A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Government Bicycle Program News



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old June 25th 20, 05:25 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
JBeattie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,945
Default Government Bicycle Program News

On Wednesday, June 24, 2020 at 6:21:32 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 6/24/2020 7:12 PM, wrote:
On Wednesday, June 24, 2020 at 12:03:40 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Wednesday, June 24, 2020 at 9:06:00 AM UTC-5, wrote:
On Tuesday, June 23, 2020 at 5:38:06 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
https://cyclingindustry.news/details...cher-released/

What could go wrong? Will it be an efficient and necessary
use of tax revenues, unlike every other ****hole program in
the past? Hope springs eternal.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Of course the money must come from somewhere do there will be taxes placed on bicycle ownership soon to be followed by a ministry of pedestianism and a shoe tax.

Or evil, terrible, horrible Joe Biden, IF elected, could just roll back a small fraction of the Trump tax giveaways. That would be enough money to build every bicycle infrastructure project imagined.


Are you serious about Biden even getting 10% of the vote?



Mailed ballots, wherein every malcontent in the County
Clerk's office gets a veto.


Really? Oregon has been doing vote by mail for local elections for almost 40 years. 25 years for federal elections. There is zero evidence of disaffected county clerks doing anything. In fact, vote by mail is popular with both Democrats and Republicans.

-- Jay Beattie.
Ads
  #12  
Old June 25th 20, 09:24 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Rolf Mantel[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 174
Default Government Bicycle Program News

Am 25.06.2020 um 03:20 schrieb AMuzi:
On 6/24/2020 7:11 PM, news18 wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 07:05:57 -0700, cyclintom wrote:


Of course the money must come from somewhere do there will be taxes
placed on bicycle ownership soon to be followed by a ministry of
pedestianism and a shoe tax.


History says they will soon scrap it as the revenue collected doesn't
cover the cost of the burearocracy.


ha. ha. ha.

The closest thing to perpetual life is a government program.


The Mandatory Bicycle registration/insurance scheme
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velovignette in Switzerland (introduced
1890) was scrapped in 2011 because it did not cover the costs of buerocracy.
  #13  
Old June 25th 20, 09:55 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
jOHN b.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,421
Default Government Bicycle Program News

On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 10:24:52 +0200, Rolf Mantel
wrote:

Am 25.06.2020 um 03:20 schrieb AMuzi:
On 6/24/2020 7:11 PM, news18 wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 07:05:57 -0700, cyclintom wrote:


Of course the money must come from somewhere do there will be taxes
placed on bicycle ownership soon to be followed by a ministry of
pedestianism and a shoe tax.

History says they will soon scrap it as the revenue collected doesn't
cover the cost of the burearocracy.


ha. ha. ha.

The closest thing to perpetual life is a government program.


The Mandatory Bicycle registration/insurance scheme
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velovignette in Switzerland (introduced
1890) was scrapped in 2011 because it did not cover the costs of buerocracy.


I've read it was because it was no longer required as coverage is, or
can be, furnished by personal liability insurance.
--
cheers,

John B.

  #14  
Old June 25th 20, 02:04 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
AMuzi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,858
Default Government Bicycle Program News

On 6/24/2020 11:25 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, June 24, 2020 at 6:21:32 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 6/24/2020 7:12 PM, wrote:
On Wednesday, June 24, 2020 at 12:03:40 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Wednesday, June 24, 2020 at 9:06:00 AM UTC-5, wrote:
On Tuesday, June 23, 2020 at 5:38:06 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
https://cyclingindustry.news/details...cher-released/

What could go wrong? Will it be an efficient and necessary
use of tax revenues, unlike every other ****hole program in
the past? Hope springs eternal.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Of course the money must come from somewhere do there will be taxes placed on bicycle ownership soon to be followed by a ministry of pedestianism and a shoe tax.

Or evil, terrible, horrible Joe Biden, IF elected, could just roll back a small fraction of the Trump tax giveaways. That would be enough money to build every bicycle infrastructure project imagined.

Are you serious about Biden even getting 10% of the vote?



Mailed ballots, wherein every malcontent in the County
Clerk's office gets a veto.


Really? Oregon has been doing vote by mail for local elections for almost 40 years. 25 years for federal elections. There is zero evidence of disaffected county clerks doing anything. In fact, vote by mail is popular with both Democrats and Republicans.

-- Jay Beattie.


If no one looks, nobody sees nuffin'

https://www.freep.com/story/news/pol...on/2419363001/

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/pol...218654810.html
\


--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971


  #15  
Old June 25th 20, 03:18 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Wolfgang Strobl[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 36
Default Government Bicycle Program News

Am Thu, 25 Jun 2020 15:55:51 +0700 schrieb John B.
:

On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 10:24:52 +0200, Rolf Mantel
wrote:

Am 25.06.2020 um 03:20 schrieb AMuzi:
On 6/24/2020 7:11 PM, news18 wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 07:05:57 -0700, cyclintom wrote:


Of course the money must come from somewhere do there will be taxes
placed on bicycle ownership soon to be followed by a ministry of
pedestianism and a shoe tax.

