You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Loooong, but this may amuse some of you:
I've been engaged in a little "debate" about car tax and the rights of cyclists with someone on YouTube calling himself [b]1CuppaCharr[/b].
Unusually he concedes that car tax ("road tax") doesn't actually pay for roads and that all taxpayers do. And that some cars don't pay it. And that most cyclists have cars and pay VED. But still maintains that cyclists don't pay so should be subservient to drivers.
All in all it forms an illuminating and rather disturbing insight into the irrational thoughts of the most outspoken bike haters.
The comments are all on [url=
video[/url], in which a rather misguided bloke attempts to show how cyclists should crawl around roundabouts in the left gutter for their own safety and to avoid "hindering drivers". 🙄
For those unable to get to YouTube, here are a few highlights:
[b]1CuppaCharr[/b]:
Only taxdisc displaying drivers actually PAY to USE the road... The rest of you bunk on? for FREE.No pay... No say...
[b]GrahamStw[/b]:Millions of "taxdisc displaying drivers" legally pay ZERO car tax.
Or are you suggesting that drivers of Band A cars should get "no say" too?
Following that logic,? "the say" of one Band I driver is ten times more important than that of a Band B driver; and one HGV driver outranks ten Band F drivers.
Democracy through tax contribution. Lovely.
Perhaps we could extend your values to other parts of society? Why should non-taxpayers get benefits, NHS treatment, or education for example?
[b]1CuppaCharr[/b]:Eco warrior hippy beatnik drivers are cheating the system.. They're no better than benefit thieves.. Nobody is saying FARE paying drivers are more? important than those who don't PAY their FARE... However those road USERS that do NOT pay should have a little respect for those that DO pay..
No pay... No say...
[b]GrahamStw[/b]:Well personally I think everyone deserves respect, independent of how much tax they pay or how much money they earn.
But you seem to confuse "respect" with "subservience". I'm sure you'd happily give up your parking space to someone driving a higher band car for example; or stop and give way to a cyclist who earns more than you. But really? I think having a standard set of rules for all makes a bit more sense, don't you?
[b]1CuppaCharr[/b]:Look I'm not suggesting that Britain become some crazy plutocracy.. All I'm saying is that motorists PAY an awful lot more than cyclists in order to USE the road... Yet it's cyclists that are the ones who ride roughshot over the humble driver.. It's the humble driver that is the submisive. Cyclists PAY nothing from cycling alone... Cyclists? should be seen but NOT heard.
No pay.. No say...
Nobody is suggesting VED pays for the roads.. All taxpayers PAY for the construction and maintenance of our roads. VED is a cleverly disguised FEE to actually USE the road... It's a FEE cyclists and Eco warrior hippy beatnik drivers do NOT pay... We do? NOT have a wear and tear tax in this country, so any comments on road wear and tear are irrelevant.. Our roads service everybody even if you're housebound you still depend on the roads for basic needs..
No pay.. No say...
[b]KidMoeMoe[/b]:VED is a tax on emissions. It's really not a difficult concept to understand. Pushbikes and electric? vehicles do not emit CO2, and so don't pay VED.
VED is not, in any way whatsoever, a fee to use the roads, no matter how many tortured metaphors you come up with. If it was, everyone who uses the roads would pay it, emissions or not.
[b]1CuppaCharr[/b]:
You have been tricked by the government... VED is NOT a tax on Co2 emissions... VED is a direct road USAGE fee...1,..A company rep? in a Prius clocks up 50,000 miles in a year
2,..A sunday driver in a Range Rover only clocks up 500 miles in a year..
Who produces the most Co2 emissions?...
It's the VED exempt Prius isn't it.... Proving once and for all that VED is NOT a tax on emissions...
No pay... No say....
[b]GrahamStw[/b]:Yep &? those extra miles/emissions are taxed by all the extra fuel duty the Prius driver will pay.
Car tax/VED is a "nudge tax". It is intended to make people think about CO2 when choosing a car and "nudge" them towards lower emissions.
