred posts anyway. I think it was settled, who knows.

Knasher

Spook_ie wrote: »

Well according to the newspaper link, it's reckoned that motorists contribute 10% of the tax take, some €4.3 billion last year

http://www.independent.ie/life/motoring/clobbered-drivers-pay-10pc-of-total-tax-take-30321308.html

That article made it sound like it included the tax take from diesel. Which would include agricultural, industrial and marine uses. Which is still taxed but at a lower rate.

Spook_ie

CramCycle wrote: »

I am one of those motorists, my point was an average commuting cyclist vs an average taxi driver. Most commuting cyclists will also so be motorists, it's not quite as simple as you make it out to be.


You said GSOC, I have no idea who to report it too other than the taxi regulator would think I was prank calling them. If they work out of hours send them up to the double yellow lines in Ranelagh any evening of the week for easy targets. The bike lane at Christchurch after you come round the bull and castle. There are a hundred more examples. It never bothers me, I indicate and move round and into the flow of traffic but I long gave up on the preposterous idea that cycle lanes are exclusively for cyclists, much like a number of other road users did a long time ago.

No you're not, you're cycling, therefore you are not contributing any more to the tax take, you may well have contributed some to the tax take when you were driving last weekend or something but as soon as you put the car on the drive you become ( effectively ) a leech, sucking on your previous contributions to the tax take.

You're all starting to sound like those FM late night callers now, " I had a job for 6 months and paid my taxes, now I can stay on the dole for life " ones

RainyDay

Spook_ie wrote: »

Yes we all know that, they pay nothing extra for having facilities provided for their exclusive use, an exclusive use that they don't even have to use, good that isn't it?

Yes, it's great that even though they've already paid motor tax for the car in their driveway, they aren't clogging up the road.

jmayo wrote: »

So are you one of the ones who clogs up the roads of North Wicklow most weekends or even some spring/summer evenings ?

Would you be of the type that decides to saunder along two or three abreast holding up traffic ?
Would you be one of the ones that reckons lights are optional on a dark evening ?
Would you be one of the eejits that reckons the lycra shouldn't make you stand out, but actually blend in ?
You know the ones that wear black or dark tops/shorts in winter, but look like a moving add for dyno rod or are off to take part in Rio's Mardi Gra during the summer.

Would you be one of the ones that refuses to pull your car in on a narrow road because the very expensive bike that sticking out at the back might get an old scrap on the bushes and briars ?

You know I now nearly applaud anyone I see out cycling to actually get somewhere.
You know the type that doesn't have shoes on that make you walk like you are newly converted to acting as a drag queen.
The type that doesn't have skin tight shorts/tights or have a top that has more adds on it than a billboard.

Some mornings I used to meet an old guy on what looked like a high nellie.
I would give him a wide berth any day of the week.
And you know some morning he would raise his hand.
Perish the thought the numpties with their very expensive ABC1 social group bikes, that they most likely bought (fraudently I would say) through the bike to work scheme, would ever do that.

And one of the worse things to now suffer is to have to listen to a bunch of weekend cyclists discuss their cleats, their shimanos, their derailers, their iphone monitoring apps.

Go for a cycle fine, but remember other people like the natives use the road and don't be a fooking pane.

Man, you seem to spend a scary amount of time studying cyclists, and particularly studying their clothing. Can I suggest that you concentrate on how other road users are driving, rather than what they are wearing?

RainyDay

Spook_ie wrote: »

OMG, which bit of this sentence is so foreign to you, you PAY motor tax, petrol duties etc for the use of THAT vehicle on the road, because you have paid for THAT vehicle it does not translate that you have therefore paid to use a DIFFERENT vehicle on the road, likewise it doesn't translate that you have paid to use a cycle on a cycle lane

The bit that is 'foreign' is the bit that you just made up. The bit that about 'it doesn't translate....'. As a matter of fact (and I mean that literally), based on current law, it does translate that a tax compliant cyclist HAS paid to use their bike on the road, in exactly the same way that your beloved motorist HAS paid to use their car on the road.

smash

RainyDay wrote: »

based on current law, it does translate that a tax compliant cyclist HAS paid to use their bike on the road, in exactly the same way that your beloved motorist HAS paid to use their car on the road.

Not really. A cyclist doesn't pay anything for the use of a road. A motorist HAS to pay motor tax for the use of a road. Not to mention they Have to have a license and their vehicle MUST pass a road safety test.

ThisRegard

Spook_ie wrote: »

OMG, which bit of this sentence is so foreign to you, you PAY motor tax, petrol duties etc for the use of THAT vehicle on the road, because you have paid for THAT vehicle it does not translate that you have therefore paid to use a DIFFERENT vehicle on the road, likewise it doesn't translate that you have paid to use a cycle on a cycle lane

You maintain that motorists are the shining light in keeping our roads maintained by contributing so much taxes. We are also motorists.

