/ Cyclists polluting the environment

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
rallymania - on 05 Mar 2013
Apparently, A washington State Representative wants an increased tax on bikes over $500 because cyclists produce more CO2 from "increased heart rate and respiration,"

wow!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/04/ed-orcutt-bike-riders-pollute-environment-washington_n_2805...

how long before a UK law to follow suit do you think?

a lakeland climber on 05 Mar 2013
In reply to rallymania:

This sounds more like a representative who's one of the car industry's tame politicians working on their behalf.

Then again it's America, so anything approaching common sense would be frankly amazing.

ALC
MG - on 05 Mar 2013
In reply to rallymania: Isn't it a close loop? Plants grab CO2 from the atmosphere to grow, cyclists eat the plants and exhale CO2, CO2 is grabbed by plants etc. Unlike digging up coal from the ground.
Alyson - on 05 Mar 2013
In reply to rallymania: This is a joke, right? Because for a minute there it sounded like a tax on breathing.
Liam M - on 05 Mar 2013
In reply to Alyson: Only a tax on breathing heavily. Though quite whether it will apply to those who find themselves gasping walking to their car we don't know.

The American pornographic industry may not like the idea of breathing heavily being considered a taxable vice too! ;)
yorkshireman - on 05 Mar 2013
In reply to Alyson:

I had to read it twice and check the date (not 1st Apr) before posting it to Facebook with a rant because its one of the most ridiculous statements I've ever seen.

Just another take on 'pay your road tax'. The irony being that people riding expensive road bikes tend to be wealthier, therefore pay more in general taxation (and likely also own at least one car) so the argument is blown out of the water.
yorkshireman - on 05 Mar 2013
In reply to yorkshireman:

Also on this logic, can those of us with a lower resting heart rate get a lower income tax rate?
radioshed - on 05 Mar 2013
In reply to rallymania: I take it we can assume running shoes and fleshlights will also be facing taxation increases.
williemiller - on 05 Mar 2013
In reply to rallymania:
Surely it should be the cheaper bikes that are taxed. A more expensive bike is generally lighter and more efficient leading to a reduced increase in breathing.
PeterM - on 05 Mar 2013
In reply to radioshed:

>fleshlights

Are you sure you're sure about this?
Toby_W on 05 Mar 2013
In reply to PeterM: He's thinking about the heavy breathing.

Cheers

Toby
Alyson - on 05 Mar 2013
In reply to Liam M: I breathe when I walk too. In fact, when I walk home instead of cycling I don't breathe as deeply but it takes me 3-4 times longer to get home, so overall I think the oxygen intake is probably similar. Maybe we need to tax everyone for breathing, just to square these inconsistencies up?
New POD - on 05 Mar 2013
I have met a few americans who are clearly oxegen thiefs.

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.