Research from the RAC (link is external) and Ageas found that one-in-three motorists deliberately avoids narrow country lanes and are prepared to take a detour of 16 miles or 25 minutes to avoid them. The study found that more than half of drivers (58 per cent) said they find using narrow country lanes stressful. For drivers who usually drive in urban areas the figure rises to 76 per cent. 58 per cent of rural drivers said it doesn't bother them, while only 21 per cent of urban drivers said the same.

Respondents to the survey said the two biggest causes of stress are squeezing past other vehicles (62 per cent) and colliding with another vehicle (61 per cent). The fear of hitting a pedestrian or cyclist was deemed stress-inducing by 27 per cent of respondents, while 22 per cent said the same for meeting a horse rider.

https://road.cc/content/news/cycling-live-blog-17-august-2021-285691#live-blog-item-27111

On 17/08/2021 02:25 pm, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> Research from the RAC (link is external) and Ageas found that one-in-three motorists deliberately avoids narrow country lanes and are prepared to take a detour of 16 miles or 25 minutes to avoid them. The study found that more than half of drivers (58 per cent) said they find using narrow country lanes stressful. For drivers who usually drive in urban areas the figure rises to 76 per cent. 58 per cent of rural drivers said it doesn't bother them, while only 21 per cent of urban drivers said the same.
>
> Respondents to the survey said the two biggest causes of stress are squeezing past other vehicles (62 per cent) and colliding with another vehicle (61 per cent). The fear of hitting a pedestrian or cyclist was deemed stress-inducing by 27 per cent of respondents, while 22 per cent said the same for meeting a horse rider.
>
> https://road.cc/content/news/cycling-live-blog-17-august-2021-285691#live-blog-item-27111

Some years ago, the most direct route to the office for me involved
about a mile of quite narrow "country lane". Two cars could pass each
other, as could two small vans. Once one of the vehicles was of Transit
van size or larger, problems were manifest.

Believe it or not, that stretch had a bus route along it (at least
lorries and the like were only an occasional worry). A bus completely
obstructed the road. There was no room for a car or small van to pass.
Even worse, the drivers of the buses seemed not to care, hurtling around
bends as though there couldn't possible be anything coming the other
way. A few near misses in the first week saw me checking the maps for
the next best route.

I still find it hard to credit that anyone could be mad enough to route
a bus along such a road.

On Tuesday, 17 August 2021 at 15:06:42 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
> On 17/08/2021 02:25 pm, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Research from the RAC (link is external) and Ageas found that one-in-three motorists deliberately avoids narrow country lanes and are prepared to take a detour of 16 miles or 25 minutes to avoid them. The study found that more than half of drivers (58 per cent) said they find using narrow country lanes stressful. For drivers who usually drive in urban areas the figure rises to 76 per cent. 58 per cent of rural drivers said it doesn't bother them, while only 21 per cent of urban drivers said the same.
> >
> > Respondents to the survey said the two biggest causes of stress are squeezing past other vehicles (62 per cent) and colliding with another vehicle (61 per cent). The fear of hitting a pedestrian or cyclist was deemed stress-inducing by 27 per cent of respondents, while 22 per cent said the same for meeting a horse rider.
> >
> > https://road.cc/content/news/cycling-live-blog-17-august-2021-285691#live-blog-item-27111
> Some years ago, the most direct route to the office for me involved
> about a mile of quite narrow "country lane". Two cars could pass each
> other, as could two small vans. Once one of the vehicles was of Transit
> van size or larger, problems were manifest.
>
> Believe it or not, that stretch had a bus route along it (at least
> lorries and the like were only an occasional worry). A bus completely
> obstructed the road. There was no room for a car or small van to pass.
> Even worse, the drivers of the buses seemed not to care, hurtling around
> bends as though there couldn't possible be anything coming the other
> way. A few near misses in the first week saw me checking the maps for
> the next best route.
>
> I still find it hard to credit that anyone could be mad enough to route
> a bus along such a road.

So what you are saying is that road was unsuitable for cars.

