It's no surprise to anyone that more people are riding bikes these days. It's in the news, the bike stores are busier than ever, and it's become harder to find places to lock your bike because of all the other bikes.
Still, it is good to see these new cyclists out on our roads because it makes all of us safer. This is known as the "safety in numbers" effect, where the crash and collision rates go down, as well as the injury and death rate, as the number of cyclists increases. The magic number on a road is about 50 cyclists/hour, or about one a minute. Above this threshold things become relatively "safe" and below this number things are much riskier. (Herb needs help collecting cycling data, please see http://www.ibiketo.ca/node/2309 )
But this has also meant that most of these new cyclists are inexperienced, making many mistakes and taking unnecessary risks. While all vehicles share most of the same rules on our roads, the way that they apply to bikes can be quite different than for other vehicles. Cyclists have at their disposal a whole different range of tools and opportunities to keep themselves safe, but face the streets without the protection of a cage of steel around them.
It takes about four years for new cyclists to become experienced cyclists. Experienced cyclists enjoy a much lower risk of injury and death, and are much less likely to be involved in a crash or collision. This timeline can be shortened to about six months with cycling education programs such as CAN-BIKE. But many people find all sorts of excuses to not take the program. That is, if they even knew such a program existed. The other problem is that there are not enough instructors for those who do want to take the program.
And that's where both the problem and opportunity lies. We want more cyclists. And we want them to be safe. We cannot, in good conscience, be advocating for cyclists and throw them into unnecessarily risky situations.
Besides waiting for four years, what can be done to make cycling safer for all of these new cyclists? How can we make it safer for those people who will start cycling later this year, or in the next years? What should you, I, IBikeTO, the Bike Union, TCAT, the city, the province, the feds [ed: can't find a link to federal policy regarding cycling, so here's the Canadian Cycling Association], each be doing to play the right role for this to be a safe transition onto two wheels?
I think that we need round-table discussion of this very topic very soon. And it should be a province wide discussion because these new cyclists aren't unique to Toronto.
In the meantime please let us know what you think.
Photo credit: Gabi
Comments
Bradford Hovinen (not verified)
Cyclist safety
Wed, 07/16/2008 - 16:53I propose two things in particular:
In the short run, enforce traffic laws far more diligently than is done now, not just one- or two-week "safety blitzes" but all year round. Perhaps start advertising campaigns to teach road users about common mistakes.
In the long run, cycling education should be part of the primary school curriculum, as is the case in much of Europe. This both teaches cyclists about their rights and responsibilities and future motorists about how to interact properly with cyclists. It's really appalling how few people in this city know anything about how cyclists and motorists should interact.
jamesmallon (not verified)
Primary Road Ed?
Wed, 07/16/2008 - 17:01The main problems with an authorized elementary school road education in this society is that it will be:
- autocentric
- unrealistic
- rule-based, not save-your-own-ass-by-any-means defensive based
- given by teachers who don't ride (I do)
- given to kids chauffered by parents in suburbia who do not follow the rules
- given to kids no longer allowed to explore their neighbourhood by bike, because their parents are subconsciously afraid of drivers like themselves
Any solutions?
Shouldice (not verified)
bikes in the classroom
Fri, 07/18/2008 - 11:11One solution is to get away from the broad assumptions.
The TDSB is so big that it is everything you think and the opposite.
Let's start with the teachers that do ride, the parents that are supportive, the kids that aren't chauffered etc.
AlanM (not verified)
Education + Enforcement + Legislation
Wed, 07/16/2008 - 17:19We already have the required legislation in the form of the Highway Traffic Act in Ontario (and corresponding legislation in other provinces), supplemented by various regional, township and municipal by-laws. While there is admittedly room for improvement in these statutes, they do provide the basis for sharing transportation infrastructure safely.
Where we seem to be lacking is both enforcement and education. Enforcement would apply to all users of facilities that fall under the legislation -- that includes peds, cyclists, motorists, skateboarders, unicyclists, inline skaters, e-bike riders, and so on. A once-in-a-while "crackdown" on one user segment doesn't help.
Education also seems to be a tough nut to crack. The number of ped-cyclists I see on our streets and sidewalks is growing leaps and bounds. These are people on bikes who don't ride like cyclists, and yet don't behave quite like pedestrians. While the numbers of bicycles out and about is increasing noticeably day by day, the disproportionate number of new riders seem to be ped-cyclists -- those who don't know the HTA and relevant by-laws, choose to mostly ignore them as well as common sense, lack the experience and street smarts to adequately gauge traffic dynamics and modify their approach accordingly, and (by my observation) make life more difficult for those of us who really do want to share the road, whether in a car or on a bike.
