eric aldinger

I agree that the landed gentry receive exclusive use of bike lanes. I am
tired of the fetid smell of mutton stew coming off all these stevadores and
coopers clogging the bike lanes on the Hawthorne.

Also, I ride in a powdered wig.

On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 12:41 PM, tackyglueit wrote:

> actually it's more about property tax. theoretically a cylist on the road
> who owns property has more right to the pavement then a car driver who does
> not own property. sort of.........
>
>
> a On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 12:31 PM, Chris Deardorff <
> chris_deardorff@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> If you use a bike instead of car, then yes, you pay less tax (tax on
>> gasoline). Gasoline tax, in my limited understanding of government
>> budgeting, is where a lot of the ODOT budget comes from.
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> *From:* Brett Boyles
>> *To:* barberb@pdx.edu
>>
>> *Cc:* obra@list.obra.org
>> *Sent:* Mon, January 17, 2011 11:30:45 AM
>> *Subject:* Re: [OBRA Chat] bill 2602
>>
>> Do I get to pay less taxes because I ride a bicycle?
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: obra-bounces@list.obra.org [mailto:obra-bounces@list.obra.org] On
>> Behalf Of barberb@pdx.edu
>> Sent: Monday, January 17, 2011 11:05 AM
>> To: rep.mikeschaufler@state.or.us
>> Cc: obra@list.obra.org
>> Subject: [OBRA Chat] bill 2602
>>
>> Dear Rep Schaufler,
>>
>> I realize that there seems to be an anti-bicycle furor lately, from a
>> number of motorists that feel privileged enough to complain. The
>> arguments range from the amount of tax paid, and the fact that
>> bicycles are typically slower than traffic, and concerns about their
>> safety. While it is true that bicycles pay less tax, its also true
>> that bicycles have less environmental impact and road deterioration.
>> On the subject that they travel slower, it should be noted that
>> bicycles are generally not allowed on freeways, and driving is a
>> privilege and not a right. Lastly in terms of safety, bicycles have a
>> lower mass and speed, and therefore are actually safer than cars. A
>> bike has more time to react, a quicker stopping distance, and faster
>> turning radius. Furthermore since there is less mass to a bike, an
>> accident involving a bike has less ability to do harm to another,
>> especially a vehicle.
>>
>> While bicycling does require more skill to perform, it is generally
>> performed with more attention to detail, because of the effects of
>> adrenaline on the brain. Vehicles are able to zone out while driving,
>> and are frequently eating, doing makeup, talking or texting on a
>> phone, or listening to audio programs. In fact many vehicles have
>> stereo systems so loud, that they can be heard from inside the homes
>> of nearby residents. Furthermore a vehicle is typically louder than a
>> bicyclist, in terms of road and engine noises. And lastly a vehicle
>> that collides with even another vehicle or residence can result in
>> injury or death.
>>
>> So i posit that bicycle safety should be less about reducing bicyclist
>> distractions, and more about vehicle distractions, because it is the
>> vehicles that pose the most risk and threat. However this would
>> probably be contrary to the wishes of your main constituency, who may
>> see bicyclists as a nuisance to their way of life, in the pursuit of
>> enjoying their privileged class.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> Benjamin Barber
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OBRA mailing list
>> obra@list.obra.org
>> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
>> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>> _______________________________________________
>> OBRA mailing list
>> obra@list.obra.org
>> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
>> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OBRA mailing list
>> obra@list.obra.org
>> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
>> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA mailing list
> obra@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>
>

--
Eric Aldinger

tackyglueit

actually it's more about property tax. theoretically a cylist on the road
who owns property has more right to the pavement then a car driver who does
not own property. sort of.........

a On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 12:31 PM, Chris Deardorff <
chris_deardorff@yahoo.com> wrote:

