Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 400 - Out Now!

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD MAGAZINE - ISSUE 400 - OUT NOW!
84 pages, 38 years of history from Open Rugby to the present day.
Click here for the digital edition to read online via smartphone, tablet and desktop devices including iPhone, iPad, Android & Kindle HD.
Click here to order a copy for delivery by post. Annual subscriptions also available worldwide.
Find out what's inside Issue 400
/ View a Gallery of all 400 covers / WH Smith Branches stocking Issue 400
Read Jamie Jones-Buchanan's Top 5 RLW Interviews including Marwan Koukash, Lee Briers, Gareth Thomas, Steve Ganson & Matt King OBE


League Express

Podcast

Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

Farage poles the electorate


  • Please log in to reply
339 replies to this topic

#41 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 16,948 posts

Posted 27 April 2013 - 07:40 AM

You can get cars with £0 VED.

Presumably they should be treated the same as bikes?

You mean they should have special paths created for them?

 

It seems a bit unnecessary.



#42 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 28,869 posts

Posted 27 April 2013 - 07:46 AM

You mean they should have special paths created for them?
 
It seems a bit unnecessary.

They should be subject to the full force of Ukip's well thought-out policies.
Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#43 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 16,948 posts

Posted 27 April 2013 - 07:58 AM

They should be subject to the full force of Ukip's well thought-out policies.

But it was the fact that cyclists gets cycle lanes for their use only that he was objecting to especially since they don't pay road tax.

 

I don't agree with him but there is no howler here.



#44 Griff9of13

Griff9of13
  • Coach
  • 5,456 posts

Posted 27 April 2013 - 08:23 AM

He may be an idiot but his argument here is sound. Whether the funds are ring-fenced or not, car users have to pay to access the roads and cyclists don't.

 

So no cyclists drive cars? And no cyclists pay any other form of taxation? 

 

Does it also not occur to these people that the more people using bikes means more space on the road for cars?


"it is a well known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it."

#45 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 19,659 posts

Posted 27 April 2013 - 08:25 AM

But it was the fact that cyclists gets cycle lanes for their use only that he was objecting to especially since they don't pay road tax.

 

I don't agree with him but there is no howler here.

 

There is no such thing as road tax. It was abolished in 1937. Roads are paid for out of general taxation, council tax and in some cases , tolls. Anyone who pays tax is paying for the roads, even if they never leave the house. VED is a tax on vehicle ownership  and is currently an emissions-based graduated system.  So no emissions, no duty.



#46 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 16,948 posts

Posted 27 April 2013 - 10:45 AM

There is no such thing as road tax. It was abolished in 1937. Roads are paid for out of general taxation, council tax and in some cases , tolls. Anyone who pays tax is paying for the roads, even if they never leave the house. VED is a tax on vehicle ownership  and is currently an emissions-based graduated system.  So no emissions, no duty.

Sure you don't pay for the roads, you just pay tax to own a car which then goes to the treasury and among other things is used to pay for roads.



#47 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 16,948 posts

Posted 27 April 2013 - 10:49 AM

So no cyclists drive cars? And no cyclists pay any other form of taxation? 

 

Does it also not occur to these people that the more people using bikes means more space on the road for cars?

I said I didn't agree his conclusions but he is correct that motorists do subsidise roads when are then used by people who have not paid as much as the motorists have. This is the kind of thing that right wingers disagree with. Even more of a red rag is that cyclists get dedicated cycle paths built for them.

 

Not against that personally and I think he is wrong to bring it up but the logic of what he is saying is consistent and there is no howler.



#48 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 28,869 posts

Posted 27 April 2013 - 12:10 PM

I said I didn't agree his conclusions but he is correct that motorists do subsidise roads when are then used by people who have not paid as much as the motorists have. This is the kind of thing that right wingers disagree with. Even more of a red rag is that cyclists get dedicated cycle paths built for them.
 
Not against that personally and I think he is wrong to bring it up but the logic of what he is saying is consistent and there is no howler.

He is not correct that "motorists" subsidise roads.
Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#49 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 16,948 posts

Posted 27 April 2013 - 12:19 PM

He is not correct that "motorists" subsidise roads.

Then why do car owners pay tax? Why is there a tax on petrol?

 

And don't give me "it's because of emissions" because if the emissions were zero, they would tax anyway.



#50 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 28,869 posts

Posted 27 April 2013 - 12:26 PM

Then why do car owners pay tax? Why is there a tax on petrol?
 