On 17/08/2021 07:33 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
> On Tuesday, 17 August 2021 at 15:06:42 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
>> On 17/08/2021 02:25 pm, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> Research from the RAC (link is external) and Ageas found that one-in-three motorists deliberately avoids narrow country lanes and are prepared to take a detour of 16 miles or 25 minutes to avoid them. The study found that more than half of drivers (58 per cent) said they find using narrow country lanes stressful. For drivers who usually drive in urban areas the figure rises to 76 per cent. 58 per cent of rural drivers said it doesn't bother them, while only 21 per cent of urban drivers said the same.
>>>
>>> Respondents to the survey said the two biggest causes of stress are squeezing past other vehicles (62 per cent) and colliding with another vehicle (61 per cent). The fear of hitting a pedestrian or cyclist was deemed stress-inducing by 27 per cent of respondents, while 22 per cent said the same for meeting a horse rider.
>>>
>>> https://road.cc/content/news/cycling-live-blog-17-august-2021-285691#live-blog-item-27111
>> Some years ago, the most direct route to the office for me involved
>> about a mile of quite narrow "country lane". Two cars could pass each
>> other, as could two small vans. Once one of the vehicles was of Transit
>> van size or larger, problems were manifest.
>>
>> Believe it or not, that stretch had a bus route along it (at least
>> lorries and the like were only an occasional worry). A bus completely
>> obstructed the road. There was no room for a car or small van to pass.
>> Even worse, the drivers of the buses seemed not to care, hurtling around
>> bends as though there couldn't possible be anything coming the other
>> way. A few near misses in the first week saw me checking the maps for
>> the next best route.
>>
>> I still find it hard to credit that anyone could be mad enough to route
>> a bus along such a road.
>
> So what you are saying is that road was unsuitable for cars.

That's yet another example of your chronic (and quite comic) inability
to read and understand English.

Try a copy of "English for Dummies". You need it.

On Tuesday, 17 August 2021 at 20:11:51 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
> On 17/08/2021 07:33 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 17 August 2021 at 15:06:42 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
> >> On 17/08/2021 02:25 pm, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> Research from the RAC (link is external) and Ageas found that one-in-three motorists deliberately avoids narrow country lanes and are prepared to take a detour of 16 miles or 25 minutes to avoid them. The study found that more than half of drivers (58 per cent) said they find using narrow country lanes stressful. For drivers who usually drive in urban areas the figure rises to 76 per cent. 58 per cent of rural drivers said it doesn't bother them, while only 21 per cent of urban drivers said the same.
> >>>
> >>> Respondents to the survey said the two biggest causes of stress are squeezing past other vehicles (62 per cent) and colliding with another vehicle (61 per cent). The fear of hitting a pedestrian or cyclist was deemed stress-inducing by 27 per cent of respondents, while 22 per cent said the same for meeting a horse rider.
> >>>
> >>> https://road.cc/content/news/cycling-live-blog-17-august-2021-285691#live-blog-item-27111
> >> Some years ago, the most direct route to the office for me involved
> >> about a mile of quite narrow "country lane". Two cars could pass each
> >> other, as could two small vans. Once one of the vehicles was of Transit
> >> van size or larger, problems were manifest.
> >>
> >> Believe it or not, that stretch had a bus route along it (at least
> >> lorries and the like were only an occasional worry). A bus completely
> >> obstructed the road. There was no room for a car or small van to pass.
> >> Even worse, the drivers of the buses seemed not to care, hurtling around
> >> bends as though there couldn't possible be anything coming the other
> >> way. A few near misses in the first week saw me checking the maps for
> >> the next best route.
> >>
> >> I still find it hard to credit that anyone could be mad enough to route
> >> a bus along such a road.
> >
> > So what you are saying is that road was unsuitable for cars.
> That's yet another example of your chronic (and quite comic) inability
> to read and understand English.
>
> Try a copy of "English for Dummies". You need it.

Thank you for, once again, proving my point.
As a paying road user (aka cyclist) I would have no trouble allowing buses to use that road.

On 17/08/2021 08:20 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
> On Tuesday, 17 August 2021 at 20:11:51 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
>> On 17/08/2021 07:33 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, 17 August 2021 at 15:06:42 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
>>>> On 17/08/2021 02:25 pm, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> Research from the RAC (link is external) and Ageas found that one-in-three motorists deliberately avoids narrow country lanes and are prepared to take a detour of 16 miles or 25 minutes to avoid them. The study found that more than half of drivers (58 per cent) said they find using narrow country lanes stressful. For drivers who usually drive in urban areas the figure rises to 76 per cent. 58 per cent of rural drivers said it doesn't bother them, while only 21 per cent of urban drivers said the same.
>>>>>
>>>>> Respondents to the survey said the two biggest causes of stress are squeezing past other vehicles (62 per cent) and colliding with another vehicle (61 per cent). The fear of hitting a pedestrian or cyclist was deemed stress-inducing by 27 per cent of respondents, while 22 per cent said the same for meeting a horse rider.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://road.cc/content/news/cycling-live-blog-17-august-2021-285691#live-blog-item-27111
>>>> Some years ago, the most direct route to the office for me involved
>>>> about a mile of quite narrow "country lane". Two cars could pass each
>>>> other, as could two small vans. Once one of the vehicles was of Transit
>>>> van size or larger, problems were manifest.
>>>>
>>>> Believe it or not, that stretch had a bus route along it (at least
>>>> lorries and the like were only an occasional worry). A bus completely
>>>> obstructed the road. There was no room for a car or small van to pass.
>>>> Even worse, the drivers of the buses seemed not to care, hurtling around
>>>> bends as though there couldn't possible be anything coming the other
>>>> way. A few near misses in the first week saw me checking the maps for
>>>> the next best route.
>>>>
>>>> I still find it hard to credit that anyone could be mad enough to route
>>>> a bus along such a road.
>>>
>>> So what you are saying is that road was unsuitable for cars.