Personally, I can't believe the number of cyclists I encounter each day who are riding the wrong way down a bike lane, as I put my head down, elbows out, and weave towards them. As I force them out into traffic or up onto the sidewalk and pass them, I do politely suggest they get on the right side of the road.
Part of the education challenge, whether aimed at cyclists or motorists, is that those who most need it are generally not those who would avail themselves of the opportunity to learn even if education were more readily available.
Personally, I'd like to see fines (for motorists and cyclists) include mandatory CAN-BIKE education, even though I know we lack sufficient instructors.
This is not a challenge that will be easily addressed in short order, and even with Darwin's help over the longer term, finding some approaches that work is important to all of us.
Svend
Let's encourage more of them
Wed, 07/16/2008 - 17:47I don't want to hear about more blitzes, more rules, more barriers to adults who decide to ride. Their own fear tends to ensure they stick to the park system or side streets before riding with busy traffic. Give them friendly advice if you can.
Skip them and work on the kids, we should have bike safety rodeos at all schools at least once a year and free classes for a week during the summer.
rob r
Public service campaign
Wed, 07/16/2008 - 18:03I'd like to see a public service campaign targetting both motorists and cyclists with commercials and posters, etc.
Something similar to this commercial that made the rounds on the internet a few months ago...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ahg6qcgoay4
Cpt_Sunshine
Education
Wed, 07/16/2008 - 18:14One really important aspect of Education are all of us "experienced" cyclists on the streets. I know nobody wants to hear it, but this is a Charles Barkley "I ain't no role model" situation. As in new nervous cyclists are going to look to the confident cyclists on the streets for what to do.
If we ride through red lights, they'll ride through red lights. If we jump up onto the sidewalks to get past a vehicle, they do it too. I know a lot of people here tend to view breaking the law in the dynamic of "fighting to take space back from cars", but even the most militant of riders will have to concede that if current trends continue, aggressive riding tactics will put beginner cyclists in danger. Particularly if inexperienced cyclists attempt moves above their skill.
Case in point, the common practice of "Jumping lights" (ie. Starting your bicycle moving, just before the light turns green). For the experienced cyclist, who knows the timing of the lights on his/her route, not a big deal. They can do it without entering the intersection too much before the light turns green and it helps because a lot of cars will cut cyclists off when the curb resumes on the other side of the intersection, so if you can beat the car there you are generally safer. Also this move isn't that big a deal if there is only a few cyclists going each direction at an intersection.
But the scene I witnessed today at Bedford and Bloor (traveling West), definitely illustrates why inexperienced riders shouldn't be attempting to Jump Lights. The trick at that intersection is there is sometimes an advanced green for people turning left traveling east. I don't ride enough to know when there is an advanced green and when there isn't so I don't try to jump the light. Anyways the other day, I was stopped at the light with 3 riders behind me. I didn't move when the southbound light turned red, but all 3 - ALL 3 - riders behind me decided to jump the light and they had to pass me to do it (which I always find very rude, but that's another issue). Unbeknown to them the car turning left thinks he has an advanced green (well legally he does). Honking and bird flipping ensues, luckily no one his hurt.
The general moral of the story is that some of us more experienced cyclists may have to change our mindset. We're so used to fighting for every inch road space, and bending the law when doing so actually improves our safety. But as the density of cyclists in Toronto explodes (and if gas prices remain high the explosion this year will be nothing compared to next year) experienced riders will have to be aware that the inch of road space you are fighting for is now occupied by another cyclist. So maneuvers that were once good, nay necessary, 5 years ago for riding may now endanger other cyclists.
Todd Tyrtle (not verified)
Opportunities for riding together
Wed, 07/16/2008 - 19:10I think in the interim we need to provide new cyclists with opportunities to ride together with some other more experienced riders. This will help those who don't feel safe enough to try it and also let the experienced ones be positive role models for the newbies. Furthermore it gives potential part-time drivers an opportunity to see cyclists as a diverse group of individuals instead of "those crazy spandex-clad treehuggers"
Anyway, I would like to float the idea of bike buses one more time and have started a facebook group (http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=25062637517) for their discussion and hopefully sometime coordination.