And don't give me "it's because of emissions" because if the emissions were zero, they would tax anyway.

Some car owners pay VED, some do not. Quite a lot of cars have £0 VED.

I believe lots of things are taxed and that tax applied to the treasury pot. You might just as well say smokers subsidise roads or that motorists subsidise drone warfare.
Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#51 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 16,948 posts

Posted 27 April 2013 - 12:34 PM

Some car owners pay VED, some do not. Quite a lot of cars have £0 VED.

I believe lots of things are taxed and that tax applied to the treasury pot. You might just as well say smokers subsidise roads or that motorists subsidise drone warfare.

We don't use drones. Unless you mean purely reconnaissance ones.

 

Motorists subsidise a lot of things but a lot of things subsidise motorists. Overall, it probably works out about even.

 

The rest of the economy subsidises bicycles.

 

I don't have a problem with that but this guy obviously does.


Edited by Northern Sol, 27 April 2013 - 12:49 PM.


#52 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 19,659 posts

Posted 27 April 2013 - 01:00 PM

More about subsidised motoring



#53 Severus

Severus
  • Coach
  • 12,694 posts

Posted 27 April 2013 - 01:37 PM

Northern Sol and this UKIP guy highlight the ignorance that a lot of motorists have when it comes to the old and false argument that cyclists shouldn't be on the road because they don't pay road tax [sic]. So yes, it is a howler. British cycling claim that over 90% of their members also drive.

A study has shown (linked in the road.cc article) that cycling is a net positive and driving a net negative. The more people who cycle, the less congestion there is on the road and the more healthy people are. The road network will not be able to cope as the volume of motorised traffic increases and one feasible solution is to make it attractive and safer for people to cycle.
Fides invicta triumphat

#54 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 28,869 posts

Posted 27 April 2013 - 01:39 PM

We don't use drones. Unless you mean purely reconnaissance ones.

The RAF will be confused by this having set up a unit to fly armed drones.
Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#55 Bedford Roughyed

Bedford Roughyed
  • Moderator
  • 5,124 posts

Posted 27 April 2013 - 01:39 PM

We don't use drones. Unless you mean purely reconnaissance ones.

We have armed drones flying over Afghan 'piloted' from near Lincoln.
With the best, thats a good bit of PR, though I would say the Bedford team, theres, like, you know, 13 blokes who can get together at the weekend to have a game together, which doesnt point to expansion of the game. Point, yeah go on!

#56 Steve May

Steve May
  • Coach
  • 10,111 posts

Posted 27 April 2013 - 01:48 PM

So no cyclists drive cars?

Good point. I have a car and a bike.

I also eat food which has been delivered to the shop by lorries on the road network.

That's me.  I'm done.


#57 Griff9of13

Griff9of13
  • Coach
  • 5,456 posts

Posted 27 April 2013 - 01:54 PM

Good point. I have a car and a bike.

I also eat food which has been delivered to the shop by lorries on the road network.

 

Absolutely. The same people probably make a similar argument when it comes to subsidising railways "I don't travel by rail so I shouldn't have to pay towards it" without thinking it through. 


"it is a well known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it."

#58 Severus

Severus
  • Coach
  • 12,694 posts

Posted 27 April 2013 - 01:54 PM

Good point. I have a car and a bike.

I also eat food which has been delivered to the shop by lorries on the road network.


Just think, more cyclists means less congestion means quicker deliveries means cheaper food. Everyone's a winner.
Fides invicta triumphat

#59 tonyXIII

tonyXIII
  • Coach
  • 4,957 posts

Posted 27 April 2013 - 02:58 PM

We have armed drones flying over Afghan 'piloted' from near Lincoln.

 

The reports I have seen specifically stated that the UK's drones were unarmed as yet. They have the capability to carry (I think) 500lb of weaponry. I know the people interviewed would say that, but I have no evidence to the contrary. If you have, I am happy to be corrected.


Rethymno Rugby League Appreciation Society
Founder (and, so far, only) member.


#60 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 28,869 posts

Posted 27 April 2013 - 03:03 PM

The reports I have seen specifically stated that the UK's drones were unarmed as yet. They have the capability to carry (I think) 500lb of weaponry. I know the people interviewed would say that, but I have no evidence to the contrary. If you have, I am happy to be corrected.

http://www.bbc.co.uk...nshire-22320275
Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users