Honda Car Forum

"Doki" <mrdoki@gmail.com> wrote in message
> Privileges such as riding on roads that I have a legal right to? If horses
> were more common, would you want them to have tax disks too? The fact is
> that VED is not a tax that gives you the right to use the road - it's not
> been called Road Fund Licence for a very long time now. It's just a tax on
> ownings cars that are taken on the road, to ensure that everyone keeps
> their cars registered and to raise a bit of cash.


Sure, why not? If you want to use the road, you should pay to have it built
and maintained. Give the mess of horses, they should be taxed even more to
cover the cleanup cost.

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
> "Doki" <mrdoki@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> Privileges such as riding on roads that I have a legal right to? If horses
>> were more common, would you want them to have tax disks too? The fact is
>> that VED is not a tax that gives you the right to use the road - it's not
>> been called Road Fund Licence for a very long time now. It's just a tax on
>> ownings cars that are taken on the road, to ensure that everyone keeps
>> their cars registered and to raise a bit of cash.


> Sure, why not? If you want to use the road, you should pay to have it built
> and maintained. Give the mess of horses, they should be taxed even more to
> cover the cleanup cost.


We do - through taxes (income tax, VAT, import duty, fuel duty, business
taxes, capital gains tax, stamp duty, alcohol and tobacco duties, inheritance
tax and all the other ways the government gets an income on top of VED). As
has been clearly stated, VED is a tax on owning a motor vehicle, and also has
the added benefit of allowing the government to keep a track of insurance and
MOTs. It is a duty, not a charge. The roads are currently paid for, where
there are no tolls, out of the common funds, that is, all of our taxes.

There's no point arguing about how the VED should be spent or whether other
road users should pay VED as VED is not related directly to road use, but is
duty on car ownership.

You may argue that it should be replaced by a road charging scheme, but it is
difficult to see how this could be implemented viably and without infringement
of human rights, not to mention whether the technology is in any way feasible.

In the current government(plc)'s rosy corporate ideal, each resource should be
charged individually and ideally outsourced. This makes a complete mockery of
the concept of common wealth and social responsibility. We no longer pay our
taxes in turn to provide services and facilities for all; it seems we are to
be charged for everything separately.

Next, we'll be paying for civil defence personally, through an annual defence
charges statement. After that, what? Float Britain on the Stock Market?

Roll on a new government, one who didn't learn politics at business school and
who understands that a nation is not a corporation...

Should horse riders pay duty? Sure, why not? Horse ownership can only be
regarded as a luxury as we no longer use horses for industry.

It is hard to justify bicycle duty. It is a socially responsible and low
impact method of personal transport. It sounds like what you are all
clamouring for is a compulsory proficiency licence and enforcement of road
usage laws for bicycle riders. I support that.

Should cars be charged duty? It is hard to justify, in fact. For many people
they are no longer a luxury as our society has spread our domestic circles
over a greater distance. My wife and I work about 20 miles in opposite
directions from our home, for instance, and if a parcel is undelivered we have
to travel 15 miles to the nearest sorting office to collect it. These make car
ownership, not necessarily use, a necessity and so unavoidable unless one
lives and works in a city.

The government knows this and so is increasing, in the name of the
environment, the taxation on personal car ownership every year, even though
the only realistic and justifiable way of taxing the environmental impact of
car usage is on the fuel.

So why not display both insurance and roadworthiness certificates in the car
window, ideally combined into a single item, negating the requirement imposed
by the government of paying private companies for basic road insurance? Then
tax car usage and environmental impact through fuel duty?

Rich

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember Adrian <toomany2cvs@gmail.com>
saying something like:

>Your logic would mean that I don't need to buy a tax disc for each of my
>cars, one is sufficient.

If only...
--

Dave
SE6a

Brian Nystrom wrote:
>
>
> >> What amazes me is the amount of harassment I get from people driving a
> >> 5' wide car in a 10' wide lane that don't think they have enough room if
> >> I'm riding near the white line on the edge of the road. This past
> >> summer, I even had some brain-dead "bimbette" driving a Jeep that her
> >> mommy and daddy must have bought her try to tell me that I should be
> >> riding on the sidewalk (which is illegal here). At the time I was on a
> >> road with 2, 10' wide travel lanes and a 6' wide shoulder. Apparently,
> >> that wasn't enough room for her.
> >
> > Always carry a few extra water bottles. They make a hell of a bank when
> > they hit the hood :-)
>
> Cleats do a nice job on doors and fenders, too. ;-)

Some car drivers can be real dicks. I had a run in with one a number of
years ago while out walking my dogs at night. I always used to carry a good
sized stick with me to prod my dogs in the right direction and to whack any
dogs that may choose to make a nuisance of themselves. It is a rural road
with no street lights. I was walking on the left side of the road, facing
traffic. I was dressed in light clothes and carrying a flashlight. Some
dick head comes flying down the road at high speed and instead of moving
over to the centre a bit, moves over to threaten me. I whacked the side of
the guy's car. He stops and comes back to confront me....tells me I am
walking on the wrong side of the road, have no business being on the road
???? Pedestrians have every right to walk on the road and are expected to
walk on the left facing traffic.

The idiot leaves, turns around, and comes flying back at high speed.
Knowing that he he about to do something dumb to intimidate me, I stepped
back and picked up a handful of 3/4inch gravel off a driveway. As the guy
approached me he swung toward me. I guess he wasn't expecting me to whip a
handful of gravel at his car when he did that. I hope he called the cops
and told them the whole story.

Brian Nystrom wrote:

> > When they come to stop signs they just blow right through them, one after
> > another. Most of them don't even slow down. I almost hit a single
> > cyclist with my car last fall at a four way stop. I came to a stop and then
> > started to go, assuming that he was going to stop. He didn't. A few weeks
> > early an entire gaggle of old cyclist blew a stop sign and pulled right in
> > front of me. To make matters worse, they puled right out into the far left
> > to make a left turn, and then one of the dumb bastards yelled at me for
> > honking at them.
> >
> There's no excuse for them being stupid and inconsiderate. I admit that
> I don't always follow the law when I'm out riding, but I would never do
> what you describe, as I value my life more than that.


I will admit to running the odd stop sign too. I slow down and drop a gear
or two. If there are no cars in sight I will keep going. If there is a car
at or approaching the intersection I come to a full stop. For a cyclist to
blow a stop sign when there are cars around is downright suicidal, and I
have seen the results of a few collisions between bikes and cars. The cars
always win. FWIW... about 10 years ago I was hit by a lady who pulled out
in front of me at a stop sign. She was turning on to the road I was on. She
stopped at the stop sign. I hd no sign. I signalled my turn and was halfway
around when the old biddy pulled out. He thought it was my fault saying "I
stopped and yielded the right of way and you pulled in front of me while I
was executing my turn."

Lucky for me I was not hurt. My big was a mess, but I was okay. The other
collisions I have seen always seem to leave the cyclists bloodied.

Dave Smith (adavidsmith@sympatico.ca) gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying :

> Some car drivers can be real dicks.

Indeed they can.

So can some pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders, truck drivers, bikers.

> I had a run in with one a number of years ago while out walking my dogs
> at night.>

> Some dick head comes flying down the road at high speed and instead of
> moving over to the centre a bit, moves over to threaten me.

Yup, that was ****ing stupid.

But he missed you.

> I whacked the side of the guy's car.

And that was ****ing stupid, too.

Either he wasn't *really* travelling that quick, or you were bloody lucky
not to do yourself some serious damage.

> He stops and comes back to confront me....

Not surprised. You've just committed criminal damage.

> tells me I am walking on the wrong side of the road, have no business
> being on the road ????

See? Told you he was ****ing stupid.

> The idiot leaves, turns around, and comes flying back at high speed.

Utterly ****ing stupid.

> Knowing that he he about to do something dumb to intimidate me, I
> stepped back and picked up a handful of 3/4inch gravel off a driveway.
> As the guy approached me he swung toward me. I guess he wasn't
> expecting me to whip a handful of gravel at his car when he did that.

Just as well he didn't lose control of the car, eh? Wouldn't *that* have
been funny...?

One person's ****ing stupid, and the other shakes his head and continues
with his day.

BOTH people are ****ing stupid, and there's very nearly serious harm done,
potentially loss of life.

I hope you're *really* proud of yourself...

On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 10:01:13 -0400, Dave Smith
<adavidsmith@sympatico.ca> wrote:

>Pedestrians have every right to walk on the road and are expected to
>walk on the left facing traffic.

Make that "on the right" and I'm with you.

--

Ian D

Ian Dalziel (iandalziel@lineone.net) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying :

> On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 10:01:13 -0400, Dave Smith
> <adavidsmith@sympatico.ca> wrote:

>>Pedestrians have every right to walk on the road and are expected to
>>walk on the left facing traffic.

> Make that "on the right" and I'm with you.

<points to ".ca" in his email address...>

On 12 Apr 2007 17:10:49 GMT, Adrian <toomany2cvs@gmail.com> wrote:

>Ian Dalziel (iandalziel@lineone.net) gurgled happily, sounding much like
>they were saying :
>
>> On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 10:01:13 -0400, Dave Smith
>> <adavidsmith@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
>>>Pedestrians have every right to walk on the road and are expected to
>>>walk on the left facing traffic.
>
>> Make that "on the right" and I'm with you.
>
><points to ".ca" in his email address...>

<points to "uk." in the name of the group I'm reading...>

--

Ian D

Ian Dalziel (iandalziel@lineone.net) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying :

>>>>Pedestrians have every right to walk on the road and are expected to
>>>>walk on the left facing traffic.

>>> Make that "on the right" and I'm with you.

>><points to ".ca" in his email address...>

> <points to "uk." in the name of the group I'm reading...>

<points to the other four groups in the list - all of which are full of
left-pondians>