Should cyclists pay road taxes ?

Forums › Transport (cars, bikes and boats) › Should cyclists pay road taxes ?

1 | ... | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22

3264 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#2730113 17-Jun-2021 13:22

sxz:

sir1963:

Personal attacks ?

Not cool.

Hey man, no attack intended. It was a serious point. If you want to charge cylists a charge to use a cycle lane (or road), surely it's just as (i)logical to charge walkers to use a footpath, since that's also infrastructure that needs to be built and maintained. A line has to be drawn somewhere, and for now, it's been drawn at cars. Presumably because they take up all the room and cause all the problems.

As I have said multiple times, pretty much everyone uses footpaths regularly. Going from shop to shop, walking to a bus, visiting a neighbour, etc. And so footpaths are built into rates.

Take away the footpaths and local businesses die. Ask any business that has had long term disruption to foot traffic.

It was drawn at cars because there was no cycleways. Cyclists rode on the roads.

Now cyclists want cycleways, for their benefit. So get them to contribute. If cyclists are unwilling to contribute, they can not be that important.

We have no problems charging the disabled to use mobility services. They don't pay the whole costs, but they do pay something. And this is something cyclists refuse to do.

We have no problems charging children to use the bus, or trains.

We have no problems charging people to use swimming pools or other civic amenities .

We don't say concerts can use venues for free because of all the money from tourists coming into to town, we expect them to stump up significant rents.

The only group I see fighting tooth and nail not to contribute anything, is cyclists.

SomeoneSomewhere

1804 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2730114 17-Jun-2021 13:23

sir1963:

MikeB4:

I wasn’t going to come out of retirement from Geekzone but this thread has just got to me. Why is it whenever something is proposed or implemented for cycling, a viable green transport, be it a simple cycle lane or a bridge the crying and hand waving that ensues is ridiculous. This seldom occurs for the billions spent on new roads like all the expressways, bridges, tunnels constructed in recent years or planned. If they had proposed dedicated shuttles the cries would be heard in the Chathams.Every cycle lane installed attracts a childish response from entitled bigots, yes bigots, the anti cyclist nonsense is the new bigotry that is harming Aotearoa, it is sickening and dangerous. As for charging cyclists RUCs, that is stupidity. Many cyclists own motor vehicles and already pay road tax along with other taxes or are there exemptions I don’t know about. Many cycles are never ridden on roads, I don’t ride on the roads due to homicidal motorists. There are a lot of cyclists that are minors and don’t earn. Lastly how much damage does a cycle do to the road surface? The administration and enforcement of this ludicrous notion would soak up any funds generated and the net result would be negative. The costs to accommodate transport alternatives can be funded out of current taxes and charges.

The adoption of green transport alternatives such as cycles is not a luxury it is a necessity for the future of our planet and it certainly does not harm folks to get off their butts, out of their cars and try riding a bike but just be aware there are motorists that will attempt to hurt you like the ones that have deliberately swerved at my wife forcing her to go up over the curb to avoid being hit. I know change can be hard to accept but we all need to accept the world is changing and we must change and accept cycling and other alternatives to motor vehicles. I applaud the Poneke City Councils’ plan to ban cars from Lambton Quay, Wiilis and Manner streets. It is a step in the right direction to reduce the dependency on cars. I also applaud the Tamaki Makaurau Councils’ bridge plan. The bridge is building for the long term and not the normal short-sighted way councils and government do it which is refreshing.

1. Motorists pay about $4 Billion is fuel and RUC taxes.

2. The facts that you pay for one thing does not entitle you to something else for free (ie you pay for roads while you use it.)

3. It is NOT just the damage. It is the cost to build.

4. I regularly see cyclists going through red lights, cycling at night with no lights, riding on the footpath, etc etc.

5. Swimming is also good for your health, pools costs rate payers, swimmers have to pay an entrance fee. So just paying rates is not enough.

6. 100% of the NZ economy ultimately relies on motor vehicles, as does emergency services. You even need trucks to build cycle paths.

7. Electric cars/bikes rely on rare earth minerals, there are some very big holes in the ground to extract them. Same for materials used to build bikes.

8. I am amused by cyclists who do not believe that they should pay anything extra for cycleways that benefit them, makes it safer, quicker, easier. And paying $1 a day is just way too much.

9. Other significant infrastructure projects (Labour bridge, Mt Maunganui Bridge, Norther express tunnel) charge(d) users on top of all the other taxes motorists pay.

10. The Dutch, at best, 35% of people cycle and their cities are more compact, flat, have historically narrow roads. Some houses need to use the canals to ship furniture into them. NZ has less than 2% cyclists.

11. Another Billion put into the rail system would serve more people, you could even have a bike friendly carriage for cyclists from further out of town.

12. Electronic metering is cheap and easy, its pretty much just the same as using a sign on/sign off bus pass.

13. Everyone ultimately uses footpaths during their week, they are critical to commerce, just ask those impacted by the Auckland rail disruption on Victoria, they are wanting $50 Million + in compensation

14. No one is talking about taxing children, that is just cyclists hysteria , same with playgrounds, etc etc etc etc. (shame on people using kids this way).

15. The options are not just 100% user pays/ or user pays $0, there is a big area in between, how about cyclists pay something ? Would a safe cycle bridge not be worth $1 each way ?

16. This is NOT a hate cyclists campaign, again emotive BS to justify paying $0.

17. NONE of this means motor vehicles do not need to go electric, but this will take time, and even then we will STILL need vehicles that burn some kind of fuel.

18. The BS about how altruistic cyclists are to motorists is just that BS. Should cyclists pay me when I walk ?, no. I ride share, and use public transport mostly, and pay something for both.

For about the fifth time, WE WANT A CITATION FOR THE $4 BILLION FIGURE. It directly contradicts the official Budget figure which is $1.8 billion. On this basis, it is fairly clear that the user-pays portion of the total ($5b for central government, probably another ~$1-2b total for local) is only around a third to a quarter - i.e. the taxpayer is subsidising roads to the tune of 70%. I believe this is actually a larger subsidy than public transport and rail receives.

Please stop repeating this mindless nonsense until you can come up with a source.

antonknee

1133 posts

Uber Geek

#2730116 17-Jun-2021 13:30

sir1963:

Now cyclists want cycleways, for their benefit. So get them to contribute. If cyclists are unwilling to contribute, they can not be that important.

For their benefit, and the benefit of drivers, and the benefit of the planet, and the benefit of the health system and wider society, yes.

Cyclists are not really asking for dedicated billion dollar bridges (to choose a recent example). You’ll recall that what was asked for was a lane on the existing bridge.

Mostly cyclists want safe infrastructure that goes the same places as the infrastructure we’ve already built for cars.

In any case, as you’ve had pointed out multiple times, cyclists do contribute as does everyone else.

sxz

761 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2730117 17-Jun-2021 13:31

shk292:

sxz:

It's a good belief, as it's a proven scientific fact. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induced_demand

I remember learing about it at Uni many, many years ago as part of a city planning course. More of a problem for young citys that have grown after cars became commonplace.

Surely you could apply the same argument to any mode of transport? You just have to look at mass transit systems in other countries to know that congestion isn’t a feature solely of cars. You could say that there is no point in building fast passenger rail to Hamilton because that will only encourage people to commute from there, and before you know it the trains we’ll be full

The point isn't that we shouldn't build more roads, the point is that building more roads doesn't fix trafic problems. So if we accept that to be true, perhaps we shouold try something else? Like encourage cycling, living in higher-density and therefore living closer to ammenities, better public transport, etc. All those would mean less cars on the road, which should be win-win for everyone.

sxz

761 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2730118 17-Jun-2021 13:33

sir1963:

Now cyclists want cycleways, for their benefit. So get them to contribute. If cyclists are unwilling to contribute, they can not be that important.

That's what taxes are for.

sir1963

3264 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#2730119 17-Jun-2021 13:33

MikeB4:

@sir1963 Thinking outside the square is required by everyone. Simply put we cannot continue as we are and changes are no longer optional, that luxury has long passed and we all need to look at alternatives. For example the hundreds of trucks travelling up and down SH1 every minute of the day is absolute stupidity and is not sustainable and made more stupid considering there are alternatives.

The tens of thousands of single occupant vehicles going in and out and around our cities hourly is stupid and unsustainable. The provision of sustainable alternatives like safe cycleways is logical, sustainable and vital and require much less capital costs and operational costs than the provisions for cars. Trying to charge RUCs for cycles is simply not feasible as the cost of administration and enforcement would out strip returns and thus would add to our problems not solve any problems.

Actually there are no alternatives. The rail system we have can not just suddenly replace trucks. We are looking at hundreds of billions in investment before that can happen.

All the rail will need to be electrified, tunnels widened, dual tracks (and more), huge investments in overpasses for other traffic.

RUC for bikes is not difficult, nor expensive. It does not need to be everywhere, just at key points. RFID technology tied to a credit card, just the same way bus passes work now.

Or, we can simplify it entirely.

Remove petrol/RUC for light vehicles and replace it with a $2000 income tax addition. No extra administration required. Everyone who has an income pays.

Choices.

sir1963

3264 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#2730120 17-Jun-2021 13:35

sxz:

sir1963:

Now cyclists want cycleways, for their benefit. So get them to contribute. If cyclists are unwilling to contribute, they can not be that important.

That's what taxes are for.

And motorists pay the exact same taxes/rates as cyclists and then on top of that they pay $4 Billion fuel/RUC taxes.

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

sir1963

3264 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#2730141 17-Jun-2021 13:42

antonknee:

sir1963:

Now cyclists want cycleways, for their benefit. So get them to contribute. If cyclists are unwilling to contribute, they can not be that important.

For their benefit, and the benefit of drivers, and the benefit of the planet, and the benefit of the health system and wider society, yes.

Cyclists are not really asking for dedicated billion dollar bridges (to choose a recent example). You’ll recall that what was asked for was a lane on the existing bridge.

