Without doubt one of the main beefs road users have with bike riders is that the road users pay f0r the roads, while the bikes, having all these rules to make their riding safer, pay nothing.

The perfect solution is a bicycle licence where any person, man, woman, senior, or child has to hold a licence and it is renewed annually simply by paying your account online.

It would not matter how many bikes one owns, because they can only ride one at a time and anyone who rides will be contributing thus removing this huge problem.

Kids and seniors say $10 per year, adults 18plus $20 per year with all funds going directly to funding bikeways.

How much should a pedestrian pay for walking on God's land?

How much should a donkey-rider pay?

How much should a donkey without a rider pay?

Do birds also pay for flying over?

'We are the cyclists'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBFFrsvgu1Y

rehctub Hope this is a joke, we are over governed and treated like a nanny state population as it is.

The last thing we need is public servants coming up with more taxes and regulations and needing more pen pushers and Law Enforcers to administer them.

cyclist should be fined for riding on the road when their are bike paths available. Millions have been spent in many cities in Australia after decades of whinging by cyclist. Now you often see them not using the paths provided for them while holding up traffic.

Bikes were here first. It is cars that are the interlopers on our roads.
Cyclists cause almost no deaths anywhere. Cars and the fools who drive them cause millions of deaths.
Cyclists are usually also car drivers so have paid their "share" of road costs. Indeed since when they are riding a bike they are neither damaging the road as a car does nor are they getting what they have paid for they should be given a rebate on their rego fees whenever they use their bike instead of a car.
Billions and Billions are being spent on road infrastructure but you would be lucky to get more than a few hundred thousand being spent on dedicated cycling infrastructure.
Enforcing registration as suggested by flesher would cost far more than it earned. Would police be expected to go around randomly checking cyclists "papers"? Not a precedent I would be keen on.
Is it fair to charge the same to someone who goes for a twice yearly ride along a bike trail the same as someone who rides to work every day?
Drivers have a duty of care to more vulnerable road users. It is them driving the potential multi tonne death machine not cyclists.
I could go on but the word limit is looming.

This is taken from the following link:

http://www.executivestyle.com.au/18-reasons-why-registering-bicycles-is-a-bad-idea-1m23gh

I think that registering either the riders or the bikes
would produce the same problems.

Experts have studied this issue in depth and Motoring
organisations such as RACV, RACQ, and NRMA don't support
bicycle (nor driver) rego.

Roads are funded through general taxation-we all pay for them.
And urban/suburban roads, where you find most cyclists, are
maintained by Councils. If a local cyclist is riding in a
suburb, their rates or rent payments helped fund the road
they're on.

Implementing a scheme of registering the riders , the same
as the bikes, would be massively expensive. We're talking a
sizeable or expanded bureaucracy to process the more than
millions of riders out there. Also the administration costs
would guzzle the fees. A NSW Government Report says that
the annual cost for a driver's licence is completely
swallowed up by what it costs to issue a skerrick of plastic
with your picture on it. And if the costs blow out - the
funds would come out of everyone's pockets not just bike
riders.

The article tells us that bike riding is good for the economy.
It eases conjestion, reduces demand on public transport,
doesn't cause pollution, doesn't use fossil fuels, and keeps
people healthy physically and mentally.

A federal government report showed that a person who travels
to work by bicycle saves the economy $21 for every round
trip. That's almost $5000 a year for a committed commuter.
Don't forget to Thank Them.

There's more on the website that you can read. But you get
the idea.

' Bikes were here first. It is cars that are the interlopers on our roads'

actually pedestrian and horses were here before bikes. You generally don't see these acting foolishly on roads.

Dear runner,

If we allowed horses on our already conjested roads
we'd have a different kind of pollution problem.

As usual there is always a hidden agenda behind everything the govt does or proposes. I elude to the recent extra charge/s on our vehicle registration fees, and other areas as well. We are told that it has to do with 'one vehicle' crashes ie; where there is no other vehicle involved. This came about mainly because of bikes getting knocked over and the riders have suffered serious injuries. I have always maintained that as long as there is a registered vehicle in the mix then the cyclist is covered by the registration of the vehicle in question, but no that's not good enough so we all get slugged another $100 or so because of a few morons who want to play Russian roulette with their lives. How stupid must you guys be, and that includes the polys, to insist on committing suicide? I continue to advise these gutless polys to remove cyclists from major arteries and force them to use the back/side streets. I am fed up with the politics of all this. A bunch of whinging, noisy, brainless, morons are telling the other 99% what to do. YOU ARE THE MINORITY AND YOU ARE WRONG! The majority of urban roads, (major roads) in this country were designed to barely cater to one vehicle let alone two. It is sheer madness on the part of the polys to suggest vehicles must leave a one metre gap or more from a cyclist when they are passing. A METRE? Fools the lot of you. I will hold my line and obviously not wanting to go anywhere near the cyclist but nobody told them not to weave in front of passing traffic. If I hit one I am immediately the guilty party, no way! So the moral of this story is, if you want to play in the traffic, then YOU suffer the consequences, and I do mean suffer!

Every now and then I find myself at a disadvantage with a truck.
Am I going to argue?
I find it more prudent to give way for a number of obvious reasons.
Now my car doesn't mind bikes, however bikes would do well to imitate my stance with the trucks....it's called getting along

One problem is many bike users don't obey the road rules. That is the problem I see too often.

some of the arguments in favour of push bikes, or the riders, or both, being licensed sound ok but they all overlook the fundamental issue.

The issue is that govt simply wants the money, the excuse for it is just an excuse.

So the key question to ask is why are more and more hidden taxes being loaded on to wage and salary earners?

Might it be because corporate Australia plays on token level tax?

All money received by the Commonwealth govt must be paid into the Consolidated Account. We are rarely told exactly how much money is spent at budget time, only what its going to be spent on. Why is this? is it because they dont want people asking exactly how much money is in the Consolidated Account. My sources tell me their is literally TRILLIONS of dollars in this account.

My local MHR refuses to reply to my letters on this question. I wonder why?

Sorry for being absent.

The whole point is the majority of issues between bike users and cars/trucks is that most road users feel that the bike riders don't pay their way. This would fix that.

There is also little doubt that bikes on our busy roads are a distraction and if such a system were to be implemented, one would think the money raised would eventually fund more bikeways, which in turn paves the way to remove bikes from our busy roads.

It does not really bother me because I am not a bake rider and hey, as long as bike riders are against finding a safer way, simply because they feel they have the right to use the roads, then by all means keep enjoying your game of chicken.