There are fuel taxes which mean that cars pay a disproportionate amount for road maintenance. But cars also put 99.99% of all the wear and tear on roads.
Fuel taxes (which never pay for all of a road - general taxes pay for them as well) don't even cover the disproportionate wear and tear for necessary maintenance from vehicles. So in reality bike riders and people who don't ever use roads subsidize the roads for car drivers. It's NOT car drivers paying for all of it, they don't even pay their fair share based on the ongoing maintenance burden they impose on the roads.
It’s funny that the parent poster mentions this - it’s likely that either the cyclist has a car, payed in the same manner as the driver and is in the moment using the road for “leisure or sport” - or the cyclist really needs to use the road and bike for transportation.
There really is no acceptable, rational reason for animosity towards cyclists. I think it comes down to the same gut instincts as racism, sexism and xenophobia - when there’s a problem people look for whatever thing seems most different in their current surroundings and blame that thing for the problem. It’s just a lack of thinking.
>There really is no acceptable, rational reason for animosity towards cyclists.
No rational reason for drivers in a road predominantly used from big vehicles to not like smaller, hard to see, vehicles with greater flexibility and much more fragile going around them?
The added care you need to have as a car driver, and danger they impose of accident, is not enough?
Especially since most of the time (e.g. in highways, interstates, etc) you get to have the road to just cars and don't have all this?
It's some of both. We have fuel taxes which pay for roads, but it's not nearly enough (because the taxes are too low) so a lot of the funds come from general taxes, which everyone pays. So the drivers are paying more for the roads, but the cyclists are also paying for those roads with their income taxes, sales taxes, etc.
> So the drivers are paying more for the roads, but the cyclists are also paying for those roads with their income taxes, sales taxes, etc.
And cars also put the vast majority of the wear and tear on the roads. So while they might pay more overall, they don't pay their fair share compared to bike riders who fund the roads from their taxes. Bike riders (and people who don't use roads) end up subsidizing roads for people who drive cars.
I live in Colorado (Larimer County) and there is a county and city level road use tax when you register your car and it aint cheap my registration was $450.
Interesting, I didn't know that. What's the legal status of a cyclist on the road then? Are they normal participants in traffic?
I generally find the tone of the discussion about cyclists here surprising. I'm from Germany, and while there is animosity between cyclists and car drivers, both are equally accepted on all roads (except the autobahn, of course). There's a movement in big cities towards more and more specific lanes for cyclists. I don't own a bicycle myself, but with regards to a car's emissions and the omnipresent wasteful parking slots, I'm all for strengthening the status of cyclists on roads.
viscanti|7 years ago
Fuel taxes (which never pay for all of a road - general taxes pay for them as well) don't even cover the disproportionate wear and tear for necessary maintenance from vehicles. So in reality bike riders and people who don't ever use roads subsidize the roads for car drivers. It's NOT car drivers paying for all of it, they don't even pay their fair share based on the ongoing maintenance burden they impose on the roads.
efnx|7 years ago
There really is no acceptable, rational reason for animosity towards cyclists. I think it comes down to the same gut instincts as racism, sexism and xenophobia - when there’s a problem people look for whatever thing seems most different in their current surroundings and blame that thing for the problem. It’s just a lack of thinking.
unknown|7 years ago
[deleted]
coldtea|7 years ago
No rational reason for drivers in a road predominantly used from big vehicles to not like smaller, hard to see, vehicles with greater flexibility and much more fragile going around them?
The added care you need to have as a car driver, and danger they impose of accident, is not enough?
Especially since most of the time (e.g. in highways, interstates, etc) you get to have the road to just cars and don't have all this?
magduf|7 years ago
viscanti|7 years ago
And cars also put the vast majority of the wear and tear on the roads. So while they might pay more overall, they don't pay their fair share compared to bike riders who fund the roads from their taxes. Bike riders (and people who don't use roads) end up subsidizing roads for people who drive cars.
coldtea|7 years ago
In many other countries those are even worse, including added state taxes on fuel, and so on.
thecount122195|7 years ago
Schaulustiger|7 years ago
I generally find the tone of the discussion about cyclists here surprising. I'm from Germany, and while there is animosity between cyclists and car drivers, both are equally accepted on all roads (except the autobahn, of course). There's a movement in big cities towards more and more specific lanes for cyclists. I don't own a bicycle myself, but with regards to a car's emissions and the omnipresent wasteful parking slots, I'm all for strengthening the status of cyclists on roads.
bryanlarsen|7 years ago