Mostly cyclists want safe infrastructure that goes the same places as the infrastructure we’ve already built for cars.

In any case, as you’ve had pointed out multiple times, cyclists do contribute as does everyone else.

Cyclists can still do all those things without cycleways.

Christchurch spent $330 million on cycleways, averaging $3 million a KM.

And no, cyclists do NOT contribute anything extra.

And as I have said many times, people who swim also help the health system, but they have to pay to use the pool.

jfanning

438 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2730170 17-Jun-2021 14:23

sir1963:

And motorists pay the exact same taxes/rates as cyclists and then on top of that they pay $4 Billion fuel/RUC taxes.

Are you using this as your source for the $4B?

Government plugs billion-dollar transport funding hole with grants and borrowing | Stuff.co.nz

frankv

5680 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2730173 17-Jun-2021 14:26

sir1963:

Now cyclists want cycleways, for their benefit. So get them to contribute.

Actually, motorists will benefit when more people use cycleways. Every cyclist is one less car on the road.

If cyclists are unwilling to contribute, they [I assume cycleways] can not be that important.

Given that cycling is a transport option that is accessible to the poor, making them pay would be counterproductive. Assuming the importance of something based on ability to pay is elitist and antisocial.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#2730176 17-Jun-2021 14:31

I am disabled and after years of fighting I am in a position to cycle for my health and the planets health but I can't why? because of the almost homicidal bigotry towards cyclists in Aotearoa that makes riding on the roads unsafe. I am still disabled and there are extended times that I must use my electric chair in which I must risk going on the roads and dice with death (looking at you NZ Bus and your drivers) I also pay RUCs on my vehicle (Hybrid so not exempt) and I pay the top rate of tax as does my wife and we pay rates.

@sir1963 don't say I don't contribute to the cost of cycles ways etc as I do and so does my wife.

Trying to apply RUCs to cycles, mobility scooters and by your logic push chairs, scooters and wheelchairs is the same as the failed TV licence scheme of days gone by.

sir1963

3264 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#2730181 17-Jun-2021 14:39

jfanning:

sir1963:

And motorists pay the exact same taxes/rates as cyclists and then on top of that they pay $4 Billion fuel/RUC taxes.

Are you using this as your source for the $4B?

Government plugs billion-dollar transport funding hole with grants and borrowing | Stuff.co.nz

Can't find it again, but this one uses the same figure

https://www.greaterauckland.org.nz/2014/06/17/should-all-new-zealand-vehicles-pay-road-user-charges/

But this is from a couple of years back, but Petrol taxes were 1.982 Billion and RUC were 1.673 Billion

https://www.treasury.govt.nz/sites/default/files/2019-10/fsgnz-2019.pdf

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18663 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2730189 17-Jun-2021 14:56

Why does everyone act like there is a war between cyclists and motorists? Instead of screaming it's all your fault, how about can I help you on your way? The problem really isn't cars or bikes or roads or other transport means. It is mentality and the notion that there is something unreasonable about the other party. Why does it never seem to occur to anyone to just offer to make things easier for the others? Give the cyclists room. Let the motorists past. If everyone does it, things get better. How hard is that?

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#2730193 17-Jun-2021 15:04

@Rikkitic as my signature says "He waka eke noa" roughly translated we are all in the same boat.

sir1963

3264 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#2730194 17-Jun-2021 15:06

MikeB4:

I am disabled and after years of fighting I am in a position to cycle for my health and the planets health but I can't why? because of the almost homicidal bigotry towards cyclists in Aotearoa that makes riding on the roads unsafe. I am still disabled and there are extended times that I must use my electric chair in which I must risk going on the roads and dice with death (looking at you NZ Bus and your drivers) I also pay RUCs on my vehicle (Hybrid so not exempt) and I pay the top rate of tax as does my wife and we pay rates.

@sir1963 don't say I don't contribute to the cost of cycles ways etc as I do and so does my wife.

Trying to apply RUCs to cycles, mobility scooters and by your logic push chairs, scooters and wheelchairs is the same as the failed TV licence scheme of days gone by.

Show me where you pay for cycleways.

I swim, I pay rates, and then on top of that I have to pay an entrance fee to get into the pool.

I also pay the top tax rate, still no free pool for me.

I also pay fuel taxes, Bus fares, walk.

My son is disabled , he walks everywhere, averages 35000 steps a day. He works, he pay taxes. He pays rates via his rent. And he STILL has to pay to go to the pool.

Simply saying "I pay rates" means nothing, if that were the benchmark I would be swimming for free.

When you pay RUC, that is solely for when you vehicle is on the road, nothing else.

Mobility scooters uses footpaths in the main, and the vast majority of rate payers use footpaths during the week.

And push chairs use the footpath, and scooters, and wheelchairs, and pedestrians and along with damn near 100% of the population in towns and cities. So its fair these are covered by rates.

But almost no one (2% ?) use cycleways, and the cost a lot of money.

But as I say, we can reduce the complications of taxing by just adding an extra $2000 to everyones tax bill.

1 | ... | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22