How's that hernia coming along?

CramCycle

Spook_ie wrote: »

No you're not, you're cycling, therefore you are not contributing any more to the tax take, you may well have contributed some to the tax take when you were driving last weekend or something but as soon as you put the car on the drive you become ( effectively ) a leech, sucking on your previous contributions to the tax take.

You're all starting to sound like those FM late night callers now, " I had a job for 6 months and paid my taxes, now I can stay on the dole for life " ones

You mean I can get a refund on my motor tax that I paid for the days I don't use it, oh wait, no.

By cycling I will reduce the cost to the HSE over time through reduced physical and mental illneses. So a positive for the economy.

I have become more productive at work, therefore improving my employers cost return for hiring me, improving our ability to do business and increasing my wages over time which leads to me spending more, increasing my contribution to the tax base in multiple ways. So a positive to the economy.

If I did not cycle I would walk. If I drove I would increase traffic volumes, reducing the economy slightly, decrease my health, costing the economy more. My cycling does not slow other road users down, no special changes to my route have had to be made because I am a cyclists. So still, apositive for the economy.

I am not sure what knowledge you have of how the economy works but its sounds shockingly ill informed. Would you like me to provide you with links to studies and investigations of how cycling has contributed to economies in Europe and America over the past few years, I think you will find that I am far from a leech.

Spook_ie

smash wrote: »

Not really. A cyclist doesn't pay anything for the use of a road. A motorist HAS to pay motor tax for the use of a road. Not to mention they Have to have a license and their vehicle MUST pass a road safety test.

You might need to visit a pharmacy for some aspirin talking to cyclists!
It must be time to introduce mandatory helmets for cyclists, the only reason I can think for them NOT understanding plain English is that they've had a fall and become brain damaged in some way

RainyDay

smash wrote: »

Not really. A cyclist doesn't pay anything for the use of a road. A motorist HAS to pay motor tax for the use of a road. Not to mention they Have to have a license and their vehicle MUST pass a road safety test.

Yes really. A cyclist pays tax, every time they earn money, every time they spend money (including spending on their bike). They pay tax. Tax pays for the road, and the cycle lane.

You correctly point out that a driver has to pass a test and hold a licence. And if you look around you for five minutes, you'll see that this doesn't do much for the standard of driving on our roads, given the extent of law-breaking by drivers. Not to mention the 200+ deaths each year and maiming of thousands of others - by drivers (not cyclists).

ThisRegard

Spook_ie wrote: »

No you're not, you're cycling, therefore you are not contributing any more to the tax take, you may well have contributed some to the tax take when you were driving last weekend or something but as soon as you put the car on the drive you become ( effectively ) a leech, sucking on your previous contributions to the tax take.

You're all starting to sound like those FM late night callers now, " I had a job for 6 months and paid my taxes, now I can stay on the dole for life " ones

Brilliant, so we get rebates on our motor tax every time we cycle?

CramCycle

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/348943/vfm-assessment-of-cycling-grants.pdf

http://www.ecf.com/wp-content/uploads/ECF_Economic-benefits-of-cycling-in-EU-27.pdf

Spook_ie

ThisRegard wrote: »

Brilliant, so we get rebates on our motor tax every time we cycle?

No, but you can get a rebate if you have more than 3 months left to run and fill in a SORN

CramCycle

Spook_ie wrote: »

No, but you can get a rebate if you have more than 3 months left to run and fill in a SORN

So no is the answer, thanks, glad you could clear that up.

ThisRegard

Spook_ie wrote: »

No, but you can get a rebate if you have more than 3 months left to run and fill in a SORN

Ah, so as motor tax paying cyclists we do fully contribute then. Again that's brilliant.

And people roll their eyes when taxi drivers say they can solve all the countrys woes during a short cross city trip.

smash

CramCycle wrote: »

You mean I can get a refund on my motor tax that I paid for the days I don't use it, oh wait, no.

You can get a refund for periods of 3 months at a time. Or you used to be able to anyway.

RainyDay wrote: »

Yes really. A cyclist pays tax, every time they earn money, every time they spend money (including spending on their bike). They pay tax. Tax pays for the road, and the cycle lane.

This has nothing to do with my original post where I stated how a motorist must pay a tax specifically to use the road. A cyclist doesn't.

RainyDay wrote: »

You correctly point out that a driver has to pass a test and hold a licence. And if you look around you for five minutes, you'll see that this doesn't do much for the standard of driving on our roads, given the extent of law-breaking by drivers. Not to mention the 200+ deaths each year and maiming of thousands of others - by drivers (not cyclists).