Still, call it whatever you like. Paying it doesn't give you any more rights than any other road users.
Cyclists are not "riding roughshot [sic] over taxdisc displaying drivers".
They are people, like you, just trying to get to their destination safely.
[b]1CuppaCharr[/b]:A "nudge tax" now... Ho Ho.. Stuff and nonsense.. VED is a cleverly disguised road USAGE fee.. And you're right, LEGALLY cyclists have the same rights as motorists, but MORALLY the have no rights at all... Drivers contribute more than £50 billion to the treasury per anum from driving alone.. Cyclists contribute..... Nothing...
No pay... No? say....
[b]GrahamStw[/b]:Well I suppose £50 billion is a lot of money. How many cyclists do you? think you should be allowed to paralyse or kill for that?
That IS your point isn't it? Cyclists "don't pay" so they should put driver convenience before their personal safety; placing themselves at greater risk of injury or death, rather than causing a driver to slow down slightly or change lanes?
(By the way cycling is worth a few billion per annum to the UK economy too - but I'm sure you'll dismiss that for some reason).
[b]1CuppaCharr[/b]:
Cycling is a choice... Nobody is forcing you to place yourself in danger by cycling on our roads...Unlike cars, vans, buses, lorrys etc, bicycles are NONE essential vehicles. Cyclists cycle at their own risk. It's NOT fair? to blame PAYING drivers (who wisely protect themselves inside the safety of an enclosed vehicle) if you come to grief on your fllimsy pushbike. Cyclists do NOT pay for the USE of the roads. So why on earth should drivers kowtow to them..No pay... No say....
[b]GrahamStw[/b]:Do you use the same logic to justify endangering pedestrians as well? After? all walking is a choice; they should be in a car eh? The nerve of them, holding up PAYING cars while they cross they road.
I don't "blame" drivers. Or ask them to "kowtow" to me.
I just ask them to drive safely and respect the safety of other road users, including drivers.
Nobody forces me to cycle. I happen to enjoy it. It's a good way to get some exercise when I'd otherwise be stuck in my car. You should try it!
[b]1CuppaCharr[/b]:What kind of idiot walks on the road? Pedestrians who cross at designated crossings have my full respect.. Just as cyclists who cycle to the extreme left of the road and don't complain about drivers also get my respect.. Cyclists do NOT pay to USE the road.. So they should behave like they do NOT pay.. If I rode a bike my face would be beetroot and I'd don my cap? and thank every taxdisc displaying driver I came across.
No pay... No say...
[b]GrahamStw[/b]:Only crossing on foot at designated crossing points? So is? that what you do is it? Good luck to you. I couldn't leave my own street following that "rule". I suppose the Green Cross Code is just another beatnik hippy government conspiracy is it?
As for cycling in the gutter. No thanks. My own safety (and yours) is worth far more to me than your "respect".
I mean, imagine if there was an accident and you ended up in hospital. You'd be beetroot and doffing your cap to all the private patients. 🙂
[b]1CuppaCharr[/b]:The Green Cross Code... I'm glad you mentioned that.. You see when a pedestrian USES The Green Cross Code they are in effect kowtowing to? the valiant taxdisc displaying drivers.. Which is fine.. As Happentpenko here demonstrates riding in the gutter is perfectly safe... All I'm asking for is a little bit if respect and humility from those who choose NOT to PAY to USE the road..It's NOT much to ask, is it?
No pay... No say...
[b]GrahamStw[/b]:Happentpenko here demonstrates that riding in the gutter on a roundabout is a *ng terrible idea, as testified to by the 89 people (including non-cyclists) who have disliked this video and taken the time to explain why.
You may not give much of a about my life, or people in general, but you should at least consider that me riding in the gutter vastly increases the likelihood that you won't spot me and scratch up your? nice Mercedes with my internal organs and the pointy bits on my bike.