That said, I'm disappointed to say that my assignment out of town for another few weeks (except for a 3 week vacation starting at the end of next week) so my offline involvement will need to be limited for another couple of months...
Theodore (not verified)
IT IS ABOUT RESPECT!
Thu, 07/17/2008 - 10:38Yes bicycles give you extrordinary freedom to do what you want BUT consider this!
by not respecting the rules that everyone else is bound to on the road you break down the fundamental respect between cyclists and drivers and make sharing the road a very difficult proposition.
Remember if a driver in a car gets mad and just so much as clips you with their mirror, you are going down, and hard!
Cars are big and powerful and dangerous and demand respect. Bicycles have a right to use as much of the road as they see fit HOWEVER cyclists are bound to respect the rules of the road.
Breaking the HTA leads to a breakdown in respect and an ultimately worse situation for other cyclists.
locutas_of_spragge
Nonsense...
Sun, 08/03/2008 - 02:11Look, let's discuss this in realistic terms. The majority of drivers who respect cyclists (and let us keep in mind that a large minority, if not majority, of drivers also ride bicycles) will do so even if the occasional cyclist breaks a traffic law. Conversely, the minority of drivers who do not respect cyclists will not change their minds if we suddenly all start following the HTA to the letter.
On a related note, cars do not demand respect by virtue of size or power or anything else, although they do sometimes demand careful management by their drivers and by those around them. In fact, the notion that size and speed create some kind of basis for demanding respect lies close to the heart of our problems with the automobile.
John G. Spragge
Mariner, cyclist, pilot
ZHZ (not verified)
Teaching new cyclists
Thu, 07/17/2008 - 10:51My girlfriend recently got a bike and I started teaching her some of the big safety rules about downtown cycling.
1) Obey traffic signals and signs (stop at the red and stop signs). She doesn't always obey these, especially at the top of a 'T' intersection. (I actually think they should be a yield for cyclists.)
2) Don't squeeze past right turning cars, stay behind or go around them on the left.
3) Turn left in the left turn lane.
4) Don't ride on the sidewalk.
5) Give lots of clearance at curbs and around the door prize zone. This can be intimidating because it requires her to ride too far into traffic at times.
6) Cross streetcar tracks at 90 degrees
7) Use hand signals at EVERY turn
8) Wear a helmet and have lights on the bike. Use the bell often especially at busy intersections and near parked cars, yell when necessary.
9) Respect your place in line at a stop (both behind cars and bikes).
It took her a few months, but I can tell she's much more confident biking now than when we first started although she still much prefers riding in bike lanes. After she's mastered those, I can teach her how to use her gears properly at an intersection.
I think it's also improved her driving when dealing with cyclists too. I tell her that she should squeeze to the right when turning right so that cyclists don't try to sneak through (it's for their own good so they don't get blind sided). Some inexperienced cyclists will still try to sneak through though. Serves them right if they get injured, especially if they also don't have any lights or a bell to warn us that they are nearby.
BTW, I also hate drivers who are afraid to cut into the bike lane when making a right turn. I never know if they are going to turn in front of me and go splat. I usually still try to go around them on the left, but there usually isn't enough space.
locutas_of_spragge
Pretty good ideas-- some comments
Sun, 08/03/2008 - 02:351) Obey traffic signals and signs (stop at the red and stop signs). She doesn't always obey these, especially at the top of a 'T' intersection. (I actually think they should be a yield for cyclists.)
I agree, but a Toronto traffic engineer I spoke to told me that the city can't change the laws on stop signs, or even modify the standard stop sign; only the provincial government can change those rules.
2) Don't squeeze past right turning cars, stay behind or go around them on the left.
Absolutely.
3) Turn left in the left turn lane.
Right, but prepare an answer for the motorists who remember Officer Friendly visiting their third grade class and telling them to walk their bikes on a left turn. For that matter, prepare to meet Officer Friendly.
4) Don't ride on the sidewalk.
Right on.
5) Give lots of clearance at curbs and around the door prize zone. This can be intimidating because it requires her to ride too far into traffic at times.
Also, keep a lookout for people in the left side seats who might open a door.
6) Cross streetcar tracks at 90 degrees
If you can, sure, but at plenty of intersections that can get very difficult. I generally find 45-50 degrees works well enough, but I have fairly wide tyres.
