Just getting into it - I'm a novice cyclist (the most dangerous type maybe?).

I like the idea of 3rd party insurance for cyclists. It would be cheap, as they're unlikely to cause massive motorway pileups, or write off your car. I don't reckon you've been rammed by many cyclists though. If it's happening a lot, there's a chance the blame is not 100% with the cyclists. Ask some other car drivers how often it happens to them.

There is no logic in the tax system that suggests you should have to pay directly for services you are using (sadly). I pay tax that goes towards schools, but I have no children, for example. I would happily pay road tax if I could reduce my other taxes for things I did not use. Plus "classic" cars (25 years old or older) are exempt from road tax. Horses are exempt from road tax. Pedestrians do not pay pavement tax or crossing tax. And smaller cars pay less road tax (and larger vehicles more). Perhaps bikes should pay per kilogram (with some sort of reduction for the lack of emissions, like hybrids and electric cars)? I would subscribe to that (as long as I get my schools money back). Write to your MP.

And I wear a helmet. I'm probably still not intelligent enough to be taken seriously though, as I am still on a bicycle (from time to time - not now), and not smart enough to stop replying when weight of opinion is against me.
(sabre-tooth monkey, Mon 6 Sep 2010, 17:02, 2 replies)

There's a reason for that.
It's not road tax. It's vehicle excise duty, and it is a tax purely on owning a car. Much like a tax on buying beer doesn't pay for pubs, it doesn't pay for roads, so that argument is unfortunately spurious.

However, the insurance one is totally valid, and it used to piss me off a fucking treat that probably only about 5% of cyclists have the nous to realise they should have 3rd party insurance at the very least.

The "ah well if I'm in accident it'll be the driver's fault or I won't cause much damage" is exactly the kind of idiotry which should result in cyclists being banned from roads. I fully support cyclists having as much right as cars to be on the roads. If they play by the rules of the roads. Obey all laws, get insured, respect other road users. Just because some car drivers are cunts doesn't give cyclists carte blanche to break the rules. Just as some cyclists being cunts doesn't give drivers the right to tag all cyclists as arseholes.
( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Mon 6 Sep 2010, 17:19, closed)

Didn't actually know insurance was available to cyclists (but of course it must be).
I will investigate.
(sabre-tooth monkey, Tue 7 Sep 2010, 10:46, closed)

im not just on the case of badmouthing cyclists
Just the ones who ignore their own safety, riding along 70mph duel carriageways is not clever at all. I have nothing but respect though for ones who use roads about town and have all the correct gear on. I overtake when i can, and usually leave space for them to pass if im in traffic/at a junction.

All I'm suggesting is that if there are stricter laws, cyclists would be safer. Ive never been hit by a bike and i hope it never happens, just IF it did I wouldnt want to have to shell out respraying a scratch or whatever. I have the same opinion for uninsured drivers; they are the scum of the earth though, cyclists are perhaps just a little naive?

I like your take on the tax system, but also get badgers post above regarding "vehicle tax not road tax". I would have thought in this new Green era Classic Cars should pay much much more tax, as they are much more likely to pollute than my 15yo celica....? but i digress :-)


kudos on being a half decent cyclist ;-)
(Monkeystrumpet monkey. Monkey, MONKEY!!!, Tue 7 Sep 2010, 11:33, closed)