These are both total spin...

Originally Posted by
kwaka_crasher
"We don't see any policy reason why motor vehicles as a whole should be subsidising motorcyclists."
If that were truly the case, then all high-risk activities would be receiving targeted levies. The earner levy is subsidising them. Why are we different?

Originally Posted by
kwaka_crasher
"You and I, when we drive our cars, are insured for both medical treatment and for earning compensation. If you took my mother, before she ceased to drive, for the last 20 years she's only been insured for medical and yet she's paying the same rate," he said."
His mother is doubtless on the pension. She may or may not have some clawed back as an 'earner'. Regardless, if she is hurt, her medical is paid and her pension continues. As for you/me, where does our weekly $ come from if we can't work through injury?
Do you realise how many holes there could be if people would just take the time to take the dirt out of them?
Bookmarks