Who should pay the bill?

Printable View

  • 03-05-2013
    AZ
    Who should pay the bill?
    All the to do being made about the "bicycle tax" leaves the question unanswered, how much should cyclists have to pay for infrastructure and how? How about runners and peds? Should overpasses and other amenities designed and constructed for "everyone but motor vehicles" be paid out of the general fund? Highway funding? Special use permits? Carbon Credits? How to pay for cyclist only infrastructure? Who bears the financial load? Tax the overweight and unhealthy? Should electric vehicles be taxed at a higher rate since they pay no fuel tax to help pay for the roadways they are using? Who should foot the bill?
  • 03-05-2013
    nachomc
    Don't we primarily pay for local roads (i.e non highway or non-fed) via our property taxes?
  • 03-05-2013
    JoePAz
    Very simple. Keep the gas tax. It is easy to administer, already in place and creates and incentive for increase fuel economy while also putting more tax burden on heavy vehicles which will cause more road maintenance. Let electric cars run for free. Right now there are so few as to make no difference. That should be in the ONLY incentive for electric cars.

    Don't tax cyclist or pedestrians.
  • 03-05-2013
    heyyall
    Who should pay the bill?
    I'll probably be in the minority, but I really don't mind taxes -- sales, property, income, etc. I love living in a community that has great parks and recognize they are made possible through local and state governments. I vote for optional sales taxes that go to support core infrastructure projects, too.

    A community that has strong infrastructure and is a pleasant place to live is a wise investment. Taxes can be used to protect and enrich the community.
  • 03-05-2013
    ElDuderino2412
    I would be happy to pay some taxes if they actually would build some bike lanes/trails, but i doubt they would. My state sucks for biking or walking. Almost no shoulders on most of our roads.
  • 03-05-2013
    Mountain Cycle Shawn
    We shouldn't have to pay any more. We already pay literally hundreds of different kinds of taxes and fees. We need to keep the Man from wasting our money. Paying more taxes is like making guns illegal. Criminals will always have them and no matter how much taxes and fees we pay, it will never be enough because of fraud, corruption and waste. When are you people going to learn that enough is enough?
  • 03-05-2013
    rockerc
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Dirty $anchez View Post
    All the to do being made about the "bicycle tax" leaves the question unanswered, how much should cyclists have to pay for infrastructure and how? How about runners and peds? Should overpasses and other amenities designed and constructed for "everyone but motor vehicles" be paid out of the general fund? Highway funding? Special use permits? Carbon Credits? How to pay for cyclist only infrastructure? Who bears the financial load? Tax the overweight and unhealthy? Should electric vehicles be taxed at a higher rate since they pay no fuel tax to help pay for the roadways they are using? Who should foot the bill?

    No easy answers here, especially with the way things are already set up in this country. I would say to look to some European countries as examples, but that is mostly a valueless exercise as there are so many differences in place here that it would take some very radical changes to implement anything meaningful. Judging by how entrenched people are in their ways and in how resistant to change they are when it comes to anything that might impinge upon 'personal freedoms', I would suggest that anything on a national level is doomed to failure. However, on a local level there are things that could and should be done to divert funding to cycling infrastructure if the demand is there. Look at cities such as Portland for a example of the cyclist-friendly environment, and even to where I live in Tucson. Much of the new development in the NW of Tucson involves purpose built cycle paths that make the whole place more attractive to people thinking of moving there. There is a burgeoning demand for places that are more health friendly, and having this infrastructure in place is a big selling point. Developers are already aware of this, and build these features into their plans, with the help and encouragement of local authorities. As far as developing new cycle infrastructure in existing unfriendly environments, this is much more problematic. I do not mind paying a slightly increased amount in tax to help toward this kind of thing, but I believe it should be borne by everyone, not just cyclists. It does benefit all of us in the long run, in ways that may not be apparent to the more short-sighted among us.
  • 03-05-2013
    rockerc
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    Paying more taxes is like making guns illegal.

    Wait! Another gun thread?!?!? {rubs hands with glee, and places tongue in cheek}
  • 03-05-2013
    bikeabuser
    The question is political - The answer is political - The Answer Is Within The Link
    Thank you. Good evening ... good evening to the resident-alien-subject-slaves. Queen Hillary and her co-queen Billary send greetings from Clintonia. Turn out the lights, the new Camelot has arrived.

    I've often wondered what does it feel like to be raped?

    You know, I've seen Hollywood's idea of it; but, ... and I've even ... you know for money ... done that once or twice myself: But I don't mean in that sense. I'm talking about being raped where it counts the most ; intellectually, and spiritually, and in your property, in your person, in your children, and in everything you think you own.

    There's been a great deal of confusion in recent years concerning what the nature of the American system is.

    It always bothered me when I, you know, I'd here these yayhoos, you know, come out and talk about democracy and all these kinds of things and I'm not the brightest man in the world, alright, but I never pledged allegiance to any democracy: And I never understood what they were talking about.

    Because when I read the philosophers- Montesque, Rousseau, Voltaire, the enlightenment thinkers; when I read Plato, and Aristotle; when I read all of these great minds and everything I see that they nowhere discuss democracy in any sense that we know it today.

    And so when I begin to look at the current state of what we call the United States of America and compare it to democracy; I see no resemblence to what democracy really is because democracy is vox populi vox dei ... the will of the people is god ... right?

    Fifty one people vote on a question, out of a hundred, it's law.

    Now they can change their mind the next day, and vote the other way, and that becomes just as valid a law as it was the first day.

    In the kind of democracy I see, on Monday it's illegal to murder ..., on Tuesday there's extenuating circumstances of course, now well on Wednesday there could be some ... you see there's some psychological problems here because of the upbringing, on Thursday the victim is accused of the crime, and on Friday it becomes legal to murder.

    Now that's what I see as a modern democracy, but then again that doesn't have anything to do with politics. Now if anybody in this room is not confused by this time as to what I'm talking about, then you come up here and make this speech, because everyone is supposed to be confused at this point.

    Because speaking out of both sides of our mouth is the classical modern way of the politicians; when they talk about Constitutional rights, they mean none of the rights given to us in the blood, sweat, and tears of the fathers when they gave us the Constitution.

    JOHN QUADE SPEECH - The Common Law