You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
IT DOESNT * MATTER WHO PAYS FOR WHAT. PAYING FOR SOMETHING NEVER GIVES YOU THE RIGHT TO HURT PEOPLE WHO HAVENT PAID FOR IT.IS THAT
* CLEAR?RIGHT THEN
Who are you trying to convince with that by the way ?
Nobody here has said any different have they.
Or do you just like shouting stuff.
Does anyone have a constructive message for her employer?
No need. Her employer already responded appropriately taking it v seriously. The ironic thing about it all is that they sponsored a local charity cycle that several of the partners participated in so I am sure that this girl is in deep s**t with them as well as the law 🙂
Why don't we, tax people (more) for using petrol and stop taxing 'em for having some types of car. That way people who drive about more pay more tax which is fair, no-one thinks they're more entitled to the road because all they're doing is paying for fuel, people who drive about more will want to drive about even less thus encouraging biking and buses and canal barges and every one will love cyclists.
Sometimes I'm so far in genius land my wife calls me Stephen.
There is a certain irony that one of her company's specialist areas is Tax advice.
That way people who drive about more pay more tax which is fair
Quite often the people who do the most miles are running small businesses.
Personally I do loads of miles as part of my job, and make very little money as it is.
I would reckon that such a change could do some serious damage to my business, or possibly even close me down.
It seems fair that those who use the roads the most should pay the most, otherwise they are just being subsidised by the rest of us.
[quote=nealglover ]
Quite often the people who do the most miles are running small businesses.
Personally I do loads of miles as part of my job, and make very little money as it is.
I would reckon that such a change could do some serious damage to my business, or possibly even close me down.
Your customers would have to pick up the full cost of your services then?
Why don't we, tax people (more) for using petrol and stop taxing 'em for having some types of car.
Well I suspect the theory is that VED /car tax is a "nudge" tax. By calling it out as a separate charge it makes folk think about it more and allows car manufacturers to make a feature out of an otherwise boring technical detail about emission levels. And it weights prices slightly more against the heavier polluting cars.
Conversely abolishing it and add 1p to petrol or whatever would be punishing the folk that have bought low CO2 cars.
I'd have to agree , abolish ved increase fuel duty
Takes away any issues with cars on private land etc and makes fuel
Tax purely an environmental thing
Low co2 cars will use less fuel ?
Your customers would have to pick up the full cost of your services then?
And everyone would pay more for everything because it cost more to get stuff onto the shelves.
So basically you would still be paying for the "subsidy" you didn't want to pay for in the first place.
It seems fair that those who use the roads the most should pay the most, otherwise they are just being subsidised by the rest of us.
Doesn't existing tax on petrol already do that?
[quote=GrahamS ]Why don't we, tax people (more) for using petrol and stop taxing 'em for having some types of car.
Well I suspect the theory is that VED /car tax is a "nudge" tax. By calling it out as a separate charge it makes folk think about it more and allows car manufacturers to make a feature out of an otherwise boring technical detail about emission levels. And it weights prices slightly more against the heavier polluting cars.
Conversely abolishing it and add 1p to petrol or whatever would be punishing the folk that have bought low CO2 cars.
I always assumed a cleaner car was a more efficient car (i.e. it got more out of the fuel you put in), so would it really punish low CO2 cars?
[quote=nealglover ]Your customers would have to pick up the full cost of your services then?
And everyone would pay more for everything because it cost more to get stuff onto the shelves.
So basically you would still be paying for the "subsidy" you didn't want to pay for in the first place.
Only if I bought your product.
[quote=GrahamS ]It seems fair that those who use the roads the most should pay the most, otherwise they are just being subsidised by the rest of us.
Doesn't existing tax on petrol already do that?
Yep - so why not go the whole hog? The Govt already gets another tax on new cars too - VAT.
I always assumed a cleaner car was a more efficient car (i.e. it got more out of the fuel you put in), so would it really punish low CO2 cars?
Yes it would because right now a low CO2 car benefits from zero car tax AND low fuel costs due to its efficiency.
So if you abolished car tax and put up fuel costs you'd increase the cost of running that car.
Gotcha. It would have worked if we'd not already introduced the zero rated VED level.
[i]Quite often the people who do the most miles are running small businesses.[/i]
Everyone does, it'd all even out. All your competitors would have the same problem, costs would move about. It's the only logical explanation both from a equality point of view (I for example pay full road tax on two cars and yet ride 6000 cycle commuting miles a year - It's not fair!!), and from an ecological point of view people will have to reconsider the way they do things. If fuel is a pony a gallon, riding down the local grocer with a trailer on your bike seems perfectly acceptable.
We HAVE to get on top of our fuel consumption. Raising fuel costs is the only way. That will necessitate different approaches to business, people will use local firms rather than great big ones, you'll not have to drive about so much, my business which operates over a huge geographical area will need to localise resources thus providing employment to some deprived areas, it'll all be for the best.
Gotcha. It would have worked if we'd not already introduced the zero rated VED level.
Sort of, though even at the Band B (£20pa) and Band C (£30pa) level they could end up paying more, depending on how much was added to fuel duty and how much they typically use a year.
e.g. abolish car tax and put 1p a litre on fuel duty instead and any Band B driver using more than 2000 litres a year would be worse off.
[quote=GrahamS ]Even at the Band B (£20pa) and Band C (£30pa) level they could end up paying more, depending on how much was added to fuel duty and how much they typically use a year.
e.g. abolish car tax and put 1p a litre on fuel duty instead and any Band B driver using more than 2000 litres a year would be worse off.
It should be possible to work out how much is collected by VED and how many litres of petrol/diesel are sold each year in order to come up with a figure. I suspect it would be a lot less than 1p per litre though?
Edit: £6Bn pa in VED 😯
Edit2: 5.6Bn Litres of Petrol/ 4.1Bn Litres of Diesel.
Edit3: and about £128m in collection costs
Ok - about .6p per litre (more than I'd have thought)
I suspect it would be a lot less than 1p per litre though?
In which case you have to ask would it actually have any effect on the factors people consider when buying a car?
Right now I doubt anyone would think about a 0.1 mpg difference when buying a car, but if it was Band C versus Band D then I bet they would.
Only if I bought your product
I'm probably not the only person who uses Petrol/Diesel in the course of running their business ??
There may be others.
[quote=nealglover ]Only if I bought your product
I'm probably not the only person who uses Petrol/Diesel in the course of running their business ??
There may be others.
Yep - and the costs of providing services/products should be borne by the customers. Perhaps some service providers would actually be able to offer a lower cost based on the use of public transport, the bicycle or not travelling at all.
Probably not almost every Shop and supermarket though eh ?
Who are you trying to convince with that by the way ?Nobody here has said any different have they.
Or do you just like shouting stuff.
SHOUTING
Why don't we, tax people (more) for using petrol and stop taxing 'em for having some types of car. That way people who drive about more pay more tax which is fair, no-one thinks they're more entitled to the road because all they're doing is paying for fuel, people who drive about more will want to drive about even less thus encouraging biking and buses and canal barges and every one will love cyclists.
Was abolishing VED and bumping fuel duty or basing road tax on annual mileage not proposed a couple of years ago?
If I recall correctly even the devil Clarkson himself spoke up in favour, the logic is impeccable, those who drive the polutiest (thirstiest) vehicles more miles pay the most, those that buy a clean machine and drive less, pay less...
The truth is nobody really pays a sufficient rate for the pollution their car creates, including Leccy jobs...
But as was said, VED is no excuse for dangerous driving...
the logic is impeccable... those that buy a clean machine and drive less, pay less...
Except they'll pay [i]more[/i] than they currently do, as I explained above.
I do hope that all those of us bleating to each other on a cycling site are actually posting their great points in the places where they might change someone's mind.
