"Roads are for cars, not lycra louts"

Mike Healey

yeehaamcgee wrote:

Hey, I said I was in two minds, not a concrete for or against.
I had assumed that our "road tax" was meant to cover the vast majority of road maintenance though.

Nowhere near the costs of providing all highway facilities, including emergency services, maintenance, building new roads, putting in new design features to take into account driver stupidities, etc. I'm afraid

As for cyclists killing other people, fair enough, not many kill other road users. However, how many cyclists are to blame for their own deaths due to irresponsible riding? I'd wager it's far higher.

Government survey showed about 65% of bike/MV collisions were drivers fault. A later AA (yup, them) survey put it higher, at about 70%.

Anyway, I pay VED like all drivers, only the bicycle is a zero emission vehicle, so I pay nowt'

verylonglegs

Mike Healey wrote:

yeehaamcgee wrote:

Hey, I said I was in two minds, not a concrete for or against.
I had assumed that our "road tax" was meant to cover the vast majority of road maintenance though.

Nowhere near the costs of providing all highway facilities, including emergency services, maintenance, building new roads, putting in new design features to take into account driver stupidities, etc. I'm afraid

I was always led to believe its the other way round, that the amount collected from VED far exceeds the amount actually spent on roads. Admittedly I've never sought any figures out.

SteppenHerring

I was always led to believe its the other way round, that the amount collected from VED far exceeds the amount actually spent on roads. Admittedly I've never sought any figures out.

When you add up the cost of road building/maintenance, the cost of policing the roads, the cost of treating accident vicitms and clearing up (the police reckon it costs £750K to sort out each fatal accident - and there are the best part of 3,000 of them a year), the illness caused by traffic pollution etc. you'll find that VED and fuel duty don't nearly cover it. Non-motorists actually subsidise motorists.

And, from some remarks above, apparently we do still have the death penalty in this country for the offence of "cycling like a tw*t". No trial required.

Porgy

verylonglegs wrote:

I was always led to believe its the other way round, that the amount collected from VED far exceeds the amount actually spent on roads. Admittedly I've never sought any figures out.

That's what the motorist's lobby have always claimed - again I've never seen any figures but it seems unlikely.

Pross

yeehaamcgee wrote:

See, I'm in two minds about this. As much as I wish our roads were safer, and that cars paid more attention to cyclists, I also realise that it's the car owners who foot the largest part of the bill for building and maintaining roads. Also, I see a lot of dangerous, or just plain ignorant cyclists, even out here in the countryside.

How do you work that out? Council tax pays the vast majority of highway repairs. VED goes into the general coffers, some may make it back into roads but will be trunk roads and motorways which we generally aren't cycling on plus most cyclists will also be motorists so it doesn't wash. Where else are we supposed to ride? We legally can't ride on the footway, cycleways are generally crap, cyclelanes on the road are shared with buses and taxis and get you just as much stick. Until we end up with nationwide long distance cycle only routes most of us are going to be on the road as it's the only choice!

Anonymous

Pross wrote:

How do you work that out? Council tax pays the vast majority of highway repairs. VED goes into the general coffers, some may make it back into roads but will be trunk roads and motorways which we generally aren't cycling on plus most cyclists will also be motorists so it doesn't wash. Where else are we supposed to ride? We legally can't ride on the footway, cycleways are generally crap, cyclelanes on the road are shared with buses and taxis and get you just as much stick. Until we end up with nationwide long distance cycle only routes most of us are going to be on the road as it's the only choice!

GIVE IT A FRICKING REST.
I was mistaken, as has been pointed out over and over and over.
I'd love to run you over if I saw you on the road :roll:

MrChuck

Porgy wrote:

yeehaamcgee wrote:

Hey, I said I was in two minds, not a concrete for or against.
I had assumed that our "road tax" was meant to cover the vast majority of road maintenance though.

As for cyclists killing other people, fair enough, not many kill other road users. However, how many cyclists are to blame for their own deaths due to irresponsible riding? I'd wager it's far higher.

It's just a distraction from the important argument though - that roads though funded by all of us seem to be geared up for motorists above all; and that (just occasionally at least) cyclists get killed by motorists while not doing anything wrong - and anyway this same judgemental attitude is never levelled at motorists for whom we seem to be bending over backwards to protect on the roads.

Also that all of us to some extent are having to make compromises for poor driving and lack of focus by powers that be on cycling issues.

Well said. It's a shame that any discussion about bike in the mainstream media is grounded in the assumption that drivers own the roads and the damage they cause is acceptable, whereas cyclists are menaces. Objectively it just makes no sense at all.

Porgy

SteppenHerring wrote:

When you add up the cost of road building/maintenance, the cost of policing the roads, the cost of treating accident vicitms and clearing up (the police reckon it costs £750K to sort out each fatal accident - and there are the best part of 3,000 of them a year), the illness caused by traffic pollution etc. you'll find that VED and fuel duty don't nearly cover it. Non-motorists actually subsidise motorists.

I read a very good report on this in the 90s - written by an American but it still applied in a general sense to the UK - talking about the little considered costs of car dominated culture. things I hadn't thought about were the small amount we all pay on our goods when we buy from a supermarket which pays for the 'free' car park and the increase in house prices due to increased width of road and off-road parking being built in to architect's designs - we all pay that whether we drive or not, and the increased interest, tax and insurance associated. It must run into billions a year.

SteppenHerring wrote:

And, from some remarks above, apparently we do still have the death penalty in this country for the offence of "cycling like a tw*t". No trial required.

+1

Le Commentateur

Seeing as the article is about cycling on Australian roads, there may be socio-econimic differences that influence opinion to road cyclists.

Porgy

Le Commentateur wrote:

Seeing as the article is about cycling on Australian roads, there may be socio-econimic differences that influence opinion to road cyclists.

Maybe - but it read just like any number of articles i've seen in the British press tbh

clanton

If anything the Aussies seem even more militant and aggressive than UK motorists.

Anonymous

So, is the general consensus here, that cyclists are the victim?

Pross

yeehaamcgee wrote:

Pross wrote:

How do you work that out? Council tax pays the vast majority of highway repairs. VED goes into the general coffers, some may make it back into roads but will be trunk roads and motorways which we generally aren't cycling on plus most cyclists will also be motorists so it doesn't wash. Where else are we supposed to ride? We legally can't ride on the footway, cycleways are generally crap, cyclelanes on the road are shared with buses and taxis and get you just as much stick. Until we end up with nationwide long distance cycle only routes most of us are going to be on the road as it's the only choice!

GIVE IT A FRICKING REST.
I was mistaken, as has been pointed out over and over and over.
I'd love to run you over if I saw you on the road :roll:

PMT time is it? Come and try anytime if you think running cyclists over is fun

Anonymous

Coo, sounds like fun. Where about do you ride?

Porgy

yeehaamcgee wrote:

So, is the general consensus here, that cyclists are the victim?

The general consensus on here appears to be that you're the victim

Anonymous

it seems it.
Hey, what we need is more of Pross butting in before reading properly.

Pross

Down in Monmouthshire BTW apologies I somehow missed your earlier responses. Yes, motorists are ripped off to pay for everything other than better roads!

Anonymous

Monmouthshire? Ooh, I'm coming down near(ish) that in a fortnight.
How's about I run you over on... say, Thursday? How's that for you?

Pross

Only available on weekends sorry. Just to warn you though, it may do me some damage but with the amount of excess weight I'm carrying I wouldn't count on your car being useable again!

Anonymous

Meh, you haven't seen the state of my car anyway. In fact it might look better

Pross

I can guess, I've seen the battered pick ups you all drive around up in Gogland

Anonymous

It's not a pickup, but it may as well be. I got shunted into a wall by a truck (actually, that's similar to a cyclist/car scenario, scaled up) and the cost to repair the bodywork is about the same as I paid for the car, so I thought, "sod it".

nick hanson

clanton wrote:

If anything the Aussies seem even more militant and aggressive than UK motorists.

To be fair,the majority of Aussies are descendants of our castoffs/criminals shipped out etc,so you can expect such behaviour!
Not too sure of the attraction people find in emigrating there,unless you like it so mind numbingly hot you have to go training at 5am. :shock:

Porgy

nick hanson wrote:

clanton wrote:

If anything the Aussies seem even more militant and aggressive than UK motorists.

To be fair,the majority of Aussies are descendants of our castoffs/criminals shipped out etc,so you can expect such behaviour!
Not too sure of the attraction people find in emigrating there,unless you like it so mind numbingly hot you have to go training at 5am. :shock:

the only people i know who went over there came back after a couple of years complaining about spiders in the bathroom, a plague of mice and terrifying forest fires near their town. Plus the shop they ran went bankrupt.

nwallace

yeehaamcgee wrote:

See, I'm in two minds about this. As much as I wish our roads were safer, and that cars paid more attention to cyclists, I also realise that it's the car owners who foot the largest part of the bill for building and maintaining roads. Also, I see a lot of dangerous, or just plain ignorant cyclists, even out here in the countryside.

Even if VED paid for roads it still wouldn't be the case.
The cost of an LGV VED disc probably out weighs it at £1,850 for a Bang G 12 month disc

Get outta my way Hummvee I paid nearly 5x more VED than you.

deptfordmarmoset

Cyclists really should get themselves inoculated against Vehicle Emission Disease, all the same...

Anonymous

bloody hell, does no-one actually read threads these days?

balthazar

yeehaamcgee wrote:

bloody hell, does no-one actually read threads these days?

There's no such thing as road tax – it's Vehicle Excise Duty; road upkeep is paid for from the general taxation pool.

(ducks)

Anonymous

I KNOW! I was mistaken, and have been corrected. Several times over by now. If you'd read the bastard thread you'd be aware of this.

balthazar

yeehaamcgee wrote:

I KNOW! I was mistaken, and have been corrected. Several times over by now. If you'd read the bastard thread you'd be aware of this.

:roll: So irony really is dead in the water..

To clarify – I get it! That's why I wrote (ducks). You know, to suggest that I was metaphorically ducking your chummy punch. Oh christ there's nothing worse than a joke explained.

(groans)

Well at least your post demonstrated that bastard isn't excluded by the swearing matron. I didn't know that.