RUC Petition for Motorcyclists

[Woodman]

ACC is a "NO FAULT" scheme ... assistance for medical help regardless of actual fault of the injured persons. For them to charge a rate depending on actual amount of guilt in the accident is hypocritical at the very least ...

Charging a fee dependent on the known/believed risk is at the least ... a bit dodgy ... a point few seem to grasp.

I get the no fault part after the accident has happened, but surely the extra charges that bikers pay is for responsibility awareness considering we knowingly use a form of transport that is inherently dangerous.

If ya get what I mean.

[Katman]

It is not the idiots fault they are idiots ... Who do you blame ... ??

Those whose agenda it is to produce idiots.

Guess who.

[FJRider]

$10 a week to rego my bike, I can live with that. And I've had a fair amount of money out of ACC through my accident. Yup I'm one of the worst offenders, my ACC tab would be in excess of half a million at a conservative guess...

I can remember pre ACC years ... get hurt in a motorcycle prang ... and no money till you were working again.

And the number of years motorcycle rego was less than half that of the four wheeled vehicles.

I personally would prefer equal ACC levy attached to all vehicle rego's ...

[FJRider]

Those whose agenda it is to produce idiots.

Guess who.

Well ... Government policy seems to cater for them. Legislation seems to revolve around their very existence.

[Moi]

As has already been said, ACC is not perfect but it is far better than what we could have.

If you had to pay for a private medical/accident/income protection insurance I'm sure your eyes would water - ask Americans about health/medical/accident insurance.

The issue of "I have a number of bikes..." I suggest may be able to be solved by having a situation where the bike that is not used often is licenced [rego] but no ACC is paid until you want to use it and then you buy the ACC for the time you want. You print a receipt for those days you've bought and away you ride. For those who don't want to play the game, there will be consequences. If you ride all year or want your bike available all year you do as we do now.

ACC is certainly a case of better the devil you know than the devil you don't...

[FJRider]

As has already been said, ACC is not perfect but it is far better than what we could have.

If you had to pay for a private medical/accident/income protection insurance I'm sure your eyes would water - ask Americans about health/medical/accident insurance.

The issue of "I have a number of bikes..." I suggest may be able to be solved by having a situation where the bike that is not used often is licenced [rego] but no ACC is paid until you want to use it and then you buy the ACC for the time you want. You print a receipt for those days you've bought and away you ride. For those who don't want to play the game, there will be consequences. If you ride all year or want your bike available all year you do as we do now.

ACC is certainly a case of better the devil you know than the devil you don't...

If you ride unregistered ... you still get ACC assistance ...

[Madness]

If you ride unregistered ... you still get ACC assistance ...

Yeah, but "you're" a bit of a cunt though at the same time, eh?

[Moi]

If you ride unregistered ... you still get ACC assistance ...

Yes, but is that fair? I would not want someone to miss out, just thinking about all those who claim to ride unregistered because I only ride that one "once in a blue moon", this would mean they ride it licenced and pay ACC for only the time they want. It would men a rethink of licencing and 'on-hold' licences - a halfway point between on-hold and full everyday use licence. It might actually increase ACC's income... It would also require a rethink of the "them and us" attitude of some...

[swbarnett]

So you dont call the difference between car and motorcycle ACC as being discriminating?

You really are fucked up in the head. How on earth did you get that from my post? I specifically said: "Charging based on history (or whatever group you happen to belong to) runs directly counter to the core principles of ACC."

Note: "or whatever group you happen to belong to" includes what mode of transport you use.

FFS, this is like trying to explain Quantum Mechanics to a five year old.

[swbarnett]

The current system is flawed and biased to our detriment ... and the per km suggestion is bullshit.

As is the "I have 5 bikes and can't afford to keep them all legal" argument.

Ah, I thought I'd read it wrong. Agreed.

[swbarnett]

Not when your idiocy has a negative impact on society.

Bullshit! You and I both have a right to be human, we are not and cannot be expected to be automatons. To do so would destroy the entire point of our existence. The impact on society is irrelevant; the only difference good or bad makes is in the concequences, both personally and publically.

No matter how much we delude ourselves to the contrary, expecting people to be perfect is by definition an act of madness.

[swbarnett]

I get the no fault part after the accident has happened, but surely the extra charges that bikers pay is for responsibility awareness considering we knowingly use a form of transport that is inherently dangerous.

If ya get what I mean.

Pick a group, any group, carve it up any way you like - mode of transport, race, sex, age, the list goes on. In any list of groups you will find one that has a more costly health bill than all others. To charge one group more than the rest would mean that the vast majority of the population would be put in one high risk group or another. So what's the point of splitting us up?

P.S.: Read my sig. Third line.

[Katman]

Bullshit! You and I both have a right to be human, we are not and cannot be expected to be automatons. To do so would destroy the entire point of our existence. The impact on society is irrelevant; the only difference good or bad makes is in the concequences, both personally and publically.

No matter how much we delude ourselves to the contrary, expecting people to be perfect is by definition an act of madness.

And I'll call 'bullshit' back at you.

If someone is determined to not give a fuck about how their actions negatively impact society then they can fuck off and find another society.

[swbarnett]

If someone is determined to not give a fuck about how their actions negatively impact society then they can fuck off and find another society.

The trick is in the definition. I actuallly agree with you on the above. However, the important point is that this person is a sociopath. The fact that they may be an idiot as well is irellevant.

[Katman]

The trick is in the definition. I actuallly agree with you on the above. However, the important point is that this person is a sociopath. The fact that they may be an idiot as well is irellevant.

What a load of semantic bullshit.

If someone has the belief that 'it is my right to be as much of an idiot as I like regardless of any negative impact to society my actions might be' then that idiot can go fuck themselves.

I refuse to tolerate wilfull idiots.