7) Use hand signals at EVERY turn
If you can do that safely, great. If you need both hands on the bars, remember to control the bike first.
8) Wear a helmet and have lights on the bike. Use the bell often especially at busy intersections and near parked cars, yell when necessary.
Right on.
9) Respect your place in line at a stop (both behind cars and bikes)
Agreed, if you also understand that you don't have an obligation to let the cars keep you waiting in a congested situation. If you can cycle safely past that stopped cars in the curb lane, don't worry that drivers may resent you. Dinosaur burners have a speed advantage from their engines, which drivers don't hesitate to take advantage of. We have an advantage in congested traffic because of our nimble and compact vehicles. Don't let a kindergarten attitude about waiting your turn stop you from using your vehicle to its potential.
.John G. Spragge
Mariner, cyclist, pilot
Dr. Steph
Yes! To everyone
Thu, 07/17/2008 - 11:23I've been nodding my head whilst reading the comments. We need to do all of these things.
For the last two weeks I've been back on the TTC because I need to take my kids with me to work and the bloor-danforth route to work is not safe enough for my 7 and 9 year old to ride (individual mileage varies, this is my call). Going back to being a pedestrian I've noticed a lot of actions by cyclists that cars would NEVER attempt that have put us in danger.
*Going across the top of a t-intersection at a red light at full speed (almost got clipped crossing at Bloor/bedford twice this week)
*Not stopping at 4 way stops
*Jumping onto the sidewalk and nearly hitting pedestrians
*Biking on the sidewalk
When I was cycling (sigh, I really miss it), I've been feeling like inexperienced riders are making the roads less safe, not more. The tentativeness, the uncertainty, no signalling (especially stopping in the middle of a street!!), the passing everyone who is stopped at an intersection making all those cyclists pass this person yet again, not using one's bell or lights (as a driver this is so scary!).
Just like I advocate driver training, I see cyclist training as a good thing. I'm also working with my children who signal and are learning the rules of the road. Change is slow.
Mason (not verified)
cycling tips
Thu, 07/17/2008 - 14:07Thanks ZHZ for the tips; it was reading through lists like yours that helped me learn how to ride safer when i was first starting out a couple months ago. I used to pass turning cars on the right all the time until someone on a forum pointed out how dangerous it was. Hopefully some of these new(er) cyclists discover websites like this and learn a thing or two.
redphone
passing on the right
Thu, 07/17/2008 - 16:29I don't pass on the right anymore if there's cars about to turn, but I'm also really wary of passing on the left in those situations. The few times I've tried it, I've had some close calls. Now I just sit and wait my turn. Is passing on the left really officially recommended as "safe"?
amphitryon
"passing on the right" -
Mon, 08/04/2008 - 00:03I wish every cyclist would adhere to this simple rule. the worst offenders are the ones creeping up from behind and pushing out into the intersection, thus preventing drivers from making r-hand turns. no wonder some drivers get p.. off.
I try to ride in a way in which I would expect to be treated as well - seems to work for me.
passing on the left is in such instances the proper way.
AnnieD
Passing on the left
Mon, 08/04/2008 - 09:41Passing on the left is what the Toronto cycling map says we're supposed to do:
http://www.toronto.ca/cycling/map/images/back-side.jpg
(see the instructions on the bottom of the left panel)
The problem is that right-turning cars usually leave a whole bike lane's worth of space to the right (I'm told this is necessary to avoid encroaching on the sidewalk when turning), leaving virtually no space on their left to pass without getting into the middle lane. When the driver is held up making their turn because of pedestrians, it can be tempting to pass on the right alongside the pedestrians rather than waiting and, often, missing the light. This sets up a situation where sometimes cyclists pass on the right, sometimes on the left, and sometimes on both sides simultaneously. No wonder everyone is confused!
On streets with bikelanes, a box for cyclists at the front of the line ensures that cyclists won't get stuck behind a line of right turning cars for more than one light cycle. But Toronto has, what? - one intersection with these boxes? Hard to know what the best solution is. Don't pass on the right any cars that get there before you, but if you miss the green light, then move to the front once the line turns red so that you can proceed forward on the next green light???
tanya
Why did you have close calls?
Thu, 07/17/2008 - 17:59Can you describe what kind of close calls you had passing on the left. I never have a problem passing on the left, with the possible exception of when someone was indicating a turn that wasn't turning.
Did you look behind you to make sure there was space before passing on the left?