>> That's yet another example of your chronic (and quite comic) inability
>> to read and understand English.

>> Try a copy of "English for Dummies". You need it.

> Thank you for, once again, proving my point.
> As a paying road user (aka cyclist) I would have no trouble allowing buses to use that road.

In both directions? ;-)

Stop digging. You got down deep enough a post back.

On Tuesday, 17 August 2021 at 23:13:47 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
> On 17/08/2021 08:20 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 17 August 2021 at 20:11:51 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
> >> On 17/08/2021 07:33 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday, 17 August 2021 at 15:06:42 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
> >>>> On 17/08/2021 02:25 pm, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>> Research from the RAC (link is external) and Ageas found that one-in-three motorists deliberately avoids narrow country lanes and are prepared to take a detour of 16 miles or 25 minutes to avoid them. The study found that more than half of drivers (58 per cent) said they find using narrow country lanes stressful. For drivers who usually drive in urban areas the figure rises to 76 per cent. 58 per cent of rural drivers said it doesn't bother them, while only 21 per cent of urban drivers said the same.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Respondents to the survey said the two biggest causes of stress are squeezing past other vehicles (62 per cent) and colliding with another vehicle (61 per cent). The fear of hitting a pedestrian or cyclist was deemed stress-inducing by 27 per cent of respondents, while 22 per cent said the same for meeting a horse rider.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> https://road.cc/content/news/cycling-live-blog-17-august-2021-285691#live-blog-item-27111
> >>>> Some years ago, the most direct route to the office for me involved
> >>>> about a mile of quite narrow "country lane". Two cars could pass each
> >>>> other, as could two small vans. Once one of the vehicles was of Transit
> >>>> van size or larger, problems were manifest.
> >>>>
> >>>> Believe it or not, that stretch had a bus route along it (at least
> >>>> lorries and the like were only an occasional worry). A bus completely
> >>>> obstructed the road. There was no room for a car or small van to pass.
> >>>> Even worse, the drivers of the buses seemed not to care, hurtling around
> >>>> bends as though there couldn't possible be anything coming the other
> >>>> way. A few near misses in the first week saw me checking the maps for
> >>>> the next best route.
> >>>>
> >>>> I still find it hard to credit that anyone could be mad enough to route
> >>>> a bus along such a road.
> >>>
> >>> So what you are saying is that road was unsuitable for cars.
>
> >> That's yet another example of your chronic (and quite comic) inability
> >> to read and understand English.
>
> >> Try a copy of "English for Dummies". You need it.
>
> > Thank you for, once again, proving my point.
> > As a paying road user (aka cyclist) I would have no trouble allowing buses to use that road.
> In both directions? ;-)
>
> Stop digging. You got down deep enough a post back.

Buses travel to a timetable. A suitable passing place could be created just like a railway siding on a single track.
By your own admission this road is suitable for primary road users but not cars.

> > Research from the RAC (link is external) and Ageas found that one-in-three motorists deliberately avoids narrow country lanes and are prepared to take a detour of 16 miles or 25 minutes to avoid them. The study found that more than half of drivers (58 per cent) said they find using narrow country lanes stressful. For drivers who usually drive in urban areas the figure rises to 76 per cent. 58 per cent of rural drivers said it doesn't bother them, while only 21 per cent of urban drivers said the same.
> >
> > Respondents to the survey said the two biggest causes of stress are squeezing past other vehicles (62 per cent) and colliding with another vehicle (61 per cent). The fear of hitting a pedestrian or cyclist was deemed stress-inducing by 27 per cent of respondents, while 22 per cent said the same for meeting a horse rider.
> >
> > https://road.cc/content/news/cycling-live-blog-17-august-2021-285691#live-blog-item-27111
> Some years ago, the most direct route to the office for me involved
> about a mile of quite narrow "country lane". Two cars could pass each
> other, as could two small vans. Once one of the vehicles was of Transit
> van size or larger, problems were manifest.
>
> Believe it or not, that stretch had a bus route along it (at least
> lorries and the like were only an occasional worry). A bus completely
> obstructed the road. There was no room for a car or small van to pass.

