What is your response?

[rainedon]

I have a bumpersticker on my car that has a picture of a bicycle and a car and it reads 'Same Road, Same Rights, Same Rules'. This morning, a coworker of mine said that he didn't feel it was fair that cyclists have the same rights as autos because the roads are paid for and maintained with money from fuel tax from automobiles.

So my question is- What is your response to someone who has this viewpoint?

[LordOpie]

how many cyclists don't own cars? heck, I own a truck and motorcycle and pay taxes on both. If i'm on my bicycle, that means I'm causing less delays in traffic and wear-and-tear on society.

That tax argument is bogus. Besides, you have a bumper sticker on your car.

[MichaelW]

Are local roads paid for by Federal taxes or local and state taxes? Even a non-fuel user may find their tax dollars being used for road maintenance. Can fuel tax pay all the costs of road building and maintenance?
Note that many roads were built before automobiles. The first road-building lobby were the Cycle Clubs.

[Grasschopper]

There is a woman here at my work that I overheard talking to another co-worker about why she will never wear a seat belt. Did you know that you are more likely to get hurt in an accident if you are wearing your seat belt? You could even be killed by it.

What I am trying to say here is that some people are simply so ignorant they shouldn't be allowed to talk. I try not to listen to these people but sometimes it is hard because they have these loud screeching voices...oh never mind. :D

[snowy]

My response would be...... Hey I pay taxes too. So that doesn't make any sense. Its not all coming out of gas taxes, now come on.

[Ebbtide]

I paid for the sidewalk in front of my house, should I be allowed to keep people off it becuase they don't pay?

I don't fly but I paid for the airline bailout.

I pay school taxes but I have no kids.

I've paid emmisions fees on my car and never fail an emmisions test.

Your friend should be used to paying taxes for the rights of others. Tell him to stop complaining and to change the law if he does not like it.

[JohnBrooking]

I guess he has a point in a very narrow sense. But as Lord Opie pointed out, there are also societal benefits to your being on a bike, never mind the fact that you own a car too.

This argument, that only those who pay for a service should be able to use it, is kind of the flip side of the argument that only people who use a service should have to pay for it. Like home-schoolers who don't like paying property tax to send the neighbor's kid to public school. In both cases, the argument is that everything should be supported by user fees alone. In reality, much of our economy doesn't operate that way, and probably couldn't. So life's messy, get over it.

Besides, we could ride on unmaintained paths if we had to, could he? If there were no cars and no gasoline tax to pay for roads, there would have to be something else to pay for whatever mode of transportation people chose instead.

Ask him if he would support going to all toll roads, with a sliding fee according to size of vehicle and wear and tear on the road.

[scarry]

Tell him if all the hidden costs of motor vehicle transport were included in the cost at the pump, gas would cost over $10 a gallon.

http://www.icta.org/ctanews/realpr.htm

[skydive69]

I have a bumpersticker on my car that has a picture of a bicycle and a car and it reads 'Same Road, Same Rights, Same Rules'. This morning, a coworker of mine said that he didn't feel it was fair that cyclists have the same rights as autos because the roads are paid for and maintained with money from fuel tax from automobiles.

So my question is- What is your response to someone who has this viewpoint?

We were hammering along on our ride today at 31 mph with faster ocassional sprints. Where would your co-worker propose that we do that - on the sidewalk? Tell him, "It's the law." We have responsibilities that go along with our use of the road. Also, as another has pointed out, my two motor vehicles and one motorcycle do their share of gulping gas, and hence paying road taxes. Also, you might point out that vehicles have a considerable impact on roads - fluid drips, wearing down asphalt. What impact does my 16.25 pound bicycle have on the same roads?

[TandemGeek]

Read this and compare to how roads are financed in your state...
http://www.biketexas.org/pdf/Fair_Share_ResSheet.pdf

Another more general "how to respond" resource for on-road bicycle use is here:
http://www.bicycledriving.com/motorists.htm

[supcom]

I'd say that road maintenance is paid for by more than just auto taxes. Federal subsidies pay for a lot of roads as well. I'd also say that we do not change the rules for visitors from other states even though they may not pay any taxes here. Besides, I happen to own a car but do not receive a refund on registration tax for days when I ride instead of drive.

