3 ms·

>Nobody should have to fking pay to ride a damn bike. Why not? If you use the road you should pay at least some road tax. Bikes should have license plates to b

>Nobody should have to fking pay to ride a damn bike. Why not? If you use the road you should pay at least some road tax. Bikes should have license plates to better identify traffic violators as well.

exabrial 3y ago
because it's a bike.
- zolbrek 3y ago
  Thanks, that explains so much.
Marsymars 3y ago
Bikes are responsible for roughly none of the wear to the road. If you use the fourth power law to calculate road stress, a typical car is on the order of five orders of magnitude more damaging to roads than a typical bicycle. There's no way to sensibly scale this to licensing costs - if, like in my jurisdiction, car registration is ~$100/yr, proportional cost for a bike would be on the order of a tenth of a cent per year - and that's before you take into account all the other negative externalities of cars that bikes don't have. I drive much more than I bike, but I'd happily pay increased car tax to actively subsidize bike users and to get more cars off the road.
- josephcsible 3y ago
  > Bikes are responsible for roughly none of the wear to the road. > If you use the fourth power law to calculate road stress, a typical car is on the order of five orders of magnitude more damaging to roads than a typical bicycle. By this logic, shouldn't cars not have to pay anything either, since they're responsible for roughly none of the wear compared to semis?
- zolbrek 3y ago
  Wear to the road isn't the only consideration. If there's no separate bicycle path, they take up space on the road and slow down traffic. Cyclists should pay for the privilege of sharing the road with more efficient vehicles.
  - petre 3y ago
    Motorists should pay for the priviledge of pousoning the air. The taxes should go towards bike commuting incentives, including infrastructure.
    - zolbrek 3y ago
      We already pay our emissions tax in Germany.
      - petre 3y ago
        Of course, we pay as well. It's in the fuel. And in the vehicle tax. But did you ever ask yourself where those taxes go to? I'd rather they went into sustainable transportation, for instance the new 45€ train ticket as opposed to the bureaucrats' salaries.
  - JambalayaJim 3y ago
    It’s not the cyclist’s fault there is so separate bicycle path though. Moreover, cyclists don’t cause congestion; motorists do. The congestion + noise + safety issues mean motorists are causing orders of magnitudes more negative externalities than any other transportation methods.
exabrial 3y ago
Because the road is in the way of the biker in the first place.

exabrial 3y ago

because it's a bike.

zolbrek 3y ago
Thanks, that explains so much.

Marsymars 3y ago

Bikes are responsible for roughly none of the wear to the road. If you use the fourth power law to calculate road stress, a typical car is on the order of five orders of magnitude more damaging to roads than a typical bicycle. There's no way to sensibly scale this to licensing costs - if, like in my jurisdiction, car registration is ~$100/yr, proportional cost for a bike would be on the order of a tenth of a cent per year - and that's before you take into account all the other negative externalities of cars that bikes don't have. I drive much more than I bike, but I'd happily pay increased car tax to actively subsidize bike users and to get more cars off the road.

josephcsible 3y ago
> Bikes are responsible for roughly none of the wear to the road. > If you use the fourth power law to calculate road stress, a typical car is on the order of five orders of magnitude more damaging to roads than a typical bicycle. By this logic, shouldn't cars not have to pay anything either, since they're responsible for roughly none of the wear compared to semis?
zolbrek 3y ago
Wear to the road isn't the only consideration. If there's no separate bicycle path, they take up space on the road and slow down traffic. Cyclists should pay for the privilege of sharing the road with more efficient vehicles.
- petre 3y ago
  Motorists should pay for the priviledge of pousoning the air. The taxes should go towards bike commuting incentives, including infrastructure.
  - zolbrek 3y ago
    We already pay our emissions tax in Germany.
    - petre 3y ago
      Of course, we pay as well. It's in the fuel. And in the vehicle tax. But did you ever ask yourself where those taxes go to? I'd rather they went into sustainable transportation, for instance the new 45€ train ticket as opposed to the bureaucrats' salaries.
- JambalayaJim 3y ago
  It’s not the cyclist’s fault there is so separate bicycle path though. Moreover, cyclists don’t cause congestion; motorists do. The congestion + noise + safety issues mean motorists are causing orders of magnitudes more negative externalities than any other transportation methods.

exabrial 3y ago

Because the road is in the way of the biker in the first place.