Cyclists should do a theory test!

ThisRegard wrote: »

Comprehension is not your forte either.

your post above shows you have been bested by your superior.
Now you can jog on, it might be safer.:cool:

ThisRegard wrote: »

You use the roads more and pay less to do so. Can't wait to see the appropriate rates for you guys under your new scheme.

Wouldn't make much difference, its a deductible business expense

Grandpa Hassan

Spook_ie wrote: »

don't expect myself and a lot of others to like paying for your lifestyle choices

You already do. Its called the bike to work scheme. I picked up a great bike on it.

Spook_ie wrote: »

No cyclists contributing to the facilities they use as cyclists, sort of like motorists contributing via motor tax, fuel tax, VRT etc for the facilities they use. Which has the added benefit of repudiating the motorists "I pay road tax, you don't " argument

You pay subsidised motor tax but still expect taxi ranks provided taking space from other road users and pedestrians.

Grandpa Hassan wrote: »

You already do. Its called the bike to work scheme. I picked up a great bike on it.

The bike to work scheme is good for everyone, including non cyclists.
I have seen fellas buying lawnmowers, chainsaws etc. and saying they got a bike.

tipparetops wrote: »

your post above shows you have been bested by your superior.
Now you can jog on, it might be safer.:cool:

Stop digging, the use of smilies doesn't disguise the fact you completely misunderstood the post.

ThisRegard wrote: »

Stop digging, the use of smilies doesn't disguise the fact you completely misunderstood the post.

smilies - spelling not your forte? :pac:

Grandpa Hassan wrote: »

You already do. Its called the bike to work scheme. I picked up a great bike on it.

Correct, and I believe that you should at least agree to pay towards the rest of the infrastructure that you all want, I don't believe the taxpayer should foot any more of cyclists bills than they do already.

Interestingly that the exchequer think its a success but can't actually tell you how many people actually cycle to work rather than
go on weekends up and down the Sallygap, of course if they ever did find out it would likely screw a lot of the Mamils up

RainyDay

Spook_ie wrote: »

Because the dept of environment receive in the motor tax and pay it back out in the form of LGA, it never went into central exchequer like income tax

Nonsense, you've just made that up. Motor tax shows on the tax receipts of central govt. It's all in one pot.

ThisRegard wrote: »

You pay subsidised motor tax but still expect taxi ranks provided taking space from other road users and pedestrians.

No the customer ( historicly ) expected to find taxis at taxi ranks, some taxi drivers believe that taxis should have somewhere to park while waiting instead of plying for hire, but we digress, if you wish to disparage taxi driving then start a new thread, AH hasn't had a decent taxi thread in ages, I'd suggest something along the lines of tipping taxi drivers for maximum response

RainyDay

ThisRegard wrote: »

You pay subsidised motor tax but still expect taxi ranks provided taking space from other road users and pedestrians.

Brilliant, I look forward to his explanation of this one.

rubadub

tipparetops wrote: »

I drive sensibly, I am watchful for other vehicles. I am always wary.
But accidents are accidents, there is no blame.
They are not called on purposes.

We all take chances every day, accept this.
Cyclists take their chance sitting on a push bike, I am all about accepting ones decisions.

You said before the parents are to blame.

tipparetops wrote: »

very few parents let their child onto busy roads on a bicycle, if they do, they must accept blame if the child is injured or killed.

When I was a child it was the norm for almost everybody I knew to cycle to school.

Or are you saying its not an accident, but an "on purpose" if a child is killed cycling on the road.

tipparetops wrote: »

smilies - spelling not your forte? :pac:

You really really need to stop making a fool of yourself. You even had the use of Google to check before posting but still posted that.

ThisRegard wrote: »

You really really need to stop making a fool of yourself. You even had the use of Google to check before posting but still posted that.

you completely misunderstood my post. stop pretending.

RainyDay wrote: »

Nonsense, you've just made that up. Motor tax shows on the tax receipts of central govt. It's all in one pot.

Did I really,

http://www.cartell.ie/2010/02/cartell-asks-where-does-our-motor-tax-go/

Pinch Flat

tipparetops wrote: »

Cyclists like yourself choose to go onto the roads with drivers that kill cyclists.
Have you paused to think about that, do you have a death wish.

I choose to use the roads as I am legally entitled to do. Incidentally, the closest I've come to a serious accident was while driving. The car came against me on the wrong side of the motorway. I'm glad you can agree though that drivers kill people. It's completely unacceptable.

cajonlardo

Give me the tests, taxes, licences, reg plates (I'm already insured )

Anything, anything to shut these whining holier than thou ^&*wipes up.

No longer allowed to be racist, homophobic or to openly berate religion - whats a cretin got left to hate?

Grandpa Hassan

Spook_ie wrote: »

Correct, and I believe that you should at least agree to pay towards the rest of the infrastructure that you all want, I don't believe the taxpayer should foot any more of cyclists bills than they do already.

Interestingly that the exchequer think its a success but can't actually tell you how many people actually cycle to work rather than
go on weekends up and down the Sallygap, of course if they ever did find out it would likely screw a lot of the Mamils up

You need to wake up and understand that government policy will remain pro cycle and anti car. I look forward to the day when increasing parts of our major cities are bike bus and taxi zones only. It's coming. Like you said, the exchequer says it's a success and Dublin bikes has just been massively expanded. The momentum is only one way, my friend. Maybe you should by a lycra and join the fun

rubadub wrote: »

You said before the parents are to blame.

When I was a child it was the norm for almost everybody I knew to cycle to school.

Or are you saying its not an accident, but an "on purpose" if a child is killed cycling on the road.

Yeah, cycled to school with you mom behind you.
You Sir, are a ticket.

My posts are quite simple to understand, adult cyclists must accept that cycling is dangerous and accidents happen.
Parents who send their children cycling onto a road should have social services and guards at the door.
If a child is killed cycling on a road, the parents will have questions to answer.

Grandpa Hassan wrote: »

You need to wake up and understand that government policy will remain pro cycle and anti car. I look forward to the day when increasing parts of our major cities are bike bus and taxi zones only. It's coming. Like you said, the exchequer says it's a success and Dublin bikes has just been massively expanded. The momentum is only one way, my friend. Maybe you should by a lycra and join the fun

Nah, can't see me wearing Lycra while driving the taxi

Spook_ie wrote: »

No the customer ( historicly ) expected to find taxis at taxi ranks, some taxi drivers believe that taxis should have somewhere to park while waiting instead of plying for hire, but we digress, if you wish to disparage taxi driving then start a new thread, AH hasn't had a decent taxi thread in ages, I'd suggest something along the lines of tipping taxi drivers for maximum response

I'm just using the very same points you always use, cyclists should pay towards the facilities they're provided with via additional taxes.

Why should your very own logic not apply to taxi drivers?

Pinch Flat wrote: »

I choose to use the roads as I am legally entitled to do. Incidentally, the closest I've come to a serious accident was while driving. The car came against me on the wrong side of the motorway. I'm glad you can agree though that drivers kill people. It's completely unacceptable.

keep cycling, but accept that if you are hurt or killed doing so, ce la vie.

Pinch Flat

tipparetops wrote: »

Parents who send their children cycling onto a road should have social services and guards at the door.

I love it. These hysterical over reactions. Keep them coming.

ThisRegard wrote: »

I'm just using the very same points you always use, cyclists should pay towards the facilities they're provided with via additional taxes.

Why should your very own logic not apply to taxi drivers?

Where have I said that it shouldn't? To be honest one of my suggestions to the NTA was to allow any legally parked taxi ( as in you were parked were parking was permitted ) to ply for hire you wouldn't need any taxi ranks, but again we digress, take it to a taxi thread

Pinch Flat

tipparetops wrote: »

keep cycling, but accept that if you are hurt or killed doing so, ce la vie.

C'est, but let's not get pedantic.

Look, I know a lot of Irish people freak out at the thoughts of personal responsibility - I had a woman try to blame me for ripping the underside of her car off for trying to overtake me on a speed ramp, my fault apparently for cycling too fast. So I get that mindset.

What concerns me even more is that there's people like you who drive around, safe in the knowledge (in their own myopic world) that whatever happens is someone else's fault. Thankfully in the minority.

Pinch Flat wrote: »

I love it. These hysterical over reactions. Keep them coming.

I think some people start out thinking they're making good points, soon realise that's not the case and end up just posting troll like posts.

Pinch Flat wrote: »

I love it. These hysterical over reactions. Keep them coming.

Typical cyclist arrogance, if you do not like the truth go back to your own forum and bring the other codgers with you.

ThisRegard wrote: »

I think some people start out thinking they're making good points, soon realise that's not the case and end up just posting troll like posts.

You have the highest troll posts, more lies because you are losing the argument.

Spook_ie wrote: »

Where have I said that it shouldn't? To be honest one of my suggestions to the NTA was to allow any legally parked taxi ( as in you were parked were parking was permitted ) to ply for hire you wouldn't need any taxi ranks, but again we digress, take it to a taxi thread

It's an easy question, should taxis fund the full costs of taxi ranks and towards bus lanes via increases in their motor taxes? You only said a couple of posts back that the tax payer should not be funding cycle facilities any further.