By your coworkers logic, people who are poor and pay little in taxes are not entitled to the same police, fire, and rescue services as the wealthy. When they go to a public hospital, they should receive service only after bonafide taxpayers. Their children should sit at the back of the school bus, only get to take the classes the rich kids have not filled, and don't get issued pads for football. Their votes should count only in proportion the their total tax contribution.

I'd also say that the roads are built for all of the public to use and, except for toll roads, require no fee for access.

I'd finish up by stating that my bicycle, unlike an automobile, contributes virtually zero wear and tear on the roads unlike automobiles and trucks.

[IchbinJay]

Your friend is just jealous because you have the ability to ride a bike. He's probably just out of shape and trying to make himself feel better.

[billh]

I hear a lot of our income tax goes to maintain the roads through federal money. As far as state fuel tax, by his logic, all out of state drivers should not be allowed to use his state roads.

[2manybikes]

To him I say...

1) It's the law. Fair or not. Try to change the law by legal means or live with the existing laws.
Too much trouble to change the laws?... Then don't complain.
I also have to live with laws that are not fair sometimes. We all do.

2) I pay taxes on all my cars, they all wear out the road.
When I do not take the car. and take my bike somewhere instead,
the wear and tear on the road is reduced so much,
the environment is polluted so much less,
the non sustainable resources (oil) are used so much less,
the scrap in the landfill is reduced so much,
....WHERE IS MY REFUND ??

In England they have tax credits for companies that encourage bicycle commuting by giving the commuters safe bike storage, and showers, etc.

In the center of London there is a "Congestion Charge" to bring a car into the center of the city at peak times. This is to encourage bike commuting. The studies say it is working.

I REPEAT...... WHERE THE HECK IS MY REFUND.

Thanks for bringing it up buddy, I'm going to get together with other cyclists and start a mileage credit law for cyclists, now that you gave me the idea. Starting in our town !! yea! Wanna sign the petition?

Sorry is that too strong? :o

[John E]

The responses so far pretty well cover the topic, and quite accurately. Point out to your coworker that private automobile travel in the U.S. is arguaby the most highly subsidized form of transportation ever devised.

[TassR700]

Another point is that many states assess vehicle license fees based on the weight of the vehicle since that has a direct bearing on the amount of wear inflicted on the roads by that vehicle. Since bikes don't have enough weight to cause measureable wear, cyclists should not be responsible for the road maintenance. Think how long roads would last if only cyclists used them. As many others have said, the time I am riding my bike is helping the roads because my car is not causing wear for that trip.

If they still think it is unfair, tell them to get out and ride and take advantage of the loophole!

[Poguemahone]

Since the roads are not fully paid for with auto taxes, tell your co-worker that he's not paying his share and should not be allowed to drive his car anywhere.

Large amounts of road funding in the commonwealth of Virginia come from general funds; the state gas tax is a low 17.5 cents a gallon, and members of the legislature are trying to do away with even that minimal amount. Take a look at the road funding for your state; you may be surprised at the amount you subsidising his automobile.

[rainedon]

If they still think it is unfair, tell them to get out and ride and take advantage of the loophole!


I like that one.

My coworker (actually the VP of the company) was playing devil's advocate and trying to get me riled up. He is an avid runner and a recreational mountain biker and we discuss fitness and cycling all the time. But when he brought up that point, I didn't have any road revenue sources to snap back with. Thanks to you guys, I've got some ammo to fire back.

nate

[LittleBigMan]

I would say that as a bicyclist, I pay general taxes that pay for the roads. I'd also say that as a bicyclist, I don't cause damage to the roads because I'm very light. I'd also point out that as a motorist, I've already paid all the other taxes road-users pay.

So really, as a bicyclist/motorist, I pay the same taxes as other motorists, but cause less of the damage (and create less need for new road construction.)

End of argument.

[DieselDan]

Just point out the bumper sticker is on your car, not your bike. Besides, you paid tax on your bike when you bought it.

[AndrewP]

Who should pay for the prisons - the prisoners, the crime victims, or the public at large. Who is benefitting from the prison system?

[Allister]

I pay the exact amount of taxes for my bike that I am legally required to, not a penny more - same as every motorist. The fact that the law asks for $0 is beside the point. It's not unfair, because everyone has the opportunity to take advantage of it.