I actually see more cyclists breaking traffic laws than motorists, especially in urban areas. Anyway... I know these are UK figures, but I'd love to see the breakdown of who's at fault: http://www.rospa.com/road-safety/advice/pedal-cyclists/facts-figures/

Pinch Flat

ThisRegard wrote: »

Brilliant, so we get rebates on our motor tax every time we cycle?

I think we should follow the French example - pay people to cycle to work. We're all Europeans, n'est pa?

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/06/02/us-france-bicycles-idUSKBN0ED1O120140602

Spook_ie

CramCycle wrote: »

So no is the answer, thanks, glad you could clear that up.

Sorry if it's not clear enough for your addled mind, the answer is actually YES, you can get a rebate but NO you can't get it for just cycling

smash

Pinch Flat wrote: »

I think we should follow the French example - pay people to cycle to work. We're all Europeans, n'est pa?

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/06/02/us-france-bicycles-idUSKBN0ED1O120140602

We kind of did pay people to cycle to work through the cycle to work scheme. Unfortunately most who avail of the scheme don't cycle to work.

Spook_ie

ThisRegard wrote: »

Ah, so as motor tax paying cyclists we do fully contribute then. Again that's brilliant.

OMG NO you don't, you have contributed for the use of the motor vehicle, you have not SPECIFICALLY contributed as a cyclist, you do not need to have a motor vehicle to use the cyclelanes therefore you have NOT paid anything as a cyclist for the provision of cycling infrastructure

ThisRegard

Pinch Flat wrote: »

I think we should follow the French example - pay people to cycle to work. We're all Europeans, n'est pa?

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/06/02/us-france-bicycles-idUSKBN0ED1O120140602

Oui.

Pinch Flat

Spook_ie wrote: »

OMG NO you don't, you have contributed for the use of the motor vehicle, you have not SPECIFICALLY contributed as a cyclist, you do not need to have a motor vehicle to use the cyclelanes therefore you have NOT paid anything as a cyclist for the provision of cycling infrastructure

yes we have.

RainyDay

smash wrote: »

This has nothing to do with my original post where I stated how a motorist must pay a tax specifically to use the road. A cyclist doesn't.

Except that it has everything to do with your original post, which takes a selectively narrow view of reality to suit a narrow argument. By looking at the big picture, it shows that your selective view was wrong.

smash wrote: »

I actually see more cyclists breaking traffic laws than motorists, especially in urban areas.

If you see more cyclists breaking traffic laws that motorists, you are either a very unobservant road user, or you are suffering from confirmation bias.

How many times did you break the speed limit the last time you drove?

smash wrote: »

Anyway... I know these are UK figures, but I'd love to see the breakdown of who's at fault: http://www.rospa.com/road-safety/advice/pedal-cyclists/facts-figures/

Sure - I'm happy to help clarify who's at fault;

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-22408573
http://btawa.org.au/2015/02/03/are-cyclists-at-fault-in-traffic-crashes-no/

ThisRegard

Spook_ie wrote: »

OMG NO you don't, you have contributed for the use of the motor vehicle, you have not SPECIFICALLY contributed as a cyclist, you do not need to have a motor vehicle to use the cyclelanes therefore you have NOT paid anything as a cyclist for the provision of cycling infrastructure

You're getting yourself into fluster, weren't you talking about road infrastructure up until this senior moment of yours?

I might go for a swim later, but hang on, I don't own a boat so presumably haven't contributed to the canal or coastal infrastructure. Am I allowed to now?

Spook_ie

smash wrote: »

We kind of did pay people to cycle to work through the cycle to work scheme. Unfortunately most who avail of the scheme don't cycle to work.

Ah be fair, some of them do, a lot of them don't but that's the exchequers fault for not following up on them, sort of like people taxing taxis and commercials at a reduced rate and not actually using them as taxis and commercials, should be more enforced by the authorities for all cases

RainyDay

Spook_ie wrote: »

OMG NO you don't, you have contributed for the use of the motor vehicle, you have not SPECIFICALLY contributed as a cyclist, you do not need to have a motor vehicle to use the cyclelanes therefore you have NOT paid anything as a cyclist for the provision of cycling infrastructure

Which bit of reality are you struggling to understand. I'm a cyclist. I've paid motor tax. So I've paid for the provision of roads.

Them's the facts,, brother, even if they don't suit your selective view of the world.

Spook_ie

ThisRegard wrote: »

You're getting yourself into fluster, weren't you talking about road infrastructure up until this senior moment of yours?

No and you know I haven't, unless there's a typo in there somewhere