I was just meeting one absurd statement with another. Any taxes that would have to be charged need to reflect actual costs that bikes inflict on roads. Very few people, and there bikes weigh enough to do any damage on the roads.
I am not advocating everybody ride a bike, but if they did, there would be no such thing as pot holes and roads would only have to be replaced about every 500 years.
My main opposition to taxing bicyclists is that, for low income earners that is often their only way around. Their alternative, if bicycling were to be made unaffordable, is simply dependency, because they wouldn’t be able to afford to work at all. We Freepers bitch about the dependents not working, so what do some here want to do, make those close to dependency dependent.
I personally will gladly absorb whatever small cost that a bicyclist might cost, in terms of road, knowing that they might be working as a dishwasher, as opposed to being on welfare. Sure, some might be some jerk yuppie, who makes if hard on everybody, but most bicyclists are not jerky yuppies.
The argument for bicycles’ lack of wear on the road also applies to motorcycles. Yet motorcycles have to pay road tax to maintain the roads and signals, and bicycles don’t. They should have to pay like motorcycles, or motorcycles should stop being taxed.
I would also point out that bicyclists cannot be held responsible for their misbehavior on the roads. They have no license to prove they are familiar with the road rules, or to be taken away for misbehavior. They display no license plates for other road users to report misbehavior to the authorities with.
You want to be an equal road user, you have to accept equal responsibilities in my book. Otherwise, you stay on the sidewalk.