Should you get a Free (Bicycle) Ride? - Page 2

Re: Should you get a Free (Bicycle) Ride?

In article <4e4a3f58.0407220924.1b44feca@posting.google.com>,
nolionnoproblem@hotmail.com (DonQuijote1954) wrote:

>> Bicycle riders should have to pay a tax or a toll to ride on the
>> streets and roadway paid by liquid fuel taxes. The money should
>> then be used to build cycle roadways. EVERYONE would benefit.
>> Unfortunately bicycle riders want to continue to ride for free.
>> It the American way I guess, to believe the government should tax
>> someone else for the things you want for free.
>
>Propose something absurd, make sure nothing is ever done about it.
>
>We live in a society and must be some things that make life
>pleasurable: arts, parks, bike routes... Or you want people to pay for
>their own parks too?


That would be the ethical thing to do, but I see you're all thoroughly
committed to *robbery*.

--
Reply to mike1@@@usfamily.net sans two @@, or your reply won't reach me.

Drug smugglers and gun-runners are heroes of American capitalism.
-- Jeffrey Quick

Re: Should you get a Free (Bicycle) Ride?

>>> Unfortunately bicycle riders want to continue to ride for free.
>>> It the American way I guess, to believe the government should tax
>>> someone else for the things you want for free.


Your position here is: "The government is stealing from me, therefore I
think it ought to steal from you too!"

--
Reply to mike1@@@usfamily.net sans two @@, or your reply won't reach me.

Drug smugglers and gun-runners are heroes of American capitalism.
-- Jeffrey Quick

Re: Should you get a Free (Bicycle) Ride?

"Leo Lichtman" <l.lichtman@worldnet.att.net> wrote:

>When your house catches fire, start building a fire engine.


Barefoot Fallacy: http://home.mn.rr.com/meadowbrookhome/z/FALLACYS.HTM

--
Reply to mike1@@@usfamily.net sans two @@, or your reply won't reach me.

Drug smugglers and gun-runners are heroes of American capitalism.
-- Jeffrey Quick

Re: Should you get a Free (Bicycle) Ride?

"HardwareLust" <no0ne@nowhere.com> wrote:

[Love the handle, btw: "All hail the Great Feast of Ostentatious
Consumption!" -- Billy Beck.]

>The money used to build/maintain those types of things ("art", parks,
>bike routes) should come directly from the people that most use them and
>benefit from them, not from 'everyone'. If we do this, then it takes the
>decision on how to disburse general funds away from the politicians, and
>puts it back into the hands of the very people that want them.


And that, of course, is what is called a "market".

Governments are the antithesis of markets.

--
Reply to mike1@@@usfamily.net sans two @@, or your reply won't reach me.

Drug smugglers and gun-runners are heroes of American capitalism.
-- Jeffrey Quick

Re: Should you get a Free (Bicycle) Ride?

Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote:

>"HardwareLust" <no0ne@nowhere.com> writes:
>
>> Yes. The money used to build/maintain those types of things ("art",
>> parks, bike routes) should come directly from the people that most
>> use them and benefit from them, not from 'everyone'. If we do this,
>> then it takes the decision on how to disburse general funds away
>> from the politicians, and puts it back into the hands of the very
>> people that want them. In case you haven't noticed, allowing
>> politicians to decided when and how money is spent is usually a Very
>> Bad Thing (tm).
>
>Yeah, they keep paying George W. Bush's salary. I hate when that
>happens.


Stop paying.

--
Reply to mike1@@@usfamily.net sans two @@, or your reply won't reach me.

Drug smugglers and gun-runners are heroes of American capitalism.
-- Jeffrey Quick

Re: Should you get a Free (Bicycle) Ride?

> Of course, you're welcome to make all roads into toll roads. The most
> logical thing would be to charge users according to the weight of
> their vehicles, since heavier vehicles do more damage. Hummer drivers
> should pay more than Geo Metro drivers, both of whom pay more than
> bicyclists who don't weigh enough to cause any damage to the roads.

in california, hummer drivers do pay more in registration every year,
since its based on the price of the vehicle. they also pay more in fuel
and associated gas taxes. bicyclists pay neither.