What sihts me is that the government won't bat an eyelid at shelling out billions of dollars for a marginally useful road tunnel (to take a current example here in Brisbane) with little to no opportinuty for a return, and which will undoubtedly be off-limits to cyclists, but the trains and buses have to pay for themselves.

[FOG]

The missing point is that the taxes to support road building were imposed in a kind of deal with motorist interests that the money would be used only for highway building, and would be a kind of "user fee." That is why there is supposed to be something called the Highway Trust Fund. Unfortunately, with the misuse of the National Environmental Policy Act by those filing frivolous lawsuits, investments in additional capacity have become very few, and investments in things like noise barriers have become many. We really need infrastructure, and as it becomes more difficult to build infrastructure, we are going to see more conflict and competition among user groups. If we ahd more highways and lanes, then bike lanes could be wider and more numerous. We all need the infrastructure.

[CRUM]

I guess he has a point in a very narrow sense.

No, not even in a narrow sense. The co-worker was a clueless twit who opened their mouth before their brain was engaged.

[iceratt]

Also, you might point out that vehicles have a considerable impact on roads - fluid drips, wearing down asphalt. What impact does my 16.25 pound bicycle have on the same roads?
Never mind wear to the road from oil drips, the state of Florida will never pay for the poisoning of the groundwater. The production, distribution, and use of oil is like throwing dead bodies in wells willy-nilly.

[DnvrFox]

Some thoughts:

An automobile, by their weight, causes tremendously more wear and tear on a road than a bicycle. A large truck even more. Large trucks pay much higher taxes, not only in fuel but in other ways. Bicycles do not cause and enlarge potholes, while cars do. Bicycles take up less space. You could have 10-20 bicycles in the same "air space" that a car takes, if bicyclists didn't have to ride single file or double at best.

[iceratt]

Bicycles do not cause and enlarge potholes, while cars do.
It's not in my nature to contradict another cyclist, but the last pothole in which I landed, increased 27% in size. Took me three days to climb out of that one, with dear Dark Star dangling precariously by a bungie cord.

[RiPHRaPH]

while automobiles are the intended users of the roadways, they are not the sole users of the road. this is the legal definition in illinois.

roads that were once intended for horses now are intended for autos. and it will evolve into something else in due time.

go to your DMV and get a rules of the road. many states clump bikers in with pedestrians. and there in lies your argument. you wouldn't plow over someone walking, but a biker is somehow different?!

[DnvrFox]

It's not in my nature to contradict another cyclist, but the last pothole in which I landed, increased 27% in size. Took me three days to climb out of that one, with dear Dark Star dangling precariously by a bungie cord.

Yes it is!

[PaulH]

In urban areas, much of the cost of road maintenance comed from general funds -- state and local taxes. You may well b contributing more than he. Automobiles do far more damage to the roads than bikes do, so they should pay more.

According to NHTSA, the annual per-capita cost of automobile accidents is $819. That's about $2,400 for a household of three. If that household drives 20,000 miles a year and buys 1,000 gallons of gas to do it, that's $2.40 per gallon "accident cost" If their insurance pays 80% of this cost, that is still a cost to society of $0.48 per gallon burned.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/rtecs/chapter3.html
http://www.rmiia.org/Auto/Traffic%20Safety/Cost_of_crashes.htm

There's also a significant cost in national security due to dependancy upon imported oil.

Paul

[Ex-rower]

Also, you might point out that vehicles have a considerable impact on roads - fluid drips, wearing down asphalt. What impact does my 16.25 pound bicycle have on the same roads?

Someone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that POUND FOR POUND cyclists probably do more damage to the roads. We use much higher tyre pressures so at the interface between the tyres and the road we will be placing a higher per square inch normal load. Also, in my observation, cyclists accellerate much more quickly than most cars so we are also introducing a higher shear force at the surface.

[sggoodri]

I have a bumpersticker on my car that has a picture of a bicycle and a car and it reads 'Same Road, Same Rights, Same Rules'. This morning, a coworker of mine said that he didn't feel it was fair that cyclists have the same rights as autos because the roads are paid for and maintained with money from fuel tax from automobiles.

So my question is- What is your response to someone who has this viewpoint?