Just use the euphemism popular in California:

Designate the road a "Historical Highway."

One mistake and you are history.

I get so worn out driving on Ben Hulse Hwy I wonder if I'd ever want my name on such a road.

> Even worse, the drivers of the buses seemed not to care, hurtling around
> bends as though there couldn't possible be anything coming the other
> way. A few near misses in the first week saw me checking the maps for
> the next best route.
>
> I still find it hard to credit that anyone could be mad enough to route
> a bus along such a road.

On 18/08/2021 07:22 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
> On Tuesday, 17 August 2021 at 23:13:47 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
>> On 17/08/2021 08:20 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, 17 August 2021 at 20:11:51 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
>>>> On 17/08/2021 07:33 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday, 17 August 2021 at 15:06:42 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
>>>>>> On 17/08/2021 02:25 pm, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>> Research from the RAC (link is external) and Ageas found that one-in-three motorists deliberately avoids narrow country lanes and are prepared to take a detour of 16 miles or 25 minutes to avoid them. The study found that more than half of drivers (58 per cent) said they find using narrow country lanes stressful. For drivers who usually drive in urban areas the figure rises to 76 per cent. 58 per cent of rural drivers said it doesn't bother them, while only 21 per cent of urban drivers said the same.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Respondents to the survey said the two biggest causes of stress are squeezing past other vehicles (62 per cent) and colliding with another vehicle (61 per cent). The fear of hitting a pedestrian or cyclist was deemed stress-inducing by 27 per cent of respondents, while 22 per cent said the same for meeting a horse rider.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://road.cc/content/news/cycling-live-blog-17-august-2021-285691#live-blog-item-27111
>>>>>> Some years ago, the most direct route to the office for me involved
>>>>>> about a mile of quite narrow "country lane". Two cars could pass each
>>>>>> other, as could two small vans. Once one of the vehicles was of Transit
>>>>>> van size or larger, problems were manifest.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Believe it or not, that stretch had a bus route along it (at least
>>>>>> lorries and the like were only an occasional worry). A bus completely
>>>>>> obstructed the road. There was no room for a car or small van to pass.
>>>>>> Even worse, the drivers of the buses seemed not to care, hurtling around
>>>>>> bends as though there couldn't possible be anything coming the other
>>>>>> way. A few near misses in the first week saw me checking the maps for
>>>>>> the next best route.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I still find it hard to credit that anyone could be mad enough to route
>>>>>> a bus along such a road.
>>>>>
>>>>> So what you are saying is that road was unsuitable for cars.
>>
>>>> That's yet another example of your chronic (and quite comic) inability
>>>> to read and understand English.
>>
>>>> Try a copy of "English for Dummies". You need it.
>>
>>> Thank you for, once again, proving my point.

>>> As a paying road user (aka cyclist) I would have no trouble allowing buses to use that road.

>> In both directions? ;-)
>> Stop digging. You got down deep enough a post back.
>
> Buses travel to a timetable. A suitable passing place could be created just like a railway siding on a single track.
> By your own admission this road is suitable for primary road users but not cars.

"Primary road users"? I hadn't even *mentioned* pedestrians, but the odd
one you saw was in no danger as long as they kept an ear out for the
sound of an approaching bus hurtling around blind bends.

Moving off the subject of those primary road users and on to the subject
of fairy-cycle riders such as yourself, the same would apply. I don't
remember ever seeing a fairy-cyclist there, though.

As I had said at the outset, there was no problem with cars or small
vans. Only vehicles over a certain size caused difficulties.

You say: "A suitable passing place could be created...".

But none had been.

Stop digging. That's good advice.

