Cyclists, insurance and road tax

AndrewJRenko

maestroamado wrote: »

I am not surprised with a comment like that coming from you, you have a lot of catching up to do to get to where i am at...

It's a genuine question - What do you mean by 'be responsible'?

maestroamado

beauf wrote: »

There is a rail network within easy cycling distance of Clonee. If you wanted to do it you could, for very little effort. You could park and ride from Dunboyne either.

The rail network in Dublin or Ireland cannot cope with the numbers at busy commute times.
I do not live in Dublin as i in country but am a regular traveler and would prefer use public transport but its not a viable option.
I know set-up and unfortunately i do not see anyone choosing public-transport as 1st option which for me is sad.
Back to topic, are we allowed bring bicycles on trains in this country?

km991148

Train stations/Luas stops are the worst. You need a cheap bike and an 100+ quid lock.

maestroamado

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

It's a genuine question - What do you mean by 'be responsible'?

I am surprised you do not know the meaning, google will tell you...
I decided to add abit, be conscious of what we are about as we can only control us...

AndrewJRenko

maestroamado wrote: »

I am surprised you do not know the meaning, google will tell you...
I decided to add abit, be conscious of what we are about as we can only control us...

So you don't expect other road users to pull over for you, or plan their journeys around you then - good to know.

maestroamado

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

So you don't expect other road users to pull over for you, or plan their journeys around you then - good to know.

The fact that after 14,500 posts you cannot read what is going on tells me quite alot...


buenas noches... bed...

beauf

maestroamado wrote: »

The rail network in Dublin or Ireland cannot cope with the numbers at busy commute times.
I do not live in Dublin as i in country but am a regular traveler and would prefer use public transport but its not a viable option.
I know set-up and unfortunately i do not see anyone choosing public-transport as 1st option which for me is sad.
Back to topic, are we allowed bring bicycles on trains in this country?

Well they were talking about Clonee as its in on the moon. It's not. There's a train station and park and ride within a reasonable distance. And to be honest if you want to use the train you kinda have to factor that in where you choose to live.

Bicycles only off peak and then subject to demand. They have to be booked on the inter cities I think. Not sure if anyone does that. Folding bikes any time but must be folded. I'm my experience it's not enforced and when it is they don't know the rules themselves. I've been asked to fold and move my bike on empty train. Every sign I see about it is worded ambiguously.

Cilldara_2000

beauf wrote: »

Its not an attack. Its the whole tax thing is bogus argument.

You only pay a small tax to drive. You pay much more in buying a car.
But then you pay tax when you buy a bicycle. You have to look at the purpose of these taxes. Its to change consumer behavior and to create income for the state. Taxing cycling would not achieve these aims, as the objective is to encourage cyclists, not discourage them.

Why are you saying this in reply to me? I haven’t said that cyclists should be taxed.

Also, the purpose of all these taxes until very recently, was to collect revenue. At no point has anyone said that VAT, VRT, Motor Tax etc are to discourage motoring.

Fair enough though with the NOX charge and the carbon tax which are very recent innovations. But I am quite sceptical of the behaviour changing potential of the carbon tax so far, and the planned incremental implementation. A cent or two extra a year will barely be noticeable.

AndrewJRenko

maestroamado wrote: »

The fact that after 14,500 posts you cannot read what is going on tells me quite alot...


buenas noches... bed...

I can only read what you write. If you're reluctant or coy about being specific, I'm not going to read between the lines.

Eric Cartman

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

It's not a choice for the people who wouldn't live in certain areas of Dublin so they chose to live in Clonee where they could afford a much bigger house and there were no ruffians and now have to drive 2 hours a day to work and the city should be designed to accommodate them driving to work because of their choices, not the yuppie cyclists who actually live in the city.

Well excuse people for not wanting to , or in many cases not being able to afford to even live in crime infested areas of dublin.

maestroamado

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I can only read what you write. If you're reluctant or coy about being specific, I'm not going to read between the lines.

Its likely a step outside your comfort zone... i am not coy about anything i say what i have seen....

beauf

Cilldara_2000 wrote: »

Why are you saying this in reply to me? I haven’t said that cyclists should be taxed....

I quoted what I was replying to. It's a handy way of keeping a reply in context.

