🚀 go-pugleaf

Jack wrote:
> DiscoDuck wrote:
> >
> > Jack wrote:
> > > DiscoDuck wrote:
> > > >
> > > > smn wrote:
> > > > > So you assume that because I ride a bike I do it because I cannot afford a
> > > > > car ie most cyclists pay  lower taxes.  That is just outright prejudice and
> > > > > very ignorant.
> > > >
> > > > Call it what you want, but generally it is true.
> > >
> > > No You are being prejudicial. Lots of rich people drive bikes.
> >
> > I didn't say rich people didn't rride bikes.  I said "GENERALLY"
> > speaking.  Re-read, jack.
>
> I did not misread, but generally, STILL strikes you as prejudicial.

No it doesn't.  That is aomong the stupidest things I have read.
Generally means, generally.

> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > > Cycling is becoming more popular again with the older crowd.  Look at all
> > > > > the road bikes this summer.  I have a higher middle class income.
> > > > > We all pay for gst and pst so buying a car has nothing to do with it that is
> > > > > your disposable income and we all pay the same.
> > > >
> > > > The questions was who pays more in Taxes.  You said bicyclists do which
> > > > is patently ridiculous.  And of course the sales tax counts.
> > >
> > > Who pays more cost as a ratio of amount paid versus damage done to
> > > roads.
> > >
> > > THE CYCLIST!!!
> > >
> > > Also since federal gas taxes do not fund provincial or municipal roads
> > > the cyclists who pays the same taxes to build roads yet does not do the
> > > same damage to roads, or life pays proportionally more tax (sales tax,
> > > and property taxes).
> >
> > The cyclist pays the same, but the driver pays ADDITIONAL taxes, in
> > gas, purchaes price, etc..   How you can possible dispute that is just
> > ridiculous.  Cyclist pay NO road tax whatsoever.
> > IN addition, there are more rich drivers than cyclists and they pay
> > more in income tax, etc.
>
> And drivers contribute ADDITIONAL costs to the environment, the health
> care system, the police, the fire, the paramedics, the insurance system,
> and others.
>
> And again, gas taxes do not pay for roads. Provincial roads are built
> with
> income taxes and sales taxes. Rich people pay for these roads whether
> they
> drive or not. Municipal taxes are paid by property taxes. Once again
> rich
> people pay for these roads too drivers or not. Even the little old lady
> who lives in a retirement home pays taxes to build our roads.

IT is very strange that you think rich people do not drive.  They do.
More of the drive than cycle.  It's common sense.

> However cyclists pay sales tax, income tax, and property taxes. The
> portion
> of those taxes used to build and maintain roads (including the
> environment,
> the health care system, the police, the fire, the paramedics, the
> insurance
> system, and others) and yet do minimal damage and use only a minimal
> percentage of the geography that the roads take up.


And drivers pay all that, and more as I pointed out earlier.


> So in summary cyclists pay more costs to the system then they cost.
> The opposite is true for motorists who's gas taxes do not begin to pay
> for the environment, the health care system, the police, the fire, the
> paramedics, the insurance system, and others.

nonsense.  There are more drivers paying more taxes.  I'm sure you'll
somehow dispute that, but just take a look outside and you'll see
scores of cars for every single cyclist.

> >
> > > > > We all pay to repair roads and everything else that goes with it when we do
> > > > > not even use it.  Cyclists do not require damage repair from what we do.
> > > > > So, drivers depend on our handouts.    We do not kill people by running into
> > > > > them either.  It is a might is right situation with some ignorant people
> > > > > unfortuneately which is where you are coming from.  Drivers are babies.
> > > >
> > > > No where do I say might is right.  You made a ridiculous statement
> > > > about how cyclist pay more.  Plain nuts which is where YOU are coming
> > > > from.
> > > >
> > > > By the way, do you know HOW many cyclists get killed by cars each year?
> > > >  I thought not.
> > >
> > > Actually proportionally there are less cyclist deaths and injuries per
> > > year
> > > than from motor vehicles. In other words it is safer to drive a bicycle,
> > > although knowledgeable safe cyclist fair better than uneducated
> > > cyclists.
> > > Note: I am talking about education and awareness, not helmets.
> >
> > HERE I agree with you.  I feel you are safer on a bike.  You are can
> > maneuver far more than in a car.
> >
> > >
> > > > >     Jail terms?  That would be for causing death by negligence.  If someone
> > > > > stole my bike I am quite sure they are not going to be killing people with
> > > > > it in the getaway process.  Give people stuff for free all their life like
> > > > > roads and they abuse it.
> > > >
> > > > How many people are killed by stolen cars a year?
> > >
> > > Actually motor vehicle injuries and deaths people operating stolen
> > > motor vehicles are significant. How many die by getting hit by a
> > > stolen bicycle?
> >
> > And again, that # is?
> > I'm sure more people are killed from stolen bicycles than stolen
> > skateboards.  Your point?
>
> Stolen cars cost lives!!!

So do non-stolen (more so).  There are more fatalities with owned cars,
than stolen ones.  Your point?


> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > > You think because someone pays $20,000 for a car they have more rights than
> > > > > me.  Twisted  You do not have a clue about anything obviously.
> > > >
> > > > I use to think like you until I was enlightened.  Until people who
> > > > wanted a helmet law said "Why should my tax dollars pay for your head
> > > > injury".  That is when I realized money was more important to those
> > > > people, than freedom of choice.  So to be consistent with their
> > > > argument about their tax dollar being the almighty, I agree with them
> > > > that the more you pay-the more rights you have.  I don't like it, but
> > > > that is what in fact supporters of the law are saying.
> > >
> > > Nothing to be enlightened about. The law is the same for motorist and
> > > cyclist.
> > > The both have the same rights and the same privileges.
> >
> > Actually that is incorrect.  You do not require (nor should) a license
> > for cycling.  A drivers license is a privilege-riding a bike is right.
> > In addition bikes can legally be in lots and lots and lots of places
> > that cars cannot.  You often see signs prohibiting cars from going and
> > the sign will specifically exclude bikes from that law.
> > Bicycles can ride along paths off road etc.  Cars cannot.
> > Although the phrase "The both have the same rights and the same
> > privileges." sounds "good" it is utter nonsense.  The two have far more
> > difference than similarities.  The only similarity they have, is that
> > they are both modes of transportation-but vastly different.
>
> An I actually agree with you on the above.
>
> Just once you get on the road the rights and privileges are the same.

No, again they are not.  Lots of places cyclists can go that cars
cannot.  PLease don't make me go take pcitures of the signs to prove
this to you.


> If you want to get real picky there are lots of places bicycles are not
> allowed. Major highways for one. Many drive through food service joints
> do
> not allow cyclists to drive through for safety concerns.

I'm not being picky-I'm just falling into the crap about cyclists and
drivers being the same.  They simply are not.