Re: Should you get a Free (Bicycle) Ride?

In article <6nYLc.124463$OB3.32844@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
"Leo Lichtman" <l.lichtman@worldnet.att.net> wrote:

>snip
>
> The image of a toll booth on the sidewalk in front of each house says it
> all.
>
>

OH! You must live in New Jersey! ...

HAND

--
³Freedom Is a Light for Which Many Have Died in Darkness³

- Tomb of the unknown - American Revolution

Re: Should you get a Free (Bicycle) Ride?

>People are lousy thermodynamic work mechanisms. When a Metrolink train
>idles overnight at an exurban siding awaiting the morning commute crowd
>it is considered a point source polluter. When the bicycles' primary
>motovator goes to sleep spewing

>CO2 and reactive halogens and various
>VOCs nobody complains near as much.

Well people do not have that large of an energy budget. People can exist on
1500 cal/day pretty easily and that includes reproduction. I figure that for
say 1 gallon of gas in energy equivilent, I would go say 600 miles. 600 miles
per gallon isn't bad and it looks pretty decent compared to 10 miles per gallon
for an SUV.

Another thing about people is all of their waste products are biodegradeable
and they are fueled with fuel which comes from renewable resources. You can
not say that for autos, computers, fridges, ovens, lights and so on.

The amount of pollution put out and energy used by people is a small percentage
of the amounts used and generated by the machines that people use to make
themselves comfy.

Re: Should you get a Free (Bicycle) Ride?

>When your house catches fire, start building a fire engine.
>
>

The romans did something like this. They had fire companys that were privately
funded. When someone's house caught fire the local company would show up at
their burning home. The fire company would offer to buy the house for a
certain price. Once the price was agreed upon, they would put out the fire.
Of course, as more of the house burned, the offered price declined so it was
definitely a "buyer's" market.

Re: Should you get a Free (Bicycle) Ride?

This is so silly as to be hardly worth a response but...

We pay a lot in taxes of all kinds, often getting little or nothing in
return and what we do get is of at least questionable cost-effectiveness as
any look at government contracts can confirm. I don't use the schools, the
welfare system, medical, the police or fire, the courts, or the correctional
system, but still pay for them - who else would? I am at least able to use
the parks and libraries on occasion - some small benefit for all my tax
dollars, but at least I get something that benefits me.
For my federal income tax dollar I get a grotesquely overspending
military that is driving our country to financial ruin (look at the drop of
the value of the dollar - a hidden tax!) while the parks I use are
neglected. I'm already paying for them once through taxes, why on earth
should we have to pay for them again in increased "user fees"???
Gas taxes and weight-based license fees seem a reasonable way to pay for
roads as those who wear out the roads pay more for their maintainance. How
much do bikes wear out roadways (maybe include bikes in weight-based fees?)?
Silly to consider taxing bikes for road use when we ought to somehow reward
their use for reducing road wear and tear, to say nothing of reducing the
air pollution that is gradually strangling us all!
--

Steve Juniper
"The world is a dangerous place, not because of those
who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing"
-- Albert
Einstein --


"HardwareLust" <no0ne@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:ZEULc.30192$gt1.23476@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
DonQuijote1954 wrote:
> Propose something absurd, make sure nothing is ever done about it.
>
> We live in a society and must be some things that make life
> pleasurable: arts, parks, bike routes... Or you want people to pay for
> their own parks too?

Yes. The money used to build/maintain those types of things ("art", parks,
bike routes) should come directly from the people that most use them and
benefit from them, not from 'everyone'. If we do this, then it takes the
decision on how to disburse general funds away from the politicians, and
puts it back into the hands of the very people that want them. In case you
haven't noticed, allowing politicians to decided when and how money is spent
is usually a Very Bad Thing (tm).

Make the users pay. That way, who benefits from it, pays for it. Artists
pay for art, park goers pay for parks, bicyclists pay for bike routes.
Takes the politics completely out of those decisions, and that's always a
good thing. If there aren't enough users to support a particular
activity/thing, than so be it. That way, the majority of the people will
decide what's worth paying for and what's not by the direct application of
their dollars, not the lobbys or the political parties deciding for us.

Regards,
H.