AndrewJRenko

maestroamado wrote: »

Its likely a step outside your comfort zone... i am not coy about anything i say what i have seen....

You're very coy about clarifying what specifically you mean by "be responsible" in the context of your previous comments where you noted your frustration that others would have the temerity to be using the road ahead of you.

beauf

The argument for cyclists having insurance and tax is simply a means to discourage cycling. Which doesn't make any sense.

Since the reasons for discouraging driving in cities is due to traffic and pollution, and creating income. None of which cycling does or can do.

It's really just a reaction to more changes that make driving harder. Regardless if it makes any sense.

km991148

beauf wrote: »

The argument for cyclists having insurance and tax is simply a means to discourage cycling. Which doesn't make any sense.

Since the reasons for discouraging driving in cities is due to traffic and pollution, and creating income. None of which cycling does or can do.

It's really just a reaction to more changes that make driving harder. Regardless if it makes any sense.

The complete irony, of course, being that, more cyclists is good for motorists!

beauf

km991148 wrote: »

The complete irony, of course, being that more cyclists is good for motorists!

Exactly. The flip side of that is drivers are their own traffic. It's that traffic and more car use that's driving up the cost of driving. Not cyclists.

But this isn't really about any of that. It's the frustration of being stuck in traffic and the expense of driving and someone cycling has none of that. So it's begrudgery.

AndrewJRenko

Those interested in the legal niceties of the overtaking law may be interested in this thread;

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058180350

Pinch Flat

Cyclists pay Vat on helmets in Ireland don't in the UK. Discuss.

harmless

Pinch Flat wrote: »

Cyclists pay Vat on helmets in Ireland don't in the UK. Discuss.

It's like how you pay VRT and VAT on safety features in a car.
Both cyclists and motorists are getting screwed here.

We should form an alliance and make a change!

beauf

You pay more the more expensive the item, the more expensive the mode of transport. I'm seeing a pattern.

MojoMaker

beauf wrote: »

But this isn't really about any of that. It's the frustration of being stuck in traffic and the expense of driving and someone cycling has none of that. So it's begrudgery.

Post #1607.

108 pages later, the irrefutable baseline on which all anti-cycling straw man arguments are built is crystallised - the frustration of being in traffic and spotting someone not burdened by the same cost (by choice) getting a "free ride".

Fighting Tao

MojoMaker wrote: »

Post #1607.

108 pages later, the irrefutable baseline on which all anti-cycling straw man arguments are built is crystallised - the frustration of being in traffic and spotting someone not burdened by the same cost (by choice) getting a "free ride".

The thing is that almost everyone has access to cycling including those complaining on this thread. It’s an equal playing field that they are moaning about.

kirving

beauf wrote: »

You pay more the more expensive the item, the more expensive the mode of transport. I'm seeing a pattern.

The benefactors of (currently optional) car safety equipment are very often vulnerable road users.

It's absolutely disgraceful that VAT and VRT are charged on already expensive items such as radar and camera systems, and in the end it's the vulnerable road user who will suffer.

I saved a lot of money buying a quality helmet form the UK before Brexit, but nowadays I probably couldn't afford the same one.

BabysCoffee

Do car drivers not understand that they are the issue??? And if cycling were to become less popular there would be more cars (traffic) on the road.

Pity more car drivers don't think of fellow citizens and leave the car at home if they have the option of walking or cycling. This would then hopefully mean less traffic for those who have to drive for various reasons varying from disabilities or length of commutes, etc.

Particularly for journeys of less than 5km or so it would be helpful to leave the car at home - unless you need to eg. if you are carrying heavy loads, etc.

John_Rambo

BabysCoffee wrote: »

Do car drivers not understand that they are the issue??? And if cycling were to become less popular there would be more cars (traffic) on the road.

Pity more car drivers don't think of fellow citizens and leave the car at home if they have the option of walking or cycling. This would then hopefully mean less traffic for those who have to drive for various reasons varying from disabilities or length of commutes, etc.

Particularly for journeys of less than 5km or so it would be helpful to leave the car at home - unless you need to eg. if you are carrying heavy loads, etc.

I'm a motorist and I carry heavy, expensive (stealable) equipment. But pedestrians, cyclists and public transport comes first. I'll happily tail cyclists for as long as it takes to safely overtake them and it's never really more than a couple of hundred metres.

