lol OP. no.

I kind of agree with tags just because it would be easier to identify people involved in accidents and recover stolen bikes.

But "equivalent of a fuel tax" for a vehicle that doesn't use fuel or damage the roads is extremely stupid.

Glad to learn that bikes never hit pedestrians. What was I thinking?

The idea of bicycle insurance is just so dumb. Do you even understand risk profiles? The probability of doing any meaningful damage is... close to nothing. Look at how much damage car drivers do. Running into other cars, people, inanimate objects, etc. And since you’re driving ever more aggressive large objects, the amount of damage that you do to things keeps growing. That is why you need insurance and people on bikes don’t.

What if my income taxes paid for a large part of the roads in DC? You can keep 395/695.

Also, you sound stressed and unreasonable. A bike ride might do you some good.

What if I own a car and thus pay fuel taxes and car registration fees, but prefer to ride my bike because it's often quicker, it's better for me and the world, and driving sucks? Surely the fees I spend to keep my car registered and parked in the driveway are offsetting the impact of my bike on the streets.

Anonymous wrote:Aww, OP, what's the matter? A bike get ahead of you today in soul-crushing traffic?

Someone left a scooter on the edge of the sidewalk and she's afraid a blind person will fall over it and get eaten by a rabid dog.

Aww, OP, what's the matter? A bike get ahead of you today in soul-crushing traffic?

Hating bikes should be taxed. Also hating dogs should be taxed.

Anonymous wrote:If you use the road, you need to help fund it. Right now, cyclists are taking advantage of a loophole that allows them to use roads paid for by automobile registration and tag fees and fuel taxes. This needs to stop.

Bikes need to be registered, tagged and insured, and there needs to be some sort of fuel tax equivalent paid.

I'm not suggesting it should be comparable to vehicles, because their impact on the roads is much smaller. But it should be scaled down appropriately to fit. A car might cost a few hundred dollars to register every couple years. A bike might perhaps cost $20. Same for fuel tax equivalent, maybe $5 annually.

This needs to become a reality.

Everybody who has actually tried this idea has discovered that it costs way more to administer than it brings in.

People don't propose this idea because they sincerely believe it. They propose it because they think it's a way to stick it to people who ride bikes.

https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2016/11/why-dont-you-need-a-bicycle-license/508937/

Do I have to register my child’s tricycle?

Anonymous wrote:Actually if you are commuting daily, the insurance part makes sense as what if they hit and damage a car or pedestrian?

If they own a home, or rent an apt and have rental insurance, they will be covered, because those include general liability.

This is about folks who don't carry even renters insurance? IOW the poor folks on crappy bikes? Thats who you want to take mobility options away from, because they might scratch your fender?

Actually if you are commuting daily, the insurance part makes sense as what if they hit and damage a car or pedestrian?

OMG this dumb idea again?

Both Federally and locally the various taxes around driving (gas taxes, car taxes, registration fees etc) don't even come close to covering the cost of maintaining our car infrastructure in this country.

I believe in the highest state something like 50% of the cost is covered by these fees but in a lot of places it is more like 20-25%.

Which is to say that non-drivers are paying a large share of the cost of maintaining roads. Which is fine because non-drivers still need goods delivered though most of our road infra is not needed for deliveries but instead exists to get suburbanites to their jobs.

But in any case it is a stupid argument. Even in DC which has the most bike lanes in the DMV the city has like 20 total miles of bike lanes in a city with IIRC about 1500 miles of road.

But even the 20 miles of bike lanes in not a single case take up the entirety of the road - in most cases the bike lanes are 1/3, 1/4, 1/5 etc of the road. So even in DC something like .03 percent of the total roadway is dedicated for bikes.

And bike cause almost zero wear and tear on the roads and minimal congestion so the bikes not in bike lanes are imposing close to zero cost on the system.

How about this since you are concerned about equity - everyone pays for what they use?

All roads are tolled.

Oversized and overweight trucks and SUVs payer higher tolls since they use more space and cause more wear and tear.

Large cars pay more to park since they take up more space.

How about charging for externalities too - maybe a carbon tax for all the global warming your SUV causes? An asthma tax for the local air quality issues caused by your truck?

If you really want to go down this road (pun intended) it would greatly benefit non drivers at the expense of highly subsidized drivers.

If you use the road, you need to help fund it. Right now, cyclists are taking advantage of a loophole that allows them to use roads paid for by automobile registration and tag fees and fuel taxes. This needs to stop.

Bikes need to be registered, tagged and insured, and there needs to be some sort of fuel tax equivalent paid.

I'm not suggesting it should be comparable to vehicles, because their impact on the roads is much smaller. But it should be scaled down appropriately to fit. A car might cost a few hundred dollars to register every couple years. A bike might perhaps cost $20. Same for fuel tax equivalent, maybe $5 annually.


This needs to become a reality.