U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > South Carolina > Greenville - Spartanburg area
 [Register]
Greenville - Spartanburg area Greenville - Spartanburg - Simpsonville - Greer - Easley - Taylors - Mauldin - Duncan
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-12-2015, 06:39 PM
 
Location: Greenville, SC
5,190 posts, read 7,504,097 times
Reputation: 2576

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ColaClemsonFan11 View Post
That's not a contradiction my friend the rebate is federal the property taxes are county and state.
You'll have to elaborate on that. An individual Federal tax rebate for a state bicycle tax? Despite all the rhetoric of locals and their politicians, doesn't SC suck the Federal Tax Teat enough already? We already take SOOO MUCH MORE federal dollars than we put in. I think the blue states have given us enough of "their money."

Quote:
Originally Posted by ColaClemsonFan11 View Post
Look we're just going to have to agree to disagree on this one because were starting to say the same things to each other.
I'll agree that you have been consistently incorrect on some basic facts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ColaClemsonFan11 View Post
Bottom line it's clear something needs to be addressed somewhere on this issue.
Why? What has to be addressed exactly? What's "the problem" exactly?


Quote:
Originally Posted by ColaClemsonFan11 View Post
More trails are a great solution Greenville is on the forefront on with the SRT
I think Greenville is 10-20 years late, compared to other places I've lived.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ColaClemsonFan11 View Post
...just don't have the cyclists flying through falls park like they do.
FINALLY, we agree on something.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-13-2015, 03:04 AM
Yac
 
5,875 posts, read 6,293,306 times
Agree to disagree. Don't fight to the death over opinions. Come on.
Yac.
__________________
Forum Rules
City-Data.com homepage
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-13-2015, 07:32 AM
 
1,474 posts, read 1,425,559 times
Reputation: 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art123 View Post
You'll have to elaborate on that. An individual Federal tax rebate for a state bicycle tax? Despite all the rhetoric of locals and their politicians, doesn't SC suck the Federal Tax Teat enough already? We already take SOOO MUCH MORE federal dollars than we put in. I think the blue states have given us enough of "their money."



I'll agree that you have been consistently incorrect on some basic facts.



Why? What has to be addressed exactly? What's "the problem" exactly?




I think Greenville is 10-20 years late, compared to other places I've lived.




FINALLY, we agree on something.
LOL I think that is something we can all agree on here! Someone came about half a foot from hitting my dog when we were out jogging the other day...I about lost it!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-13-2015, 12:36 PM
 
Location: Upstate
5,495 posts, read 6,217,604 times
Reputation: 3822
Bicyclists should be exempt from taxes if for no other reason that unlike a driver of a car, bicyclists are actually doing something that is healthy. So taxing them is like adding a sin tax, since bicycling has the potential of reducing traffic and helping the environment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-13-2015, 12:40 PM
 
Location: california
920 posts, read 598,544 times
Reputation: 1064
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColaClemsonFan11 View Post
This isnt a shot at cyclists or anything but the way I see it, if we are going to continue to talk about "sharing the road" and build bike lanes across Greenville County (which I am not opposed of) the cyclists using them need to chip in to help pay for it.

I realize cyclists already pay property taxes on their vehicles just as I do, but I also pay taxes on a boat that uses no public infrastructure in order to operate while building bike lanes require tax dollars not to mention cyclists are using the road where there are no lanes. Someone who rents their apartment and bikes everywhere with no car pays no taxes. If we have to "share the road" we need to "share the expense."
Whether a person rides a bike once in a while doesn't change the fact that 95% of cyclists own a car so are already paying for the road.

Next we'll want to tax the 6 yr old kid riding his Big Wheel down the sidewalk
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-13-2015, 12:49 PM
 
Location: california
920 posts, read 598,544 times
Reputation: 1064
Quote:
Originally Posted by USNRET04 View Post
Bicyclists should be exempt from taxes if for no other reason that unlike a driver of a car, bicyclists are actually doing something that is healthy. So taxing them is like adding a sin tax, since bicycling has the potential of reducing traffic and helping the environment.
Excellent post!
It's crazy to fine people for helping the enviorment and the tax payer save money/

Think of all the folks on breathing machines causing us unnecessary medical bills and them unneccesary pain...all due to the added exhaust in the enviornment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-18-2016, 06:18 AM
 
114 posts, read 151,108 times
Reputation: 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by USNRET04 View Post
Bicyclists should be exempt from taxes if for no other reason that unlike a driver of a car, bicyclists are actually doing something that is healthy. So taxing them is like adding a sin tax, since bicycling has the potential of reducing traffic and helping the environment.
Sin taxes sound good on the surface...until we realize that the government gets addicted to the $$...and when the desired behavior is achieved, it results in a corresponding drop in revenue...which the government now "needs" and has to raise in other venues.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-18-2016, 06:20 AM
 
1,525 posts, read 1,911,745 times
Reputation: 1031
Quote:
Originally Posted by yakko View Post
Sin taxes sound good on the surface...until we realize that the government gets addicted to the $$...and when the desired behavior is achieved, it results in a corresponding drop in revenue...which the government now "needs" and has to raise in other venues.
So you're saying the process goes like this:

There is a problem.
The government taxes this problem.
The problem goes away.
The government resumes raising revenue through normal means.

What's the problem here?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-18-2016, 09:30 AM
 
855 posts, read 569,144 times
Reputation: 863
Quote:
Originally Posted by gvsteve View Post
So you're saying the process goes like this:

There is a problem.
The government taxes this problem.
The problem goes away.
The government resumes raising revenue through normal means.

What's the problem here?
The problem, as I see it, would be quite costly to administer. Most likely outweighing any potential "windfall" from a revenue standpoint.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-18-2016, 01:32 PM
 
105 posts, read 75,733 times
Reputation: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColaClemsonFan11 View Post
This isnt a shot at cyclists or anything but the way I see it, if we are going to continue to talk about "sharing the road" and build bike lanes across Greenville County (which I am not opposed of) the cyclists using them need to chip in to help pay for it.

I realize cyclists already pay property taxes on their vehicles just as I do, but I also pay taxes on a boat that uses no public infrastructure in order to operate while building bike lanes require tax dollars not to mention cyclists are using the road where there are no lanes. Someone who rents their apartment and bikes everywhere with no car pays no taxes. If we have to "share the road" we need to "share the expense."
Because bicycles basically do no damage to the roads that would require resurfacing etc. The owners pay for it with their driving. How about reducing tax burdens rather than finding ways to screw more people and disincentivize bike riding?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > South Carolina > Greenville - Spartanburg area
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top