Some drivers making right turns - presumably trying to be "nice" to cyclists leave way too much room on the right when turning and that leaves little or no room between the lanes on the left. These cases may be better to wait if the next lane over is heavily trafficked.
Anonymous (not verified)
CAN-BIKE
Fri, 07/18/2008 - 01:10CAN-BIKE needs to be wrested from the hands of the sport governing authorities who have ignored and abandoned it. It is currently owned by elitist, narrowminded incompetants who are completely disconnected from the realities of every day cycling.
Cycling is more and more a form of transport than an actual sporting activity (motorcar driving was once percieved as a sport and a pastime too!)
CAN-BIKE is a proven, successful curriculum that clearly belongs in grade schools across the country. Today's children are tomorrow's road users.
The Canadian Cycling Association must surrender CAN-BIKE to the education sector (they're not doing anything with it anyhow), and let the teaching begin.
jamesmallon (not verified)
maybe downtown
Fri, 07/18/2008 - 13:38Sorry 'Shouldice', I work in a more representative part of N. America: the 'burbs. Lucky you, sincerly.
Shouldice (not verified)
the burbs
Fri, 07/18/2008 - 17:53point taken, it is a different world.
All good things,
Anonymous (not verified)
message for new cyclists
Wed, 07/30/2008 - 01:06All you people should just shut up and ride.
If helmets ever become mandatory here, I will leave.
Just ride. Its the best thing ever. Nothing much else needs to be said.
David (not verified)
I know nobody wants to hear
Thu, 07/31/2008 - 20:37Amen.
I've been cycling for about a year, on and off, and while I endure the ire of motorists when I, for example, need to change into inner lanes to make a left turn, I've come to realize that I'm largely the victim of the reputation that cyclists have in Toronto. It's a sad fact that most of the "experienced" riders don't give a flying fuck about the law, routinely run red lights (which is bad even at the head of a T-intersection, as someone pointed out, since it endangers pedestrians), jump onto the sidewalk when it suits them, weave in and out of traffic, and in general show a great deal of disrespect to motorists and fellow riders. About twice a week I see some idiot riding in the wrong direction in a bike lane.
I couldn't care less whether people wear helmets, they're free to be as reckless as they want with their own skulls, but when it comes to messing with my ability to ride safely and making enemies with motorists who in turn view me as their enemy: we have a problem, folks, and by and large it's not with the newbies, it's with the bold, reckless, hardened riders who think that traffic laws don't or shouldn't apply if you've only got two wheels.
locutas_of_spragge
I respectfully disagree....
Sun, 08/03/2008 - 02:52Speaking as someone who believes cyclists should try to set an example of excellence in transportation, I still reject any suggestion of collective responsibility for cyclists.
First, I think it misplaces the source of the problem. If someone hollers at you for turning left, in the left lane, I suspect that has much less to do with a cyclist having jumped a red light in front of them yesterday or last week, and a lot more to do with his or her memory of Officer Friendly visiting their third grade class and telling them to walk their bike to turn left.
Second, let's face facts; if we applied principles of collective guilt to classes of road users, we would long ago have banned the automobile. The idea that anyone can judge cyclists as a group only works if you take the overall attitude that cars and trucks belong on the road, while cyclists have to earn the privilege of using it. In fact, if anything, the onus goes the other way. Mobility by human power amounts to a basic right (see habeas corpus for details); operating a multi-tonne steel bomb n public space has always constituted a privilege. We as a cyclists have nothing to apologize for.
John G. Spragge
Mariner, cyclist, pilot
jamesmallon (not verified)
Figure it out.
Thu, 07/31/2008 - 21:00Oh, stop whinging about experienced cyclists: not wearing helmets, not obeying traffic laws, swearing at dangerous drivers, etc. You know why we're experienced? Because we ride like that, we're not in the hospital!! Figure it out.
David (not verified)
No, you figure it out.
Thu, 07/31/2008 - 22:17That you avoid injuries doesn't mean you're not more likely to cause an accident, make people villainize cyclists, etc. Grow the fuck up.
jamesmallon (not verified)
I have
Thu, 07/31/2008 - 22:34Dude, work on your grammar and avoid the 'language' and someone might listen to you. You might also work on your logic: I have neither been in, nor caused any accidents, unlike the lifetime odds of someone in a car.
David (not verified)
Dude...