History says they will soon scrap it as the revenue collected doesn't
cover the cost of the burearocracy.

ha. ha. ha.

The closest thing to perpetual life is a government program.


The Mandatory Bicycle registration/insurance scheme
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velovignette in Switzerland (introduced
1890) was scrapped in 2011 because it did not cover the costs of buerocracy.


I've read it was because it was no longer required as coverage is, or
can be, furnished by personal liability insurance.


If memory serves me right, it was the other way round. In Switzerland,
personal liability insurance didn't cover bicycles, because these had
their own mandatory insurance. Germany, for example, didn't have a
Velovignette, so personal liability insurance _did_ - and still does -
cover bicycles, even for bicyclists using their bicylces in Switzerland.

The reason for including bicycle coverage is simple, as stated. Bicycles
cause a neglectible amount of damages, so a separate insurance is
essentially the cost of buerocracy. For this reason a general liability
insurance includes most of these risks, but excludes major risks, like
those caused by motorized vehicles.

In Germany most families have a "Familienhaftpflichtversicherung"
(general liability insurance for families), which covers essentially
everthing but cars and business)
--
Thank you for observing all safety precautions
  #16  
Old June 25th 20, 03:44 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
JBeattie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,945
Default Government Bicycle Program News

On Thursday, June 25, 2020 at 6:04:13 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 6/24/2020 11:25 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, June 24, 2020 at 6:21:32 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 6/24/2020 7:12 PM, wrote:
On Wednesday, June 24, 2020 at 12:03:40 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Wednesday, June 24, 2020 at 9:06:00 AM UTC-5, wrote:
On Tuesday, June 23, 2020 at 5:38:06 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
https://cyclingindustry.news/details...cher-released/

What could go wrong? Will it be an efficient and necessary
use of tax revenues, unlike every other ****hole program in
the past? Hope springs eternal.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Of course the money must come from somewhere do there will be taxes placed on bicycle ownership soon to be followed by a ministry of pedestianism and a shoe tax.

Or evil, terrible, horrible Joe Biden, IF elected, could just roll back a small fraction of the Trump tax giveaways. That would be enough money to build every bicycle infrastructure project imagined.

Are you serious about Biden even getting 10% of the vote?



Mailed ballots, wherein every malcontent in the County
Clerk's office gets a veto.


Really? Oregon has been doing vote by mail for local elections for almost 40 years. 25 years for federal elections. There is zero evidence of disaffected county clerks doing anything. In fact, vote by mail is popular with both Democrats and Republicans.

-- Jay Beattie.


If no one looks, nobody sees nuffin'

https://www.freep.com/story/news/pol...on/2419363001/

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/pol...218654810.html
\


When one looks carefully, one sees nuffin' -- or not much. Ms. Hawkins manipulated computer records to reconcile counting errors, and in Florida, mail-in ballots are disqualified at a higher rate than vote-in-person ballots because people forget to sign the envelopes. That's a sad comment on the intelligence of the electorate, but it does not support the Trump narrative of ballots being stolen out of boxes and altered or that fake ballots will somehow be substituted for real ones. https://www.npr.org/2020/06/22/88159...voting-by-mail

Disaffected county workers can manipulate vote-in-person ballots with the stroke of a computer key or by dumping ballots, and voting machines can screw up like the whole hanging chad thing. The addled old volunteers at local precincts can screw up or dump ballots, too.

Depending on the mail-in system, there can be manipulation -- but its typically by individuals and isolated. A study in Oregon showed 15 incidences of voter fraud in 19 years among 15.5 million ballots cast. I doubt that swung any elections. 15 is lower than 91,000 in a single election.
https://texasscorecard.com/local/how...-9100-ballots/

-- Jay Beattie.

  #17  
Old June 26th 20, 12:02 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
SMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,051
Default Government Bicycle Program News

On 6/23/2020 5:38 AM, AMuzi wrote:
https://cyclingindustry.news/details...cher-released/


What could go wrong?* Will it be an efficient and necessary use of tax
revenues, unlike every other ****hole program in the past?* Hope springs
eternal.


Are there people that are driving, instead of bicycling, because the
cost of bicycle repair is too high?

Remember the AHZ argument that if helmets are required then health care
costs will increase because, instead of buying a $20 helmet, former
cyclists will stay home watching TV and eating fatty snacks causing
nationalized health care costs to soar? Perhaps they'll make the same
argument here, 'without government funded bicycle repair we're going to
not ride and it'll cost the government even more money.'

What we have in my area is service organizations funding free bicycle
repair clinics. One day I was dropping off some bicycle lights to give
away and I stayed and helped because it was clear that most of the
volunteers had no idea what they were doing. However if the government
funded bicycle repair clinics I'm sure that bicycle shops would
legitimately object.

In the U.S. you get tax credits for electric cars. Maybe we should also
have tax credits for bicycles, both electric and non-electric. Perhaps
President Biden will do this, if elected. We shall see. As the Economist
has stated "Poorly educated voters hold the keys to the White House"
https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2019/11/11/poorly-educated-voters-hold-the-keys-to-the-white-house.
But Trump is now struggling even with his base of poorly educated white
voters.
  #18  
Old June 26th 20, 02:47 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,031
Default Government Bicycle Program News

On 6/25/2020 7:02 PM, sms wrote:
On 6/23/2020 5:38 AM, AMuzi wrote:
https://cyclingindustry.news/details...cher-released/


What could go wrong?* Will it be an efficient and necessary use of tax
revenues, unlike every other ****hole program in the past?* Hope
springs eternal.


Are there people that are driving, instead of bicycling, because the
cost of bicycle repair is too high?

Remember the AHZ argument that if helmets are required then health care
costs will increase because, instead of buying a $20 helmet, former
cyclists will stay home watching TV and eating fatty snacks causing
nationalized health care costs to soar? Perhaps they'll make the same
argument here, 'without government funded bicycle repair we're going to
not ride and it'll cost the government even more money.'


Mayor Scharf (AKA "sms") should stick to losing one argument at a time,
instead of resurrecting past losses.

Data clearly shows mandating helmets reduces cycling, typically by about
30%. A reasonable person might doubt the exact percentage, but only a
fool would say there would be no effect.

--
- Frank Krygowski
  #19  
Old June 26th 20, 02:58 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
jOHN b.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,421
Default Government Bicycle Program News

On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 21:47:46 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 6/25/2020 7:02 PM, sms wrote:
On 6/23/2020 5:38 AM, AMuzi wrote:
https://cyclingindustry.news/details...cher-released/


What could go wrong?* Will it be an efficient and necessary use of tax
revenues, unlike every other ****hole program in the past?* Hope
springs eternal.


Are there people that are driving, instead of bicycling, because the
cost of bicycle repair is too high?

Remember the AHZ argument that if helmets are required then health care
costs will increase because, instead of buying a $20 helmet, former
cyclists will stay home watching TV and eating fatty snacks causing
nationalized health care costs to soar? Perhaps they'll make the same
argument here, 'without government funded bicycle repair we're going to
not ride and it'll cost the government even more money.'


Mayor Scharf (AKA "sms") should stick to losing one argument at a time,
instead of resurrecting past losses.

Data clearly shows mandating helmets reduces cycling, typically by about
30%. A reasonable person might doubt the exact percentage, but only a
fool would say there would be no effect.


Interesting. Over here there is no "helmet Law" for bicycles yet I
can't remember when I've seen a recreational cyclist without a helmet.
Note that I differentiate between, would one say "normal" cyclists,
and recreational cyclists as we still do have a certain number of
people that use a bicycle as their only means of local transportation.
--
cheers,

John B.

  #20  
Old June 26th 20, 05:25 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,031
Default Government Bicycle Program News

On 6/25/2020 9:58 PM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 21:47:46 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 6/25/2020 7:02 PM, sms wrote:


Remember the AHZ argument that if helmets are required then health care
costs will increase because, instead of buying a $20 helmet, former
cyclists will stay home watching TV and eating fatty snacks causing
nationalized health care costs to soar? Perhaps they'll make the same
argument here, 'without government funded bicycle repair we're going to
not ride and it'll cost the government even more money.'


Mayor Scharf (AKA "sms") should stick to losing one argument at a time,
instead of resurrecting past losses.

Data clearly shows mandating helmets reduces cycling, typically by about
30%. A reasonable person might doubt the exact percentage, but only a
fool would say there would be no effect.


Interesting. Over here there is no "helmet Law" for bicycles yet I
can't remember when I've seen a recreational cyclist without a helmet.
Note that I differentiate between, would one say "normal" cyclists,
and recreational cyclists as we still do have a certain number of
people that use a bicycle as their only means of local transportation.


If you define "recreational cyclist" as a person with a stylish bike as
promoted in some bicycling magazine, with clipless pedals (um... that
you clip into), wearing lycra shorts, riding gloves, a brightly colored
cycling jersey (bonus points if it advertises the brand of bike) then
yes, that person will almost certainly wear a helmet. Come on! Would you
expect the Shriners to parade without their red hats?
https://medinah.org/wp-content/uploa...rs-parades.jpg

But if you talk about other people riding bicycles, the majority in my
area do not wear helmets. And if you told them they must wear a helmet
or be subject to a penalty, ridership would certainly decrease by some
amount. in Australia and New Zealand, where those laws are still being
enforced, ridership is way, way down, especially if you index it to
population growth.

Even a little kid will ride less. Kids' typical riding is over to
Johnny's house for a little while, then to Georgie's house, then to the
playground, then home for a snack, etc. Tell them they MUST strap on a
helmet, then remove it, then strap it on each time and the kid is going
to say "screw it" and stop using the bike as much.


--
- Frank Krygowski
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
General Bicycle News jbeattie Techniques 2 February 23rd 20 09:33 PM
Bicycle News [email protected] Techniques 0 November 10th 14 03:17 AM
Chinese bicycle news AMuzi Techniques 5 March 1st 13 01:48 PM
Bikeability Toolkit: free seminars for Bicycle User Groups & local government cfsmtb Australia 0 October 5th 06 08:30 AM
California: Bicycle Recycling Program proposed by assemblywoman Ken Marcet General 17 March 22nd 05 09:28 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2020 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.