←back to thread

597 points achristmascarl | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
afcool83 ◴[] No.44988724[source]
I live in one of the areas they are actively testing/training in. Their cars consistently behave better and more safely than most human drivers that I’m forced to share the road with.

As semi-autonomous and autonomous cars become the norm, I would adore to see obtaining a drivers license ratchet up in difficulty in order to remove dangerous human drivers from the road.

replies(17): >>44988828 #>>44988868 #>>44989177 #>>44989308 #>>44989330 #>>44989469 #>>44991099 #>>44991289 #>>44991364 #>>44991734 #>>44992111 #>>44992248 #>>44992992 #>>44993041 #>>44993645 #>>44997874 #>>45040367 #
gibolt ◴[] No.44988868[source]
The real issue is all the current bad drivers. A requirement to start re-testing normal people in addition to the elderly would be a large benefit to society.
replies(7): >>44988942 #>>44989017 #>>44989038 #>>44989108 #>>44989130 #>>44989398 #>>44989807 #
rs186 ◴[] No.44989017[source]
Complete unrelated, I just wish every driver on the road re-learn that cyclists have the same rights of being on city roads like cars.
replies(5): >>44989178 #>>44989225 #>>44989299 #>>44990008 #>>44992270 #
MisterMower ◴[] No.44992270[source]
Cyclists contribute to congestion and occupy road space that was created through taxes on motorists while paying nothing for these benefits.

Cyclists are not licensed and their bicycles are not tagged or inspected for safe operation on roads, unlike motorists.

Cyclists are rarely subjected to traffic law enforcement despite demanding all of the rights that motorists pay for and are licensed for.

Cyclists are a danger to themselves and others while operating in the same area as motorists, but are not required to carry insurance or wear safety equipment, while motorists are held to more stringent regulation.

In a nutshell, cyclists are free-riding risk takers who are arrogant to boot. When they start acting like motorists and pay taxes like motorists and are fined like motorists for violating the law, I will happily change my opinion.

replies(3): >>44992334 #>>44992484 #>>44992911 #
achierius ◴[] No.44992484[source]
I do pay taxes, just like a motorist might. Where do you live that you think your car or your gas is taxed in a way that contributes to road upkeep? In the US gas taxes haven't been upped in decades, roadways are maintained out of the common coffers (incl. large federal incentives which come straight out of your income tax payments).
replies(2): >>44992585 #>>44992919 #
MisterMower ◴[] No.44992585{3}[source]
Because motorists don’t fund all road upkeep, cyclists who consume those very same roads are entitled to pay none of it? What exactly is your point?

For the record, I support closing that gap, in addition to taxing the odometer on electric vehicles which don’t contribute to gas tax revenue but use roadways like other motorists.

replies(1): >>44992940 #
Mawr ◴[] No.44992940{4}[source]
> Because motorists don’t fund all road upkeep, cyclists who consume those very same roads are entitled to pay none of it?

I don't think you understood what you wrote. Non-motorists subsidize motorists.

Feel free to look up the % of funding for roads that gas tax or w/e accounts for in your country.

Also look up the fourth power law, that'll tell you how much tax a cyclist should pay compared to a driver in terms of road wear. Say a cyclist should pay $1, how much should you?

Then check how many millions it costs to build a mile of highway and internalize the fact that cyclists are not allowed there. Nor do they use car parking. Nor do they cause 40 thousand deaths per year in the USA. What's the cost of human life again?

Once you figure all that out, we'll be ready to start talking about pollution and its effects.

replies(1): >>44998541 #
1. MisterMower ◴[] No.44998541{5}[source]
More than half of the US doesn’t pay income taxes. Your point about non-motorists subsidizing motorists is nonsensical in this context. At least some of the taxes motorists pay are directly used for road maintenance.

Roads deteriorate whether they’re used or not. If cyclists want to use them, they should pay to maintain them. I don’t know why you find this idea so controversial. Adjust the fees commensurate with their weight if you want, but by definition those fees should not be zero.

Roads are obviously expensive, hence why it is repulsive that cyclists pay nothing to build or maintain them, but actively increase the danger on them and degrade the efficiency of using them.

Pollution? In what world do cyclists not require fuel to operate? Cyclists use the most expensive fuel possible to operate: consumable calories. We burn fuel to operate machinery to produce food, then transport it to stores and then transport it home, cook it, and then use only a portion of the available calories to operate a bicycle because the human body isn’t 100% efficient.

You’re delusional if you somehow think cycling is good for the environment.