Fri, 08/01/2008 - 04:15Dude, work on your spelling. Unless "whinging" is some kind of trendy new term for "spelling out the facts". My grammar is not the issue here (and it was fine, by the way, even if the sentence was a bit convoluted).
My logic holds just fine, thank you very much. That you haven't caused an accident really has no bearing on whether or not you're more prone to. When you disobey traffic laws you are confronting other motorists/cyclists with the unexpected, something that they shouldn't have to deal with, something that they're right to honk at you for. I couldn't care less whether a punk like you gets hit by a car, but the damage done while swerving to avoid you (or by your carcass on a windshield, for example) could be significant and/or costly.
The roads are not your private playground, they're paid for by every taxpayer (in fact moreso by motorists) and so they have a right to expect you to follow the rules. Like I said: grow up.
Luke Siragusa
Re: Dude....
Fri, 08/01/2008 - 11:06David:
I should hope so, since motorists constitute the prime, and often the sole intended users, requiring the most infrastructure (parking, traffic lights, space), services (policing, ploughing, road maintenance) and generating the most wear and tear.
That you may contribute more toward the cost of the network shouldn't obscure the fact that user specific taxes (gas) and fees as they're presently constituted fall far short of paying for our road/highway network and associated infrastructure.
So guess what? You're still getting a free ride. Numerous studies and books have been written on the topic: Elephant in the Bedroom; The Automobile Age, etc. Read up, you may even come across the term 'whinging' if you do.
Disassociating and isolating costs and consequences from activities, e.g., subsidizing driving and energy costs with revenue from the general tax base, leads to irrational policies and use patterns. It's economics 101: supply the public with 'free parking' and 'free roads' and you generate demand. If motorists and our car crazy culture were made to directly confront the cost of their compulsions we'd benefit by a rational transportation policy.
tanya
.... a lot of cars will cut
Fri, 08/01/2008 - 11:15This will only happen if you've put yourself into a bad position to begin with, generally by filtering to the front of a queue in a lane that isn't wide enough to share. If you wait at a red light in the middle of the lane, whether first or behind other cars, this won't happen.
If you've managed to get yourself for whatever reason in this scenario, say you got to the light first and waited at the curb, yeah a car will generally pull up rather than wait behind you. Then you have to negotiate somewhat who is going to pull ahead of who, unless you really like riding side by side in the gutter.
locutas_of_spragge
Queue?
Sun, 08/03/2008 - 03:13The vehicles at a red light do not constitute a queue. This kind of approach compromises cyclists' ability to move through congested traffic, which gives us as cyclists a major speed advantage. That doesn't mean we should behave recklessly or inconsiderately; it just means that I disagree with the idea that we should "wait our turn" when we can move more quickly in congested traffic (a cry which quickly turns to "get out of the way" when the congestion clears). I graduated kindergarten a long time ago, and given that I have a more nimble vehicle, I refuse to compromise the advantages of that vehicle to cater to the resentments of a few drivers.
John G. Spragge
Mariner, cyclist, pilot
Luke Siragusa
Re: Queue?
Sun, 08/03/2008 - 13:49Vehicles (cars) at a red light constitute a queue, that is, they're lined up. It seems Tanya noting this fact has you misconstruing it as a recommendation that cyclists should "wait our turn" and queue up behind them. Where is that stated or implied?
The only reference made to a cyclist waiting involves a red light. The rest concerns the dynamics of, and tactics calculated to prevent, cars squeezing you out at intersections -- sensible comments. I don't consider anticipating and acting to avoid such a situation as compromising the advantages of my vehicle.
mothman (not verified)
Amen Luke
Fri, 08/01/2008 - 14:02Luke is right on. I bike because I don't want to contribute to global warming. And because I'd rather spend my money on sushi than gasoline. But as a person with a relatively decent income, I'm being way overcharged for my road use. My taxes are being used to fund automobile infrastrucure, which I don't even use. I guess I should tell drivers to get off the roads that I pay for. Not the other way around.
Darren_S
Taxes and infrastructure
Sat, 08/02/2008 - 11:05"My taxes are being used to fund automobile infrastrucure, which I don't even use"
You may not use an automobile but that sushi you eat gets there by a motor vehicle. Yes you pay relatively more than someone with a private automobile but there is virtually no way of getting around not using the roads, either directly or indirectly.
A user fee on road use, instead of taxes, could better reflect how much or how little you actually use the infrastructure. It would also encourage better conservation.