> If you use a bike instead of car, then yes, you pay less tax (tax on
> gasoline). Gasoline tax, in my limited understanding of government
> budgeting, is where a lot of the ODOT budget comes from.
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Brett Boyles
> *To:* barberb@pdx.edu
>
> *Cc:* obra@list.obra.org
> *Sent:* Mon, January 17, 2011 11:30:45 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [OBRA Chat] bill 2602
>
> Do I get to pay less taxes because I ride a bicycle?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: obra-bounces@list.obra.org [mailto:obra-bounces@list.obra.org] On
> Behalf Of barberb@pdx.edu
> Sent: Monday, January 17, 2011 11:05 AM
> To: rep.mikeschaufler@state.or.us
> Cc: obra@list.obra.org
> Subject: [OBRA Chat] bill 2602
>
> Dear Rep Schaufler,
>
> I realize that there seems to be an anti-bicycle furor lately, from a
> number of motorists that feel privileged enough to complain. The
> arguments range from the amount of tax paid, and the fact that
> bicycles are typically slower than traffic, and concerns about their
> safety. While it is true that bicycles pay less tax, its also true
> that bicycles have less environmental impact and road deterioration.
> On the subject that they travel slower, it should be noted that
> bicycles are generally not allowed on freeways, and driving is a
> privilege and not a right. Lastly in terms of safety, bicycles have a
> lower mass and speed, and therefore are actually safer than cars. A
> bike has more time to react, a quicker stopping distance, and faster
> turning radius. Furthermore since there is less mass to a bike, an
> accident involving a bike has less ability to do harm to another,
> especially a vehicle.
>
> While bicycling does require more skill to perform, it is generally
> performed with more attention to detail, because of the effects of
> adrenaline on the brain. Vehicles are able to zone out while driving,
> and are frequently eating, doing makeup, talking or texting on a
> phone, or listening to audio programs. In fact many vehicles have
> stereo systems so loud, that they can be heard from inside the homes
> of nearby residents. Furthermore a vehicle is typically louder than a
> bicyclist, in terms of road and engine noises. And lastly a vehicle
> that collides with even another vehicle or residence can result in
> injury or death.
>
> So i posit that bicycle safety should be less about reducing bicyclist
> distractions, and more about vehicle distractions, because it is the
> vehicles that pose the most risk and threat. However this would
> probably be contrary to the wishes of your main constituency, who may
> see bicyclists as a nuisance to their way of life, in the pursuit of
> enjoying their privileged class.
>
> Sincerely,
> Benjamin Barber
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA mailing list
> obra@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA mailing list
> obra@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA mailing list
> obra@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>
>

Chris Deardorff

If you use a bike instead of car, then yes, you pay less tax (tax on gasoline).
Gasoline tax, in my limited understanding of government budgeting, is where a
lot of the ODOT budget comes from.

________________________________
From: Brett Boyles
To: barberb@pdx.edu
Cc: obra@list.obra.org
Sent: Mon, January 17, 2011 11:30:45 AM
Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] bill 2602

Do I get to pay less taxes because I ride a bicycle?

-----Original Message-----
From: obra-bounces@list.obra.org [mailto:obra-bounces@list.obra.org] On
Behalf Of barberb@pdx.edu
Sent: Monday, January 17, 2011 11:05 AM
To: rep.mikeschaufler@state.or.us
Cc: obra@list.obra.org
Subject: [OBRA Chat] bill 2602

Dear Rep Schaufler,

I realize that there seems to be an anti-bicycle furor lately, from a
number of motorists that feel privileged enough to complain. The
arguments range from the amount of tax paid, and the fact that
bicycles are typically slower than traffic, and concerns about their
safety. While it is true that bicycles pay less tax, its also true
that bicycles have less environmental impact and road deterioration.
On the subject that they travel slower, it should be noted that
bicycles are generally not allowed on freeways, and driving is a
privilege and not a right. Lastly in terms of safety, bicycles have a
lower mass and speed, and therefore are actually safer than cars. A
bike has more time to react, a quicker stopping distance, and faster
turning radius. Furthermore since there is less mass to a bike, an
accident involving a bike has less ability to do harm to another,
especially a vehicle.

While bicycling does require more skill to perform, it is generally
performed with more attention to detail, because of the effects of
adrenaline on the brain. Vehicles are able to zone out while driving,
and are frequently eating, doing makeup, talking or texting on a
phone, or listening to audio programs. In fact many vehicles have
stereo systems so loud, that they can be heard from inside the homes
of nearby residents. Furthermore a vehicle is typically louder than a
bicyclist, in terms of road and engine noises. And lastly a vehicle
that collides with even another vehicle or residence can result in
injury or death.