Public travel is a fundamental right. All vehicle drivers have the right to use the public roadways. (The only qualification of this is that they must obey the traffic laws when doing so. Persons without motor vehicle licenses still retain the right to operate non motorized vehicles on roadways.)

Your coworker feels that bicyclists are under-taxed and do not pay their fair share. In that case he should advocate for higher taxes for bicycles or bicycle operation. We could debate what is fair all day, but the recurring reality is that the states have found that the public costs of bicycling are too low to warrant the kind of fee and tax structure overhead created to accommodate motor travel, and/or the states have decided that increasing the costs of bicycling will have negative social costs that outweigh the revenue potential.

Citizens don't lose their fundamental legal rights just because the government reduces their tax obligation. Dislike of another person's tax obligation does not justify infringing upon that person's legal rights.

[FOG]

Someone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that POUND FOR POUND cyclists probably do more damage to the roads. We use much higher tyre pressures so at the interface between the tyres and the road we will be placing a higher per square inch normal load. Also, in my observation, cyclists accellerate much more quickly than most cars so we are also introducing a higher shear force at the surface.Damage is typically a fourth power function of axle weight, although wheel weights make a difference on flexible pavements. bottom line, cars don't do any damage to pavement and neither do cyclists. very heavy tandems do most damage to rigid (portland cement concrete) pavement, and steering axles on very heavy single unit trucks, like dump trucks, do most of the damage on flexible pavement. Acceleration causes some small shear on pavement, and essentially has no effect. bicyclists do not accelerate more rapidly than motorized vehicles, and have so little mass that their effect is non-existent.

[pablo27]

that's how those little cager minds think... blood for oil... consume consume consume... you have no right to be here

[iceratt]

that's how those little cager minds think... blood for oil... consume consume consume... you have no right to be here
Possibly he was only concidering the wear on roads as an engineer would. One can't make arguments for and against particular policies, without demonstrating convincingly, why yours is best. It's good to consider how much damage each type of vehicle produces. I believe that sound science and economics could be used to show why cycling should be subsidized, rather than taxed.

[Raiyn]

So my question is- What is your response to someone who has this viewpoint?
Am I allowed to shoot them?

[royalflash]

all the points above are valid (apart from Raiyns maybe). In addition I think that car drivers in any case are not paying fully for the effects of their activities on the rest of us. Just consider the pollution cars bring and the reduction in quality of life by having these noisy stinking machines hurtling dangerously all around us day and night.

Also are they going to pay me when I or one of my family gets asthma or heart disease from breathing in their fumes?. How exactly are they going to make it up to me when one of them drives over me and kills me or maybe my kids.

They should be paying me not the reverse.

[Raiyn]

all the points above are valid (apart from Raiyns maybe).
Awww! What's wrong with my idea? :D
If the person's too dumb to notice that it's a bumper sticker on the man's car therby rendering their arguement moot they don't need to be using anymore of the world's resources now do they? Nevermind the narrowmindedness of the postion in the first place.

Been around the world and found that only stupid people are breeding
The cretins cloning and feeding

[HigherGround]

My coworker (actually the VP of the company) was playing devil's advocate and trying to get me riled up. He is an avid runner and a recreational mountain biker...

By your co-worker's own logic, he shouldn't be running on the roads either. After all, he didn't pay a registration fee for his running shoes, did he? What's next? License plates for baby strollers? :)

[genec]

I have a bumpersticker on my car that has a picture of a bicycle and a car and it reads 'Same Road, Same Rights, Same Rules'. This morning, a coworker of mine said that he didn't feel it was fair that cyclists have the same rights as autos because the roads are paid for and maintained with money from fuel tax from automobiles.

So my question is- What is your response to someone who has this viewpoint?

Ask how much wear and tear a bike does to the roads compared to a vehicle?

[pseudobrit]

He's a moron and you should have stabbed him in the face as he was speaking.

[Crazy Cyclist]

how many cyclists don't own cars? heck, I own a truck and motorcycle and pay taxes on both. If i'm on my bicycle, that means I'm causing less delays in traffic and wear-and-tear on society.

That tax argument is bogus. Besides, you have a bumper sticker on your car.

I don't own a car.

[recursive]

Never mind wear to the road from oil drips, the state of Florida will never pay for the poisoning of the groundwater. The production, distribution, and use of oil is like throwing dead bodies in wells willy-nilly.

When you consider the pollution aspect, you can make the case that bicyclists shoud be compensated for not polluting like 98% of other vehicles.

[operator]

Losl.

[Smorgasbord]

Read this and compare to how roads are financed in your state...
http://www.biketexas.org/pdf/Fair_Share_ResSheet.pdf

Another more general "how to respond" resource for on-road bicycle use is here:
http://www.bicycledriving.com/motorists.htm


PDF link was broken at the time I tried to access it, but IA has a copy: http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.biketexas.org/pdf/Fair_Share_ResSheet.pdf

[iceratt]

Let's remember, kids, that the wear on the road that a vehicle does, is not a linear function of the vehicular wieght, or even pounds per square inch on the road. Trucks and cars stress a roadway in ways that a bike could never. The great weight of a vehicle pressing down on the road, with variable pressure, from bumps, and the vibration created from this process, going at great speed will make small cracks grow. Just as a finger tapping on a brick, will never do anything, a sledgehammer, tapping on it, will quickly turn it to dust. I don't think that bikes do any damage to roads, what so ever. We don't exactly clean the air and water from our activity, but we are some of the few people who don't foul it. Damn we're good( or should I say, not bad)!

[andygates]

UK estimates are a total wear in the order of a couple of hundred pounds a year per car, about ten thousand a year for a big truck, and pennies for bikes.

Dedicated bike lanes don't wear out, they just get weeds growing through them!

[FOG]

Let's remember, kids, that the wear on the road that a vehicle does, is not a linear function of the vehicular wieght, or even pounds per square inch on the road. Trucks and cars stress a roadway in ways that a bike could never. The great weight of a vehicle pressing down on the road, with variable pressure, from bumps, and the vibration created from this process, going at great speed will make small cracks grow. Just as a finger tapping on a brick, will never do anything, a sledgehammer, tapping on it, will quickly turn it to dust. I don't think that bikes do any damage to roads, what so ever. We don't exactly clean the air and water from our activity, but we are some of the few people who don't foul it. Damn we're good( or should I say, not bad)!Per my comment above, damage is roughly a fourth power function of weight. Velocity of trucks appears not to have any significant affect on pavement.

[FOG]

UK estimates are a total wear in the order of a couple of hundred pounds a year per car, about ten thousand a year for a big truck, and pennies for bikes.

Dedicated bike lanes don't wear out, they just get weeds growing through them!Therein may lay some of the problem. Some pavements, especially flexible pavements, have a limited life whether or not they are exposed to heavy loads. Just take a look at some footpaths which are paved with asphalt. The bike lane carries its traffic for about ten years, and then should be at least sealed, and it should be repaved after about twenty years. It costs almost as much per square foot to pave for bikes as it does for trucks, the difference being the cost of the paving material, which must be thicker. Most of the labor, grading, and paving costs are the same. Bicycles seldom use bike lanes at high density, although I am sure there are a few exceptions. Assuming one bike every two minutes during rush hours, and one every fifteen minutes outsiide of rush hours, with three rush hours, we get 90 bikes per day during rush hours, and 84 during non rush hours, for a total of 174, times five days, a total of 870, plus 96 a day during weekends, a total of 1,062, per week, times 52, 55,224 per year, times 20 years roughly 1.1 million bikes. If it costs $330,000 per mile to pave a bike lane,then it costs about 30 cents a bicycle-mile to provide bike lanes. If we double the density we halve the per bicylce mile costs, and if we halve the density, we double the cost. At the 30 cents per bicycle mile rate, we are approaching the marginal cost of operating an automobile, including pavement and societal costs.

[iceratt]

At the 30 cents per bicycle mile rate, we are approaching the marginal cost of operating an automobile, including pavement and societal costs.
When( and if) we, as bicyclists, advocate for improved infrastructure, geared towards our needs, we should be able to demonstrate that bike specific facilities are cost effective. The roads will be built, no matter what. I think that we have a good case to make, as far as paying for the facilities that we use. If each person paid, according to their use, motorists would pay much more, and cyclist ranks would swell, reducing our costs further. But this won't happen, because you know who rules America- the motorists. In a democracy, they could have us riding on the sidewalks, and paying a greater share of their costs on top of the indignity.