[b]1CuppaCharr[/b]:Eco warrior hippy beatnik drivers are cheating the system.. They are stealing from everybody.. You see when Churchill? abolished actual "road tax" (and tricked drivers into PAYING an emissions based tax) he didn't anticipate the mainstream USE of Eco warrior hippy beatnic cars.... It's because of cyclists like you, and Eco warrior hippy beatnik drivers ( trying to save a quick buck by not PAYING fuel duty or VED) that the national debt is spiraling out of control...
No pay... No say...
[b]GrahamStw[/b]:What on earth are you on about now 1CuppaChar?
Churchill abolished the? hypothecation of the road fund license in 1937, but the tax itself still existed.
Basing VED on CO2 emissions was introduced in 2005 with the express aim of nudging people towards cleaner engines - so to say that effect wasn't anticipated is complete and utter nonsense.
You are aware of the one about not arguing with idiots, aren't you?
🙂
I've been engaged in a little "debate" about car tax and the rights of cyclists with someone on YouTube calling himself 1CuppaCharr.
I see what you did wrong there.
You are aware of the one about not arguing with idiots, aren't you?
Why do you think I still come here...? 😉
call him a **** and walk away? anyway I struggle with long sentences (or what ever the mods substitute for (I.N.R.A.T.S) these days
[img] 
[/img]
Yeah, anyone who uses the same phrase over and over (twice in one post, infact) is clearly trolling.
[i]No pay... no say...[/i]
****er
I think 1cuppacharr should be tasked to deliver Oscar Prestorious a surprise valentine's present. He could drive there if he wanted..... 😈
What a numpty - don't bother Graham, you are wasting your breath
mikewsmith:
"Don't believe internet quotes from people that can't spell Arthur"
-- GarhamS
You posted a link to this a few months ago? Are you in need of that much attention?
To be honest, I've seen / read worse, less well thought out anti-cylist venom posted in the bottom half of the internet (local newspaper comments sections anyone?). At least he was willing to have the debate and engage with your arguments (whoever illogically and contradictory it was).
you've got too much spare time on your hands Graham
[img] 
[/img]
Most cyclists (all that I know) also own a taxed car that is sitting on the drive while they're riding their bike instead anyway.
So if, as he asserts, it really is a fee for using the road then those cyclists have paid it.
On the other hand... just step away from the youtube comments.
You posted a link to this a few months ago? Are you in need of that much attention?
Erm.. nope. Check the YouTube timestamps: this debate progressed over the past week or so.
The video itself was only published on the 2nd of Feb.
What a waste of time.
I got the feeling he was trolling the hell out of you. Plutocracy? Really?
you've got too much spare time on your hands Graham
Yep. Isn't that why we are all here?
Most cyclists (all that I know) also own a taxed car that is sitting on the drive while they're riding their bike instead anyway.So if, as he asserts, it really is a fee for using the road then those cyclists have paid it.
He covers that. Doesn't count. One ticket doesn't buy you two rides or something.
Cyclists do NOT pay to USE the road
Except that they do. Like everyone else does, wether they drive or not.
He's got a point about Toyota Pious drivers. 'Hybrid' vehicles still create pollution.
Other than that, he's a thick ****.
Or a troll.
You posted a link to this a few months ago? Are you in need of that much attention?Erm.. nope. Check the YouTube timestamps: this debate progressed over the past week or so.
Apologies. At work so can't access YT. You're not the first STW member to post a link to "debates" with an anti-cyclist on youtube.
perhaps I need to spend less time on here 😀
Theres nothing to argue with - what he thinks about a cyclists place on the road, how they might hinder other road users or anything else is irrelevant because him thinking that, or saying that, or broadcasting that will not steer a bicycle, let alone all bicycles. He's not in a position to re-draft the highway code, educate the public of his revisions, change driver training and testing and police all this. All he can do is mutter about it and get his dander up.
I already pay for a VED car
I pay income tax
I pay vat
I pay council tax
I pay insurance tax
If I ride my bike rather than drive I don't do as much damage, or cause as much polution, and make more space for ignorant, Daily mail reading mupets to drive their car and then complain about me not paying my way.