On Tue, 17 Aug 2021 20:20:47 +0100, Mike Collins <cmike8828@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tuesday, 17 August 2021 at 20:11:51 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
>> On 17/08/2021 07:33 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
>> > On Tuesday, 17 August 2021 at 15:06:42 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
>> >> On 17/08/2021 02:25 pm, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
>> >>> Research from the RAC (link is external) and Ageas found that one-in-three motorists deliberately avoids narrow country lanes and are prepared to take a detour of 16 miles or 25 minutes to avoid them. The study found that more than half of drivers (58 per cent) said they find using narrow country lanes stressful. For drivers who usually drive in urban areas the figure rises to 76 per cent. 58 per cent of rural drivers said it doesn't bother them, while only 21 per cent of urban drivers said the same.
>> >>>
>> >>> Respondents to the survey said the two biggest causes of stress are squeezing past other vehicles (62 per cent) and colliding with another vehicle (61 per cent). The fear of hitting a pedestrian or cyclist was deemed stress-inducing by 27 per cent of respondents, while 22 per cent said the same for meeting a horse rider.
>> >>>
>> >>> https://road.cc/content/news/cycling-live-blog-17-august-2021-285691#live-blog-item-27111
>> >> Some years ago, the most direct route to the office for me involved
>> >> about a mile of quite narrow "country lane". Two cars could pass each
>> >> other, as could two small vans. Once one of the vehicles was of Transit
>> >> van size or larger, problems were manifest.
>> >>
>> >> Believe it or not, that stretch had a bus route along it (at least
>> >> lorries and the like were only an occasional worry). A bus completely
>> >> obstructed the road. There was no room for a car or small van to pass.
>> >> Even worse, the drivers of the buses seemed not to care, hurtling around
>> >> bends as though there couldn't possible be anything coming the other
>> >> way. A few near misses in the first week saw me checking the maps for
>> >> the next best route.
>> >>
>> >> I still find it hard to credit that anyone could be mad enough to route
>> >> a bus along such a road.
>> >
>> > So what you are saying is that road was unsuitable for cars.
>> That's yet another example of your chronic (and quite comic) inability
>> to read and understand English.
>>
>> Try a copy of "English for Dummies". You need it.
>
> Thank you for, once again, proving my point.
> As a paying road user (aka cyclist) I would have no trouble allowing buses to use that road.

How much fuel duty is on the food you eat?

On Tue, 17 Aug 2021 14:25:42 +0100, swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:

> Research from the RAC (link is external) and Ageas found that one-in-three motorists deliberately avoids narrow country lanes and are prepared to take a detour of 16 miles or 25 minutes to avoid them. The study found that more than half of drivers (58 per cent) said they find using narrow country lanes stressful. For drivers who usually drive in urban areas the figure rises to 76 per cent. 58 per cent of rural drivers said it doesn't bother them, while only 21 per cent of urban drivers said the same.
>
> Respondents to the survey said the two biggest causes of stress are squeezing past other vehicles (62 per cent) and colliding with another vehicle (61 per cent). The fear of hitting a pedestrian or cyclist was deemed stress-inducing by 27 per cent of respondents, while 22 per cent said the same for meeting a horse rider.
>
> https://road.cc/content/news/cycling-live-blog-17-august-2021-285691#live-blog-item-27111

This doesn't make sense. A country lane is one of the easiest roads to drive on, as it's quieter and there's less to think about. And the figure actually rises for urban drivers? The ones that have to deal with busy traffic every day?!

On Thursday, 19 August 2021 at 14:26:47 UTC+1, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Aug 2021 20:20:47 +0100, Mike Collins <cmik...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday, 17 August 2021 at 20:11:51 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
> >> On 17/08/2021 07:33 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
> >> > On Tuesday, 17 August 2021 at 15:06:42 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
> >> >> On 17/08/2021 02:25 pm, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> >>> Research from the RAC (link is external) and Ageas found that one-in-three motorists deliberately avoids narrow country lanes and are prepared to take a detour of 16 miles or 25 minutes to avoid them. The study found that more than half of drivers (58 per cent) said they find using narrow country lanes stressful. For drivers who usually drive in urban areas the figure rises to 76 per cent. 58 per cent of rural drivers said it doesn't bother them, while only 21 per cent of urban drivers said the same.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Respondents to the survey said the two biggest causes of stress are squeezing past other vehicles (62 per cent) and colliding with another vehicle (61 per cent). The fear of hitting a pedestrian or cyclist was deemed stress-inducing by 27 per cent of respondents, while 22 per cent said the same for meeting a horse rider.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> https://road.cc/content/news/cycling-live-blog-17-august-2021-285691#live-blog-item-27111
> >> >> Some years ago, the most direct route to the office for me involved
> >> >> about a mile of quite narrow "country lane". Two cars could pass each
> >> >> other, as could two small vans. Once one of the vehicles was of Transit
> >> >> van size or larger, problems were manifest.
> >> >>
> >> >> Believe it or not, that stretch had a bus route along it (at least
> >> >> lorries and the like were only an occasional worry). A bus completely
> >> >> obstructed the road. There was no room for a car or small van to pass.
> >> >> Even worse, the drivers of the buses seemed not to care, hurtling around
> >> >> bends as though there couldn't possible be anything coming the other
> >> >> way. A few near misses in the first week saw me checking the maps for
> >> >> the next best route.
> >> >>
> >> >> I still find it hard to credit that anyone could be mad enough to route
> >> >> a bus along such a road.
> >> >
> >> > So what you are saying is that road was unsuitable for cars.
> >> That's yet another example of your chronic (and quite comic) inability
> >> to read and understand English.
> >>
> >> Try a copy of "English for Dummies". You need it.
> >
> > Thank you for, once again, proving my point.
> > As a paying road user (aka cyclist) I would have no trouble allowing buses to use that road.
> How much fuel duty is on the food you eat?