If not it's all hot air.
ffs who turned this into a boring VED thread? I wanted updates on the story not mindless rehashing of something we all know about anyway, oh wait, I just realised where I am.
[i]I do hope that all those of us bleating to each other on a cycling site are actually posting their great points in the places where they might change someone's mind.[/i]
The targets of any discussion are of the intellectual capacity displayed below.
"I just hit a cyclist and then tweeted about it"
Debating with these people will never change their minds, we should turn up with twenty benson and a 2 litre bottle of ALDI blue cider if we want to do that. 😉
what fuzzy said!
ffs who turned this into a boring VED thread? I wanted updates on the story not mindless rehashing of something we all know about anyway, oh wait, I just realised where I am.
Exactly, it's gone way off topic now.
[url= http://road.cc/content/news/84284-nofolk-bloodycyclists-twitter-story-hits-local-national-headlines-cyclists ]Back on topic[/url]
Its made the Mail, the Guardian & The Independent. I bet this Doris is feeling bloody stupid now!
ffs who turned this into a boring VED thread? I wanted updates on the story not mindless rehashing of something we all know about anyway, oh wait, I just realised where I am.
The story is done. There is nothing more to say really, unless you just want more links to how different news agencies are covering exactly the same thing?
If so then here it is on Sky: http://news.sky.com/story/1093752/drivers-twitter-boast-about-hitting-cyclist (who also explain the "road tax" thing - bless them)
I do hope that all those of us bleating to each other on a cycling site are actually posting their great points in the places where they might change someone's mind.
And I hope everyone here has taken a moment to [url= http://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/psa-please-sign-the-get-britain-cycling-e-petition-1 ][b]SIGN THE PETITION to help improve conditions on the road for cyclists[/b][/url]?
[url= http://smh.drive.com.au/motor-news/tweet-sparks-cyclist-outrage-20130522-2k0j6.html ]Made the news here in Oz as well... Silly girl...[/url]
I'll bet she's regretting it now
"Police probe 21-year-old UK driver"
According to the CTC, Cartlon Reid will be on the Jeremy Vine Show (Radio 2) today at 1:40 to discuss the issue.
"Police probe 21-year-old UK driver"
Ooh it's a bit more serious now. Strip and cavity searches for motoring offences!!
I'm on my third burning torch, whens the lynching going to start proper?
According to the CTC, Cartlon Reid will be on the Jeremy Vine Show (Radio 2) today at 1:40 to discuss the issue.
I shall listen with interest and try not to shout at the radio when the inevitable ****nuggets call in 😆
Was just about to post as what swavis said ^^
Might even call in to the Jeremy Vine show myself. 😉
The only realistic long term prospect to get people to understand this is a proper road pricing scheme. Abolish VED, cut fuel prices but then charge per mile with a fee based on time of day, type of roads and type of car. That way it's easily understood by even the dippiest moron.
charge per mile with a fee based on time of day, type of roads and type of car. That way it's easily understood by even the dippiest moron.
True - but then we'd get EVEN MORE hassle for not paying it on bikes (assuming cyclists would be exempt) so it's not really a great solution for us.
Even more complicated though, the Fuel duty solution is so much easier - if you want to discourage commuters put a small small charge on commuter roads (i.e. 50p) on a morning, you could pay people to collect it, provide some employment. A mini congestion charge, would make good sense then for cyclists to be excepted.
Now you're talking. I'd be happy waiting for cyclist to ride through the toll point and give chase. If I catch 'em they have to pay up, if not, well, well done to you sir.
How about if your bike makes any 'worrying noises' then you pay, if not and the chain's well cared for, you go for free?
yes. Plus there will some crimes that can simply not go unpunished.
Plastic bag over the saddle, seat too low, people doing 3mph on a 5 grand road bike and fat bikes.
The free of charge lane should be 12 inches wide, with censors... if you go outside that lane (ie, can't ride in a straight line), you pay.
It would encourage better riding skills.
