I do pay road tax in any case
As I said in my post, I also drive. I have spent thousands on being able to do so. I pay ridiculously large amounts to continue doing so. I would be quite happy not to use roads and rather to use tracks and paths. In fact, living in the country, I frequently do. It so happens that the roads are more convienient and as I already pay toward their upkeep as a driver, I don't see why I should pay more to cycle on them.

Are you seriously suggesting that you're going to ban people from cycling because they can't afford your myriad taxes and licences when one reason a lot of people cycle is that they can't afford all that stuff for a car?

I can, in a way, see where you're coming from and there have been days when I've thought along similar lines, but I think that in the end cycling is not in the same category as driving. You can go out on a bike for exercise, fresh air, you can go and see your friends at age 13 rather than walk... I think that all the licences and taxes wouldn't cut down on dickhead cyclists - if they're serious cyclists then they'll probably pay the fees anyway - but it would hurt a lot of people (particularly young people, old people and poor people) for whom a car just isn't practical.
( MatJ LOOK, Wed 28 Apr 2010, 17:33, 1 reply)

I'm not for one moment suggestion that the fees be the same PRICE as those for a car.
Proportionate, is all. Numberplates for the cycles, tax, license, etc. Sure - make the minimum age 13 and lower the insurance the older/less points on the license. Likewise, points on license = higher tax.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 28 Apr 2010, 17:43, closed)

You are suggesting a minimum age for riding a bike?!

(The Kwyjibo A big, dumb, balding North American ape., Wed 28 Apr 2010, 21:07, closed)

Why not? There's a minimum age for driving all other vehicles.

( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Thu 29 Apr 2010, 8:43, closed)