The usual amount. Fuel duty is part of the shelf price with an added percentage for the retailers profit. Thank you for proving cyclists pay more fuel duty than motorists.

On Thursday, 19 August 2021 at 19:00:09 UTC+1, Peeler wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Aug 2021 07:13:18 -0700 (PDT), Mike Collins, another mentally
> deficient, troll-feeding senile ASSHOLE, and typical Google groper,
> blathered:
> >> How much fuel duty is on the food you eat?
> >
> > The usual amount. Fuel duty is part of the shelf price with an added
> > percentage for the retailers profit. Thank you for proving cyclists pay
> > more fuel duty than motorists.
> No, the attention-starved troll thanks YOU for feeding him yet again, senile
> moron!

ISTM you are the one seeking attention.
My comment was aimed at those who believe it is OK to use motor vehicles as a weapon against cyclists because they are under the delusion cyclists don't pay 'road tax' or fuel duty. Nugents and Pounders worship the mythical being Road Tax the same way the gnomes in Terry Pratchett's Truckers worshipped Arnold Bros.

On 20/08/2021 02:30 am, Mike Collins wrote:

> On Thursday, 19 August 2021 at 19:00:09 UTC+1, Peeler wrote:

>> On Thu, 19 Aug 2021 07:13:18 -0700 (PDT), Mike Collins, another mentally
>> deficient, troll-feeding senile ASSHOLE, and typical Google groper,
>> blathered:

>>>> How much fuel duty is on the food you eat?
>
>>> The usual amount. Fuel duty is part of the shelf price with an added
>>> percentage for the retailers profit. Thank you for proving fairy-cyclists pay
>>> more fuel duty than motorists.

>> No, the attention-starved troll thanks YOU for feeding him yet again, senile
>> moron!
>
> ISTM you are the one seeking attention.

> My comment was aimed at those who believe it is OK to use motor vehicles as a weapon against fairy-cyclists because they are under the delusion [that?] fairy-cyclists don't pay 'road tax' or fuel duty. Nugents and Pounders worship the mythical being Road Tax the same way the gnomes in Terry Pratchett's Truckers worshipped Arnold Bros.

I don't see Peeler's posts unless someone responds to him.

But while it certainly isn't worded in a way which I would ever emulate,
he seems to have the measure of you.

PS: If Road Tax has been abolished, why do we still have to pay it?

On 20/08/2021 02:58, JNugent wrote:
> On 20/08/2021 02:30 am, Mike Collins wrote:
>
>> On Thursday, 19 August 2021 at 19:00:09 UTC+1, Peeler wrote:
>
>>> On Thu, 19 Aug 2021 07:13:18 -0700 (PDT), Mike Collins, another mentally
>>> deficient, troll-feeding senile ASSHOLE, and typical Google groper,
>>> blathered:
>
>>>>> How much fuel duty is on the food you eat?
>>
>>>> The usual amount. Fuel duty is part of the shelf price with an added
>>>> percentage for the retailers profit. Thank you for proving
>>>> fairy-cyclists pay
>>>> more fuel duty than motorists.
>
>>> No, the attention-starved troll thanks YOU for feeding him yet again,
>>> senile
>>> moron!
>>
>> ISTM you are the one seeking attention.
>
>> My comment was aimed at those who believe it is OK to use motor
>> vehicles as a weapon against fairy-cyclists because they are under the
>> delusion [that?] fairy-cyclists don't pay 'road tax' or fuel duty.
>> Nugents and Pounders worship the mythical being Road Tax the same way
>> the gnomes in Terry Pratchett's Truckers worshipped Arnold Bros.
>
> I don't see Peeler's posts unless someone responds to him.
>
> But while it certainly isn't worded in a way which I would ever emulate,
> he seems to have the measure of you.
>
> PS: If Road Tax has been abolished, why do we still have to pay it?

You mean it's like "window tax"?
Every time I moved to a property with more windows, my Council Tax went
up! Funny old world.