Oh and +1 on the seat too low knees out penalty...
The mash has an interesting perspective
[url= http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/motorists-and-cyclists-united-against-pedestrians-2013052269600 ]Daily Mash[/url]
This has bugger all to do with VED. People and goods would not need to travel such distances as they do ( or nip down the shops in their car), if the car / truck hadn't been made so readily available. Simple fact is they are and an infrastructure needs to be available for them. It's big, complicated and made comically expensive by signage for the terminally thick.
The entire problem here is a woman totally unable to be responsible for her own actions and utter inability to interact.
For what it's worth, the wife and I have 3 vehicles. Her car ( she can't even ride a bike !). Our van for camping and carting toys about and a car which I have been provided with by work. I probably do about 25000 miles a year driving these days and don't enjoy much of it. But, equally I don't mind paying VED as we do need good roads otherwise it would all grind to a halt twice a day, much earlier than it does already. I do, however , hate how much insurance we pay, largely down to the utter social incapability of morons like this.
Hope the guy who got hits suffers no future problem as a result.
P.S. If this all sounds a bit like I drive everywhere, I'm lucky to have good trails within 10 miles of home and ride to them as often as I get chance.
After a couple of stella's i could probably overlook Ms Way's horrific personality and assist the Police in giving her a probing.
[i] equally I don't mind paying VED as we do need good roads otherwise[/i]
it doesn't make the roads any better. 😉
Now running on [url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22614569 ]BBC Magazine[/url]
equally I don't mind paying VED as we do need good roads
How did you get this far in the thread and miss the point that VED DOESN'T PAY FOR ROADS ?! 😕
If it does not pay for roads then why is it called road tax MORON
Should try this anon on twitter or you tube to really get you 😉
Its on BBC Radio 2 now.
From the BBC article:
"They're dressed exclusively in lycra and wraparound shades, they ride on the pavement, go the wrong way down one way streets and straight through red lights. And that's why motorists hate them."
I just don't get this at all. I don't actually see a lot of commuters in lycra and wrapround shades, but why does it matter so much to drivers what cyclists wear???
And how is that any different from complaining about say "those Indian fellows coming here and wearing turbans"?
And yes, I do ride on pavements and the wrong way up one-way streets. But I do this [b]legally[/b] (shared use pavement and cycle contraflow one-way). I wonder how many non-cyclists realise this?
Why does Vine have to bellow?
Could they have got a more shouty, angry man that missed the point of the whole article.
I think this picture from the bbc says everything you need to know about what the problem is. Nothing to do with VED.
[img] 
[/img]
You've gone out and spent a lot of money on a car. Now you're stuck in a big queue because every other bugger has done the same thing.
Then some cock on a bike just rolls past without a care in the world KILL HIM!!!
Its pointless i see more bad driving from cars than bikes but I see more cars than bikes
i think it annoys cars becaus ethey are stuck in traffic jams when this happens andthey wish they could do the same tbh
IME the worst cyclists - the red light jumpers and the pavement riders are people who own a bike rather than a cyclist
it might be placebo but im sure i get more room since i fitted the roadhawk visibly onto my helmet for commuting through the city.
folks at work said seeing cyclists with helmet cams on makes them give them more room.
works for me - infact id fit front and rear cams to my cars if the insurance decreased significantly for them being fitted.
the biggest issue i find is lack of respect - and i dont mean to other cyclists .... i mean the drivers dont even respect each other, what hope have cyclists got ?
I'm starting a business selling camera casings for people who can't afford the full camera...
Could they have got a more shouty, angry man that missed the point of the whole article.
YES
I though he was one of the characters from 'Down the line' 😕
Never really listened to Jeremy Vine, think I havent really missed much. Is he the chattering classes Jeremy Kyle?
It seemed like a wasted and slightly miss matched 'debate'. What I came away with is trucker doesnt like people braking the law but wasnt really getting the issue was the driver braking the law.