You can't win an argument with these people
You need to step away from that one. I've had similar "discussions" with some clown I was a school with 25 years ago.
He got done by a bus lane camera in Glasgow late at night and thinks its stupid and unfair. Despite the fact that those were the rules I got various insults and abuse from him. So I stepped away and let it go. I REALLY wanted to keep debating, but I knew that he wasn't even prepared to reasses his viewpoint.
He was a * 25 years ago and he's still a * now.
'Hybrid' vehicles still create pollution.
Yep but they don't pump nearly as much of it out in stop-start traffic in crowded areas where people directly interact with it.
Apologies. At work so can't access YT. You're not the first STW member to post a link to "debates" with an anti-cyclist on youtube.
Just checked my posting history.
I [i]did[/i] actually post [url= http://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/todays-road-tax-conversation ]a different YouTube debate with someone calling himself [b]chew1047[/b][/url] around six months ago.
What can I say? I think it is important to publicly challenge these idiots. 😀
I've been engaged in a little "debate"
[img] 
[/img]
I already pay for a VED car
I pay income tax
I pay vat
I pay council tax
I pay insurance tax
The thing is Tax and Duty are Tax and Duty, they're not subscriptions or purchases, theres no return. Its doesn't matter if you pay millions or nothing at all. If you are arguing about road use in relation to any kind of tax payment then you are wrong from the outset
[img] 
[/img]
....and i promise not to bother reading a similar thread again (me that is)
[i]a waste of space[/i] to publicly challenge these idiots.I think it is [s]important[/s]
It's just not worth it. Just thank them profusely for their generous contribution into your "free cycling infrastructure", tell them you're wracked with guilt at your freeloading behaviour, and move on.
Loving the meme action.
Graham my love, I think you've been trolled
Yep. Isn't that why we are all here?
I get paid to be here.
[img] 
[/img]
Sorry, I was asleep then...what just happened??? 😐
The guy's an idiot. The bit he's missing is that cyclists save HIM money.
And that's the thanks you get.
Graham my love, I think you've been trolled
I'm not sure. He does crop up regularly on YouTube cycling videos with the same nonsense.
So I guess he is trolling in that sense. But sadly I don't think he is just there for the rise, I think he actually believes his own blethering.
Either way, I'm happy to challenge it. I'll never change his mind - but those comments remain for others to see. "Edmund Burke Principle" innit?
(also emsz called me "my love"... [i]*swoon*[/i])
Birky got it spot on and hence salad spitting on keyboard ensued.
Graham my love, I think you've been trolled
I'm not sure. He does crop up regularly on YouTube cycling videos with the same nonsense.
Because he knows it gets a reaction? You're just playing his game.
If you really want to takes this to its natural headbanging, screaming and spitting conclusion the argument goes like this.
Car Tax is based on emissions, more emissions = more tax
Logic: To induce a move away from gas guzzling eco unfriendly transport top low emission nirvana.
Outcome: With the excpetion of those who've had too much gel, cyclists are the lowest emission road users of all, so as the zero tax band is set somewhat higher than zero, far from banning or taxing cyclists, the natural conclusion is that we actually should be paid out of gas guzzlers taxes for using the road system.
Cue: Heads hitting keyboards and exploding in high dudgeon
Aren't vintage cars also exempt from 'Car Tax'?
I think he should be told...
the royal vehicular transport on the roads, the army and the police are all also exempt aren't they?
[img] 
[/img]
The problem with any discussion on Road Tax and cyclists is fraught with difficultly, because of the number of people ignorant of the facts.
VED is a tax on emissions. It's really not a difficult concept to understand. Pushbikes and electric? vehicles do not emit CO2, and so don't pay VED.VED is not, in any way whatsoever, a fee to use the roads,
This is entirely 100% incorrect.
