This has to be one of THE dumbest articles ever published: http://www.nationalpost.com/todays-paper/story.html?id=2044739.
Among other things, the article suggests that we cyclists should pay a “bike tax” because when we breath heavily while riding, we add to our carbon footprint, and do not pay for it.
You really have to read the entire article for yourself to fully comprehend how ridiculous it is.
I say they should stop putting pavement alongside the road because the pedestrians don’t pay for the infrastructure built for them.
If we think that way, cyclists should be paid to ride, since by having a healthy lifestyle, we don’t participate nearly as much in clogging the hospitals, whereas all those drivers in town contribute to sending thousands of people to the hospitals with respiratory diseases, on top of contributing to obesity and such. And then, there should be a tax for overweight drivers, since the extra bulk they carry increases the energy to accelerate their cars.
So if we’re going to get into arithmetics, the moron who wrote that article should pay a tax for wasting space in the newspaper. Arghhh, such idiocy drives me mad.
This sort of argument crops up in editorials over and over again and usually gets drowned out massively by criticism to the point where the editorialist in question either runs with his tail between his legs or apologizes for a bad joke in poor taste.
The fact is that most cyclists are also drivers and thus pay the infrastructure costs in proportion to the wear and tear they put on the roads (at least according to taxation theory). The further reality is that one of the biggest demographics for cycling to work is the middle/upper middle class who already shoulder a proportionately large tax burden. You can bet that most of the people who are in neither of those two groups are in a low enough income bracket they’d be getting the taxes refunded anyway…
The article really ends up just highlighting one of the big demons of socialism in that it encourages the mentality that you can just tax your way out of a problem without adding value.
ahaha seriously… what a joke.
carbon foot print… LMAO…
like… i know that for instance cigarette smokers pay enough taxes but isnt smoking also emitting carbonmonoxide, etc… in the air?!?]
wait im not making a good point. How about a fat person going up a stair way and being even more out of breath than a cyclist is anytime during his whole 100km ride. Its like… everyone should stop breathing for 10 seconds and lets see if the world can recover from the climate crisis.
i donno this rant still doesnt make sence. The write seemed to have a peronal grudge on cyclists. Maybe he was cut off walking by a hipster or something… eh. wtr.
Okay so I do think that the carbon footprint article cemented the article as juvenile and crusadely, and I do think the author should be thrown in a pit full of venomous snakes, but at the same time,
There is (barely) a point in there in that bike paths cost money. Tons of money. Think of lost parking profits for every block of the de Maisonneuve bike path.
At the same time, it’s obviously a govn’t priority to get people on bikes if they’re doing things like giving people $490 to buy a bike if they stop driving
Another missed point: roads used by cars cost shit-tonnes more in maintenance than roads used by bikes. Bikes don’t WEIGH enough to make pot-holes.
Anyways
Dude’s a dick, I might write a letter.
John, there are good reasons why most cities are trying to actively discourage cars in the cities, and its not because of fluffy environmentalism, its because it costs the gov a boatload of money they don’t recover through taxation and fees. The health care burden due to air pollution alone is pretty massive.
i agree that bike lane costs are enormous. But why shouldn’t car-driving taxpayers pay for them, when taxpaying cyclists pay for roads as well.
In fact, i’m guessing that the average future salary of the members of MCT will be well in excess of $100,000 (all the doctors on the team will make $250,000; Jason L will make $750,000 plus bonuses developing his toys for grown-ups). Granted most of you will move away, nevertheless, all those who stay will get half that amount taxed away… to pay for health services we won’t require (except when getting crushed or doored by car-drivers), and pavement we are well entitled to ride on (more entitled than the average suburban butt-head from a purely monetary standpoint).
haha Nick, only if I get involved in building stuff on the down-low for various unsavoury clients. Or WW3 breaks out.
Of course we all know how that turned out for the last McGill affiliate who went down that path :shock:
lol
strange products at TdF
Scotland got a wee bit further than us with regards to a bike tax than silly articles:
http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/scots-government-cycle-tax-idea-abandoned-23499