If people want to push cyclist behavior maybe some thought should be given to why cyclists feel the safest course of action may not be acording to the highway code. For example the decision to roll a red light on a junction when its green for pedestrians rather than risk a manover in the flow of traffic.
Carlton Reid for PM! Or Mayor of London when Boris leaves to be PM 🙂
He really is a one-man campaign, doing more for correcting the anti-cyclist myths than all the 'official' campaigning organisations put together, IMO
If it does not pay for roads then why is it called road tax MORON
VED DOES NOT PAY FOR ROADS..... but even if it did current VED rates are based on the CO2 emissions of a vehicle and those with zero emissions pay £0, therefore in the current VED system a bike pays nothing !
living up to your name i see excitable1 - the poster was being fascicious(sp) i suspect.
One of the good things about VED is a lot of people suddenly 'remember' to do their MOT or renew their insurance when they need the tax disk (I know many don't). I suspect that's more of it's reason for existence for the government.
You got a bite Junkyard. 😀
Don't worry excitable1 (aptly named) Junkyard was just teasing. (me specifically I think)
sarcastic surely, and easier to spell to boot.the poster was being fascicious(sp) i suspect.
living up to your name
...what Brian ?! 😉
the poster was being fascicious(sp) i suspect
Sod this for a game of soldiers, I'm back off to the 1D message board. None of these bloody big words or double meanings on there, just a lot of love for each other, the boys, and good quality music !
You got a bite Junkyard.Don't worry excitable1 (aptly named) Junkyard was just teasing. (me specifically I think)
Yes thought it was obvious and GrahamS and I have had off stw forays into arguing with car lovers on this issue
I though he was one of the characters from 'Down the line'
If he wasn't I bet he soon will be...
A great word - facetious. It's got all the vowels in it - AND THEY ARE IN THE CORRECT ORDER!!
Incidentally, I seem to be seeing far fewer RLJers these days. On my epic trek across London this morning I only saw two, and one was a left turn. They were also the only two people I saw dressed entirely in normal clothes, the lycra louts were impeccably behaved. Except me cutting across two lanes of (admittedly stationary) traffic, because I had no idea where I was going or where I was even meant to go so I had to pull over!
Only go into London one day a week now but I have seen a fair few cyclists being pulled over for RLJing.
Good I say, but they should put those advance stop boxes before the traffic lights as well and enforce them, which they do not.
And they should run a national TV campaign showing cyclists how huge the lorry drivers blind spots are to stop them crawling up the inside of them - i.e. show the lorries some respect to the same level they would like returned.
Bring in strict liability, but also punish cyclists that flout the law.
And ban Addison Lee taxis from the roads...
Nice to know the huge HGV's are being driven by such calm understanding people...
Good I say, but they should put those advance stop boxes before the traffic lights as well and enforce them, which they do not.
Yep! A motorist entering an advanced stop box is breaking exactly the same law as the dreaded RLJing cyclist. Likewise those motorists that cruise through amber lights.
Funnily enough many motorists will tell you that this "doesn't count".
Bring in strict liability, but also punish cyclists that flout the law.
Seems fair - but only if they also punish motorists that flout the law too - after all their potential for harm is far greater than that of a cyclist.
Thanks for the clip Horatio - at the start does Jeremey say she was "getting increasingly frustrated at a bunch of cyclists that were holding her up"
Doesn't that rather contradict the other reports that suggested it was just him and his mate and he was struck head on as she came round the corner?
Edit: never mind I see Carlton corrects him 😀
Lorry driver seems to be complaining about a moped rider too... 😐
I ride through London on normal clothes every weekday on my Brompton.
I'm a good lad and obey traffic signals and the rules of the road.
I often see RLJing and this is by buses, lorries, cars, taxis, motorbikes, mopeds and bicycles. Now, my experience (which is in no way scientific) looking at fellow people on bicycles is that if you look at RLJing and gender, then by far the biggest group of offenders are women.
I'd estimate that of all the women I see riding in London, 85% RLJ