If I buy three identical vehicles, with identical emissions, use one for closed circuit racing, one for closed circuit rallying, and one on the road...guess what, only the one I use on the road requires VED. Therefore, very clearly,[b] VED is a tax to use our roads.[/b]
Hence 'Road Tax' (colloquialism).
Now, some people apparently think that Road Tax means the money is spent on the roads. I find that very hard to believe. Do they think Alcohol Tax (another colloquialism) is spent on alcohol? Tobacco Tax (yet another colloquialism) on ciggies? Really, it's pretty basic stuff here.
You only have to drive your car for 5 minutes to realise how many clueless morons drive cars. You don't have to go get evidence in the Youtube comments section.
He's probably a troll but to be fair I've got too much free time so I've joined in.
You only have to drive your car for 5 minutes to realise
that the daily grind is soul destroying.
Therefore, very clearly, VED is a tax to use our roads.
Agreed, but importantly it is [i]only[/i] a tax for motor vehicles whose emissions exceed a certain level to use our roads.
You can use the roads quite happily without paying VED.
[i]You only have to drive your car for 5 minutes to realise how many clueless morons drive cars[/i]
Try riding a bike on the road for five minutes if you want to understand how truly clueless they are 😉
This whole conversation shows why 'taxing' vehicles is a bad idea though. Irrespective of where the money goes, stupid people think it gives them more rights. Take away VED, slap it onto fuel, no more arguments.
If I buy three identical vehicles, with identical emissions, use one for closed circuit racing, one for closer circuit rallying, and one on the road...guess what, only the one I use on the road requirs VED. Therefore, very clearly, VED is a tax to use our roads.
To split hairs - Its a duty on a road-going motor vehicle. Not on road use. Everyone can use the road freely; children, foreigners, the sick,lunatics, criminals, perverts. They can walk all over them, cycle on them, ride horses, walk their dog, pogo, crawl on their belly like a reptile. I've even fallen asleep in the middle of the road. Motor vehicle owner/users can only use motor vehicles on the road under the condition of a license. They need to be of legal age, to have passed test, be in good health, be sober, be a registered,license holding driver, they need to maintain a road worthy vehicle and they need to pay a duty (even if that duty is discounted to zero). If they don't do those things then the right to be a [i]driver [/i]gets taken away from them, but the right, as a human, to use a road doesn't.
The notion that paying duty confers the duty payer more rights on the road than anyone else is incorrect - its indicative of having far, far fewer rights on the road than anyone else.
[img] 
[/img]
[i]foreigners, the sick,lunatics, criminals, perverts.[/i]
Hey, don't start bringing lorry drivers into this.
Following your own logic that is also incorrect. What would be correct is saying [b]VED is a tax to use vehicles that produce a certain amount of emissions our roads[/b]If I buy three identical vehicles, with identical emissions, use one for closed circuit racing, one for closed circuit rallying, and one on the road...guess what, only the one I use on the road requires VED. Therefore, very clearly, VED is a tax to use our roads.
edit: although I guess technically any car requires a tax disc even if it hasn't cost any money
[i]The humble car driver[/i]
- an endangered species, which needs the support of all of us. It's years since I saw one.
You can use the roads quite happily without paying VED.
Absolutely.
Following your own logic that is also incorrect. What would be correct is saying VED is a tax to use vehicles that produce a certain amount of emissions our roads
Not at all. I didn't say for ALL vehicles. And of course old very polluting cars are exempt, so your statement is incorrect anyway.
Perhaps, to make my statement 100% accurate, I should have added the word 'some' to prevent any incorrect inferences.
Hey, don't start bringing lorry drivers into this.
I was about to - Lorry drivers are a perfect example - they need to be[i] further[/i] trained and licensed to drive, theres an operators license to aquire pay and abide by, the operator needs planning permission just to park their truck at night and their fuel duty payments are astronomical - and for all that they have fewer rights, not more and have to have every minute they drive, stop and sleep metered and measured.
If I buy three identical vehicles, with identical emissions, use one for closed circuit racing, one for closed circuit rallying, and one on the road...guess what, only the one I use on the road requires VED. Therefore, very clearly, VED is a tax to use our roads.