On 20/08/2021 08:52 am, colwyn wrote:

> On 20/08/2021 02:58, JNugent wrote:
>> On 20/08/2021 02:30 am, Mike Collins wrote:
>>> On Thursday, 19 August 2021 at 19:00:09 UTC+1, Peeler wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 19 Aug 2021 07:13:18 -0700 (PDT), Mike Collins, another
>>>> mentally deficient, troll-feeding senile ASSHOLE, and typical Google groper,
>>>> blathered:
>
>>>>>> How much fuel duty is on the food you eat?
>
>>>>> The usual amount. Fuel duty is part of the shelf price with an added
>>>>> percentage for the retailers profit. Thank you for proving
>>>>> fairy-cyclists pay
>>>>> more fuel duty than motorists.
>
>>>> No, the attention-starved troll thanks YOU for feeding him yet
>>>> again, senile
>>>> moron!
>
>>> ISTM you are the one seeking attention.
>
>>> My comment was aimed at those who believe it is OK to use motor
>>> vehicles as a weapon against fairy-cyclists because they are under
>>> the delusion [that?] fairy-cyclists don't pay 'road tax' or fuel
>>> duty. Nugents and Pounders worship the mythical being Road Tax the
>>> same way the gnomes in Terry Pratchett's Truckers worshipped Arnold
>>> Bros.
>
>> I don't see Peeler's posts unless someone responds to him.
>
>> But while it certainly isn't worded in a way which I would ever
>> emulate, he seems to have the measure of you.
>
>> PS: If Road Tax has been abolished, why do we still have to pay it?
>
> You mean it's like "window tax"?
> Every time I moved to a property with more windows, my Council Tax went
> up! Funny old world.

3/10. Borderline 4/10.

Far from being funny, but considerably better than Collins' efforts.

On Friday, August 20, 2021 at 2:30:18 AM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:

> My comment was aimed at those who believe it is OK to use motor vehicles as a weapon against cyclists because they are under the delusion cyclists don't pay 'road tax' or fuel duty.

Do the same drivers attack the owners of electric cars for paying no VED or fuel tax?
Or disabled people?

On 20/08/2021 02:58, JNugent wrote:>
> PS: If Road Tax has been abolished, why do we still have to pay it?

Most roads are funded by council tax. Council tax also pays to empty
dustbins and contribute to your care home. The tax you have to pay is
not "road tax".

On 20/08/2021 11:17 am, TMS320 wrote:

> On 20/08/2021 02:58, JNugent wrote:

>> PS: If Road Tax has been abolished, why do we still have to pay it?
>
> Most roads are funded by council tax. Council tax also pays to empty
> dustbins and contribute to your care home. The tax you have to pay is
> not "road tax".

So what *is* it, other than Road Tax (actually properly called the "Road
Fund Licence", even then) with a different and contrived official name?

Which leads us straight back to the question of why it is that we still
have to pay an allegedly abolished tax (even on top of council tax)?

On 20/08/2021 11:22, JNugent wrote:
> On 20/08/2021 11:17 am, TMS320 wrote:
>> On 20/08/2021 02:58, JNugent wrote:
>
>>> PS: If Road Tax has been abolished, why do we still have to pay it?
>>
>> Most roads are funded by council tax. Council tax also pays to empty
>> dustbins and contribute to your care home. The tax you have to pay is
>> not "road tax".
>
> So what *is* it, other than Road Tax (actually properly called the "Road
> Fund Licence", even then) with a different and contrived official name?

The tax you have to pay is called Council Tax. Because it covers a
multitude of other things it can't be "road tax".

> Which leads us straight back to the question of why it is that we still
> have to pay an allegedly abolished tax (even on top of council tax)?

You don't have to pay another tax. Since being the keeper of a car is
voluntary, anything paid to the government for the privilege of being
the keeper is also voluntary. Perhaps it helps towards the medical
treatment of the pedestrians and cyclists killed and injured by drivers.
Or towards the 4 star accomodation of foreigners that turn up in rubber
boats.

On Friday, 20 August 2021 at 11:22:14 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
> On 20/08/2021 11:17 am, TMS320 wrote:
>
> > On 20/08/2021 02:58, JNugent wrote:
>
> >> PS: If Road Tax has been abolished, why do we still have to pay it?
> >
> > Most roads are funded by council tax. Council tax also pays to empty
> > dustbins and contribute to your care home. The tax you have to pay is
> > not "road tax".
> So what *is* it, other than Road Tax (actually properly called the "Road
> Fund Licence", even then) with a different and contrived official name?
>
> Which leads us straight back to the question of why it is that we still
> have to pay an allegedly abolished tax (even on top of council tax)?