So i posit that bicycle safety should be less about reducing bicyclist
distractions, and more about vehicle distractions, because it is the
vehicles that pose the most risk and threat. However this would
probably be contrary to the wishes of your main constituency, who may
see bicyclists as a nuisance to their way of life, in the pursuit of
enjoying their privileged class.

Sincerely,
Benjamin Barber

_______________________________________________
OBRA mailing list
obra@list.obra.org
http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
_______________________________________________
OBRA mailing list
obra@list.obra.org
http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org

Brett Boyles

Do I get to pay less taxes because I ride a bicycle?

-----Original Message-----
From: obra-bounces@list.obra.org [mailto:obra-bounces@list.obra.org] On
Behalf Of barberb@pdx.edu
Sent: Monday, January 17, 2011 11:05 AM
To: rep.mikeschaufler@state.or.us
Cc: obra@list.obra.org
Subject: [OBRA Chat] bill 2602

Dear Rep Schaufler,

I realize that there seems to be an anti-bicycle furor lately, from a
number of motorists that feel privileged enough to complain. The
arguments range from the amount of tax paid, and the fact that
bicycles are typically slower than traffic, and concerns about their
safety. While it is true that bicycles pay less tax, its also true
that bicycles have less environmental impact and road deterioration.
On the subject that they travel slower, it should be noted that
bicycles are generally not allowed on freeways, and driving is a
privilege and not a right. Lastly in terms of safety, bicycles have a
lower mass and speed, and therefore are actually safer than cars. A
bike has more time to react, a quicker stopping distance, and faster
turning radius. Furthermore since there is less mass to a bike, an
accident involving a bike has less ability to do harm to another,
especially a vehicle.

While bicycling does require more skill to perform, it is generally
performed with more attention to detail, because of the effects of
adrenaline on the brain. Vehicles are able to zone out while driving,
and are frequently eating, doing makeup, talking or texting on a
phone, or listening to audio programs. In fact many vehicles have
stereo systems so loud, that they can be heard from inside the homes
of nearby residents. Furthermore a vehicle is typically louder than a
bicyclist, in terms of road and engine noises. And lastly a vehicle
that collides with even another vehicle or residence can result in
injury or death.

So i posit that bicycle safety should be less about reducing bicyclist
distractions, and more about vehicle distractions, because it is the
vehicles that pose the most risk and threat. However this would
probably be contrary to the wishes of your main constituency, who may
see bicyclists as a nuisance to their way of life, in the pursuit of
enjoying their privileged class.

Sincerely,
Benjamin Barber

_______________________________________________
OBRA mailing list
obra@list.obra.org
http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org

barberb@pdx.edu

Dear Rep Schaufler,

I realize that there seems to be an anti-bicycle furor lately, from a
number of motorists that feel privileged enough to complain. The
arguments range from the amount of tax paid, and the fact that
bicycles are typically slower than traffic, and concerns about their
safety. While it is true that bicycles pay less tax, its also true
that bicycles have less environmental impact and road deterioration.
On the subject that they travel slower, it should be noted that
bicycles are generally not allowed on freeways, and driving is a
privilege and not a right. Lastly in terms of safety, bicycles have a
lower mass and speed, and therefore are actually safer than cars. A
bike has more time to react, a quicker stopping distance, and faster
turning radius. Furthermore since there is less mass to a bike, an
accident involving a bike has less ability to do harm to another,
especially a vehicle.

While bicycling does require more skill to perform, it is generally
performed with more attention to detail, because of the effects of
adrenaline on the brain. Vehicles are able to zone out while driving,
and are frequently eating, doing makeup, talking or texting on a
phone, or listening to audio programs. In fact many vehicles have
stereo systems so loud, that they can be heard from inside the homes
of nearby residents. Furthermore a vehicle is typically louder than a
bicyclist, in terms of road and engine noises. And lastly a vehicle
that collides with even another vehicle or residence can result in
injury or death.

So i posit that bicycle safety should be less about reducing bicyclist
distractions, and more about vehicle distractions, because it is the
vehicles that pose the most risk and threat. However this would
probably be contrary to the wishes of your main constituency, who may
see bicyclists as a nuisance to their way of life, in the pursuit of
enjoying their privileged class.

Sincerely,
Benjamin Barber