It's a running cost associated with your car. If it's a tax to use the roads then so is buying petrol for your car.
Next time tell him you drive a pre-tax V8 range rover that does 9mpg while holding up traffic, see what happens.
Have to say though, every time a cyclist says "Actually nobody pays road tax since year wheneveritwas", I sigh a little sigh. Smartassery will never convince anyone but it'll make some people even more hostile.
Have to say though, every time a cyclist says "Actually nobody pays road tax since year wheneveritwas", I sigh a little sigh. Smartassery will never convince anyone but it'll make some people even more hostile.
I only dredged that up when he (rather bizarrely) announced that Churchill hadn't anticipated there would be so many cyclists and [i]"Eco warrior hippy beatnik drivers"[/i] when he introduced charging by CO2 emissions... 😯
But there are plenty of people out there who genuinely still call it the "road fund licence" and believe that it goes in a special pot to pay for the roads.
Answer to "you don't pay road tax" is "great, isn't it".
He's got a point about Toyota Pious drivers. 'Hybrid' vehicles still create pollution.
Less overall, and besides not all band A vehicles are hybrids anyway.
He's funny, he can come to my party. 🙂
The humble car driver- an endangered species, which needs the support of all of us. It's years since I saw one.
I'm a humble car driver, I own a Skoda to prove it! 😉
not seen that one before Birky, thankyou 🙂
may save maccruiskeen's post for C&Ping into future arguments with idiots too
Teh inerwebz is now back to playground rules. If graham leave the discussion now with a comment of "it's obviously no good arguing with you" then it's a flounce and he's "lost"
Don't think he's trolling, eco warrior beatnick drivers, no pay no say, sounds more like he's a regular and the church of car and has all the mantras off pat. Scary individual anyway.
Apparently the guy drives two Band M motors (a 6-litre Merc and a Landie) so he is shelling out nearly a grand a year in car tax alone.
LOL. No wonder he has such a chip on his shoulder about it.
I suggested he get himself a nice Prius instead but he didn't seem impressed 😀
I think the debate was over when 1CuppaChar said this:
And you're right, LEGALLY cyclists have the same rights as motorists,
Troll or not, people like this are out on our roads. I've had enough incidents with dangerous people like this to keep off the roads.
Troll. The only thing that works is not responding in the first place. Being ignored [b]really[/b] hurts a troll.
You engage in a "debate" and he wins automatically.
in the mindset of said troll my counter argument would be "BIKES WERE HERE FIRST FELLA!" 😉
Every troll needs a billy goat
Try pointing out that the average cyclist earns more than the average driver and therefore pays more tax. Road maintenance comes out of general taxation therefore cyclists pay more than drivers per head towards the roads. Given the logic of the moron you're arguing with, in theory he should see that cyclists have more right to use the road than motorists.
Except that the guy is a complete half wit and no doubt won't.
No pay, no say
Try pointing out that the average cyclist earns more than the average driver and therefore pays more tax.
Tried that.
And pointed out that of we're going by tax paid then why do allow the unemployed on the roads (or indeed give them education, healthcare etc)
Even gave the example that the tax paid by a keen cyclist like Sir Alan Sugar would likely dwarf that of thousands of motorists. But that still doesn't count because he's not paying the FEE?!?
Or, ask him what a fair road tax would be for cyclists.
I pay 120 quid a year on my two ton, 2.2 litre car which tears up the roads with it's 150bhp. My bike weighs about 25lb and develops one human power. So assuming we're just going on weight, that's £1.50 I should pay a year, which would be a lot less than the admin charge.
He's just cost us all money.
But that still doesn't count because he's not paying the FEE?!?
This is where you are wasting your time. The argument about cars and bikes is impossible because your adversary doesn't understand the concept of tax. You can't do the remedial work on a youtube comment section, but that lack of grasp on his part handicaps both your arguments. He thinks he's buying something. Paying a tax doesn't buy you anything.