I don't care if they're two abreast or not.
I don't get triggered in to a rage by what they're wearing.
I don't loose my mind if they're not wearing helmets.
I don't care if they break lights.
I don't know if they have bells, so that doesn't bother me.
I don't mind if they filter up beside me on either side, I'm a good driver and have mirrors.
Even if they're teenagers pulling wheelies I'll stay behind them and won't overtake as they're unpredictable (as all teenagers are)

I'm ok with joggers on the road too. They're social distancing, I give them space.

Often, when I do overtake cyclists they end up in front of me at traffic lights anyway. It's just a change of mindset that motorists have to get their heads around.

It will improve, the younger cohort of motorists with proper skills do it, it's the guys my age 40+ that have some weird sense of entitlement like their riding a carriage powered by eight barely tamed, dangerous mustangs (the horse, not the car) and everyone that's not in a car needs to clear the way for their super important journey because in their minds the road is built for cars only.

BabysCoffee

John_Rambo wrote: »

I'm a motorist and I carry heavy, expensive (stealable) equipment. But pedestrians, cyclists and public transport comes first. I'll happily tail cyclists for as long as it takes to safely overtake them and it's never really more than a couple of hundred metres.

I don't care if they're two abreast or not.
I don't get triggered in to a rage by what they're wearing.
I don't loose my mind if they're not wearing helmets.
I don't care if they break lights.
I don't know if they have bells, so that doesn't bother me.
I don't mind if they filter up beside me on either side, I'm a good driver and have mirrors.
Even if they're teenagers pulling wheelies I'll stay behind them and won't overtake as they're unpredictable (as all teenagers are)

I'm ok with joggers on the road too. They're social distancing, I give them space.

Often, when I do overtake cyclists they end up in front of me at traffic lights anyway. It's just a change of mindset that motorists have to get their heads around.

It will improve, the younger cohort of motorists with proper skills do it, it's the guys my age 40+ that have some weird sense of entitlement like their riding a carriage powered by eight barely tamed, dangerous mustangs (the horse, not the car) and everyone that's not in a car needs to clear the way for their super important journey because in their minds the road is built for cars only.

You sound like a very considerate person along with being very astute and being aware that there are other road users who are very vulnerable. Fair play to you

Thelonious Monk

Tomorrow has all the makings to be the worst day of traffic everywhere this year so far with the predicted beautiful weather, or possibly of any Saturday given the restrictions.
Going to take a cycle out to Howth and along the coast, should be interesting, you'd be nuts to drive anywhere tomorrow.

Fighting Tao

John_Rambo wrote: »

I'm a motorist and I carry heavy, expensive (stealable) equipment. But pedestrians, cyclists and public transport comes first. I'll happily tail cyclists for as long as it takes to safely overtake them and it's never really more than a couple of hundred metres.

I don't care if they're two abreast or not.
I don't get triggered in to a rage by what they're wearing.
I don't loose my mind if they're not wearing helmets.
I don't care if they break lights.
I don't know if they have bells, so that doesn't bother me.
I don't mind if they filter up beside me on either side, I'm a good driver and have mirrors.
Even if they're teenagers pulling wheelies I'll stay behind them and won't overtake as they're unpredictable (as all teenagers are)

I'm ok with joggers on the road too. They're social distancing, I give them space.

Often, when I do overtake cyclists they end up in front of me at traffic lights anyway. It's just a change of mindset that motorists have to get their heads around.

It will improve, the younger cohort of motorists with proper skills do it, it's the guys my age 40+ that have some weird sense of entitlement like their riding a carriage powered by eight barely tamed, dangerous mustangs (the horse, not the car) and everyone that's not in a car needs to clear the way for their super important journey because in their minds the road is built for cars only.

You sound like a reasonable person.

John_Rambo

BabysCoffee wrote: »

You sound like a very considerate person along with being very astute and being aware that there are other road users who are very vulnerable. Fair play to you

It's going to be the norm in less than a decade.

07Lapierre

John_Rambo wrote: »

It's going to be the norm in less than a decade.

I dunno....I'm over 40 and when I'm out cycling, most close passes are by drivers that look a lot younger than me!