You are paying for permission to use your lethal polluting machine on roads owned by pedestrians, equestrians and cyclists.
If you have a problem with that I suggest you contact your MP.
Bear in mind road damage is 4th power of axle loading and the 'safety' features in modern cars make then more massive.

On 20/08/2021 12:19 pm, TMS320 wrote:
> On 20/08/2021 11:22, JNugent wrote:
>> On 20/08/2021 11:17 am, TMS320 wrote:
>>> On 20/08/2021 02:58, JNugent wrote:
>>
>>>> PS: If Road Tax has been abolished, why do we still have to pay it?
>>>
>>> Most roads are funded by council tax. Council tax also pays to empty
>>> dustbins and contribute to your care home. The tax you have to pay is
>>> not "road tax".
>>
>> So what *is* it, other than Road Tax (actually properly called the
>> "Road Fund Licence", even then) with a different and contrived
>> official name?
>
> The tax you have to pay is called Council Tax. Because it covers a
> multitude of other things it can't be "road tax".

Don't act daft.

>> Which leads us straight back to the question of why it is that we
>> still have to pay an allegedly abolished tax (even on top of council
>> tax)?
>
> You don't have to pay another tax. Since being the keeper of a car is
> voluntary,

B O R I N G !

Why not just answer questions intelligently and directly, rather than
evasively (like that)?

> anything paid to the government for the privilege of being
> the keeper is also voluntary. Perhaps it helps towards the medical
> treatment of the pedestrians and cyclists killed and injured by drivers.
> Or towards the 4 star accomodation of foreigners that turn up in rubber
> boats.

On 20/08/2021 12:25 pm, Mike Collins wrote:

> On Friday, 20 August 2021 at 11:22:14 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
>> On 20/08/2021 11:17 am, TMS320 wrote:
>>> On 20/08/2021 02:58, JNugent wrote:
>
>>>> PS: If Road Tax has been abolished, why do we still have to pay it?
>
>>> Most roads are funded by council tax. Council tax also pays to empty
>>> dustbins and contribute to your care home. The tax you have to pay is
>>> not "road tax".

>> So what *is* it, other than Road Tax (actually properly called the "Road
>> Fund Licence", even then) with a different and contrived official name?
>> Which leads us straight back to the question of why it is that we still
>> have to pay an allegedly abolished tax (even on top of council tax)?
>
> You are paying for permission to use your lethal polluting machine on roads owned by pedestrians, equestrians and cyclists.
> If you have a problem with that I suggest you contact your MP.

So you accept that Road Tax still has to be paid.

Thank you. That's all I wanted you to admit.

On Friday, 20 August 2021 at 12:43:51 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
> On 20/08/2021 12:25 pm, Mike Collins wrote:
>
> > On Friday, 20 August 2021 at 11:22:14 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
> >> On 20/08/2021 11:17 am, TMS320 wrote:
> >>> On 20/08/2021 02:58, JNugent wrote:
> >
> >>>> PS: If Road Tax has been abolished, why do we still have to pay it?
> >
> >>> Most roads are funded by council tax. Council tax also pays to empty
> >>> dustbins and contribute to your care home. The tax you have to pay is
> >>> not "road tax".
>
> >> So what *is* it, other than Road Tax (actually properly called the "Road
> >> Fund Licence", even then) with a different and contrived official name?
> >> Which leads us straight back to the question of why it is that we still
> >> have to pay an allegedly abolished tax (even on top of council tax)?
> >
> > You are paying for permission to use your lethal polluting machine on roads owned by pedestrians, equestrians and cyclists.
> > If you have a problem with that I suggest you contact your MP.
> So you accept that Road Tax still has to be paid.

No.
Vehicle Excise Duty has to be paid for permission to operate a motor vehicle on our roads just like I have to pay a fee. for my shotgun licence and TV tax, Your god Road Tax does not exist.
Do you still believe the earth is flat?

On 20/08/21 6:01 am, Peeler wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Aug 2021 09:33:04 -0700 (PDT), swldx...@gmail.com, an absolutely
> brain dread troll-feeding senile asshole and typical demented Google groper
> blathered yet again:
>
>
>>> How much fuel duty is on the food you eat?
>>
>> It's unknown. Depends on if it's shipped from Australia or you pick it yourself in a local field.
>
> That trolling Scottish attention whore can always count on one or two of you
> senile assholes feeding him and willing take his dumbest baits, you abnormal
> senile shithead!
>
Shaft extractor