It's a well known fact that a 650cc bike is more dangerous than a 600cc bike, just like a 60hp diesel car is more dangerous than a 400hp petrol car. It must be true because the government told me so. The government would never lie to me, would they?
It's a well known fact that a 650cc bike is more dangerous than a 600cc bike, just like a 60hp diesel car is more dangerous than a 400hp petrol car. It must be true because the government told me so. The government would never lie to me, would they?
No, they just don't get their tax at the pump for the diesel so screw you on rego instead.
On a complete tangent, I refuse to believe the government give a shit about the environment when they rego and RUC small super efficient diesels to the point that they aren't viable to own, kinda fucked when we import all our fuel.
Riding cheap crappy old bikes badly since 1987
Tagorama maps: Transalpers map first 100 tags..................Map of tags 101-200......................Latest map, tag # 201-->
That's what RUCs are for. If you have a close look, you'll see that the ACC levy is higher on small diesel vehicles than on petrol vehicles. This must mean that somehow slow, old diesels are more dangerous than high performance petrol vehicles.
On another note, apparently diesel vans are more dangerous than a 1000cc sports bike. Have a look at the licensing fees on that http://www.nzta.govt.nz/vehicle/regi...sing/fees.html
Any argument that the government has regarding vehicle safety and licensing fees is bullshit. Pay close attention to the "Goods truck/van/utility Private passenger Non-petrol driven - 1-3500kg GVM" and compare that to the "Motorcycle Petrol driven - 601cc and over".
The government was complaining that other road users have to subsidize the cost of motorbike riders binning it, so where is the justification that a private non petrol driven goods truck/van/utility should be taxed higher than a high performance car or bike?
No no no ...
The cost of petrol includes an RUC component and also an ACC component of 9.9c/l. Diesel has no such taxes at source, which is why they're levied as separate items.
The average petrol-driven car incurs around $200pa ACC levy on fuel use alone. Add that to it's ACC levy part on it's rego - you're now at around the same level as a diesel pays on rego alone.
Your +600cc motorcycle stills pays more than a diesel...because of the petrol component.
Do you realise how many holes there could be if people would just take the time to take the dirt out of them?
Whenever you buy a vehicle licence, you know that small sheet it comes on that shows you where all the funds are going? Diesels have a very high ACC levy as part of the licensing fees. I am still yet to see why diesels are more dangerous than petrol models in general.
It's like saying that a big bore Harley is faster than an R1 just because the engine is slightly bigger.
Comprehension isn't your strong point, eh? I know what you are trying to say, but it's not right.
I don't claim to know all the answers, but I'm looking at a car relicencing form right now, and the ACC levy is $198.46. If I add $200 (approx annual ACC petrol tax) I come up with $398.46. Which is getting close to what a diesel will be paying on it's rego. Don't forget the 15% GST on top.
Do you realise how many holes there could be if people would just take the time to take the dirt out of them?
That's exactly the same as saying "All 1000cc bikes are faster than 600cc bikes".
The government really needs to sort their shit out and realise that not everything is black and white as they would like us to believe. They (politicians) basically put shit like this in the "too hard basket" and instead of putting some thought into it, they seem to all put their own idea on a piece of paper and pull it out of a hat like a raffle.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks