Cyclists.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eevo

its ironic that cyclists say car drivers should not complain about being slowed down and inconvenienced by cyclists and that sharing the road and safety is more important than losing a portion of my time.

yet, when a cyclists is inconvenienced by a red light, sharing the road and safety go right out the window and waiting a portion of time is just unbearable.

---

You're being inaccurate again....:p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sam_d

Banning cyclists from certain roads would be a great way to reduce accidents but not until well designed, usable and linked up separated cycle ways are built.

A cheaper solution in the interim would be to reduce speed limits on roads popularly used by cyclists.

But neither of these things will happen.

(Oh, before anyone chimes in with the inevitable "Cyclists should pay for dedicated infrastructure, I pay for the roads with my Rego." or anything like that, please spend a few minutes educating yourself as to how the roads are actually funded so as not to appear ignorant or foolish.)

---

Actually they should, given less than a third of the rego/ fuel tax is actually used on roads. So using that ratio if dedicated cyclist infrastructure come back at a cost of 3 billion the cyclists should pay 9 billion in rego, as they don't use fuel. Or put a mega tax on bike tyres and Lycra.:D
NRMA says state's roads have $4 billion funding backlog
If your going to present a view back it with a link or it heads towards white noise.
Did you read the report that showed in 60% of incidents cyclist where at fault in Oz? Again cyclist rego and specific targeted training for our underfunded roads would reduce deaths just as specific training for motorbikes has done here and specialist driver training in certain eu countries has done there.

Well at least one pub in Perth has taken a step in the right direction. :D

Some of the comments posted in this article are quite good. Have to laugh at comment by Shelley Archer - for those who don't know her, she is a failed politician (dumped by her own party) who shares the penthouse apartment of the Raffles with her partner, that picture of health and manly physique, Kevin Reynolds. ;)

Raffles Hotel in Perth denies ban on 'smelly? Lycra-clad cyclists

I've long complained that car registration is incorrectly calculated. In Queensland for instance it is still based on the number of cylinders (go figure). Surely the correct way of determining registration cost is based on the weight & size of a vehicle and therefore it's likely wear and tear on road infrastructure.

Using the same logic, bicycles should likewise we registered based on their size & wear & tear on road & cycleway infrastructure - which is virtually nil. So the actual real world cost of registering a bicycle should be, say, 1/10th the cost of registering a car.

1 Car = 10 Bicycles | TheCityFix

Although if you go by weight, the actual registration cost would be say 1/100th. My bike weighs about 9kg so let's say 15kg per bike to be generous, the average car, say a Toyota Camry = 1500kg.

This would make registration compared to a 4 cylinder car (in Qld at least) = $6.50. And that figure includes third party personal insurance. The actual figure without insurance would be half that amount!

SO - if annual bicycle registration was likely to only be less than $5, why not just add a $50 road infrastructure tax to the cost of all new bikes? This would assume an average design life of 10 years which seems generous. You could find a way of exempting "kids" bikes as they would not and should not be ridden on roads (might be tricky but I'm sure there is a combination of wheel & frame size that works for this).

It doesn't stop the problem of identification for bike riders, but at least it should address the constant whinge about bicycle users not paying their way.

Just a thought anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bee utey

You're being inaccurate again....:p

---

ah nuts.

You forgot to add the average weight of the occupants :p And a odor surcharge esp in peak hour. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndyG

You forgot to add the average weight of the occupants :p And a odor surcharge esp in peak hour. :D

---

Ahhh yes, but the weight I used for the Camry was unladen as well. If we assume car drivers are, on average, heavier... then the rego gets even less for the bike.

As for odour - cyclists pay that tax per can of Rexona.

Driving around yesterday,a group of cyclists held everyone up doing 20 in a 60 zone,we all overtook them and continued on,after stopping at a red light the group simply rode through the cars to the front and on the green held everyone up again,after getting around them I stopped at the next lights only for the process to be repeated again,later at a round a bout another group decided to not give way to the right and I almost had them come through the passenger side windows,it was nice for them to abuse me even though they were in the wrong. Pat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bee utey;. [B

Anyone who is not insured for their own risk faces the same problem[/B]. And cyclist caused injuries are extremely uncommon compared to motor vehicle inflicted injury.



People just want someone else to blame for their misfortunes instead of preparing themselves for the unforseen in life. It's pathetic.

---

Oh I've got it lets get the pedestrians to all have CTP and comprehensive insurance to pay for the bent bike wheels when they get hit. Are you for real?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by solmanic

I've long complained that car registration is incorrectly calculated. In Queensland for instance it is still based on the number of cylinders (go figure). Surely the correct way of determining registration cost is based on the weight & size of a vehicle and therefore it's likely wear and tear on road infrastructure.

Using the same logic, bicycles should likewise we registered based on their size & wear & tear on road & cycleway infrastructure - which is virtually nil. So the actual real world cost of registering a bicycle should be, say, 1/10th the cost of registering a car.

1 Car = 10 Bicycles | TheCityFix

Although if you go by weight, the actual registration cost would be say 1/100th. My bike weighs about 9kg so let's say 15kg per bike to be generous, the average car, say a Toyota Camry = 1500kg.

This would make registration compared to a 4 cylinder car (in Qld at least) = $6.50. And that figure includes third party personal insurance. The actual figure without insurance would be half that amount!

SO - if annual bicycle registration was likely to only be less than $5, why not just add a $50 road infrastructure tax to the cost of all new bikes? This would assume an average design life of 10 years which seems generous. You could find a way of exempting "kids" bikes as they would not and should not be ridden on roads (might be tricky but I'm sure there is a combination of wheel & frame size that works for this).

It doesn't stop the problem of identification for bike riders, but at least it should address the constant whinge about bicycle users not paying their way.

Just a thought anyway.

---

Just looked at your link rofl. :D
First photo shows 6-8 bikes in a "car sized rack" the second shows two;)
It really helps if the photos back the 10 bikes per car argument, not undercut it.:angel: one question, what would happen if 10 MAMILS tried to ride that close together at any decent speed?
Reality is two cyclists take up as much roadway as one car if they leave the correct gaps.
As helmets are compulsory, rego code on them. Do it exactly the same as your tollways, designate compulsory zones for rego, with suburbia back streets and kids no rego needed.
Now here's an idea that could benefit both cyclists and motorists. All cyclist rego $$$$ go to improved/ new cycleways. Unlike all the current road taxes of which we don't even see 25%.