Chance of a lifetime: YOU can decide on the message that will unite all bikers

[Scuba_Steve]

How'd this become an ACC thread???

[jafar]

Too bloody right.


True. But every single vehicle owner would be mightily upset when their levy goes up to compensate for the loss in levvies from multiple vehicles. Why should they subsidise those who choose to own more than one?

It's a conundrum, whatever system of levying is applied.

I doubt it would go up by much, they would be paying a compulsory personal accident insurance, not a per vehicle insurance. So the multiple vehicle ownership argument does not apply. The ACC portion of the rego would be gone, so what they lose one way they would make up the other. Those that cost the ACC due to their own negligence or bad luck would find their levy increased while those that have not claimed would get it cheaper . User pays & stupid pays even more

[SMOKEU]

Your theory fails in a few areas, someone riding a scooter will be paying less than someone who is driving a V8 due to their lower fuel usage per km, but the cost of fixing the scooter rider would be the same or more than the cost of fixing the V8 driver in a similar speed crash.

But the scooter does less damage to the roads, and the modern 4 stroke scooters spew out far fewer emissions than an average fossil fuelled car. Scooters also burn a lot less fossil fuel and contribute less to road congestion. Now I know that ACC don't build the roads, and that ACC doesn't have anything to do with air pollution, but it's still government money.

[MSTRS:Me]

I object to having to pay my hard earned $$ to fix up idiots that can't drive/ride & have the cost of that going up because I happen to have the same type of vehicle as they used to injure themselves with... to make it worse, the ACC figures take no account of WHO was @ fault in a crash, just what kind of vehicle was involved. If they were trying to be even a little bit fair then they would take that information on board & change the levy accordingly.

So do I mate, so do I. And you are right, Fault is not an issue to ACC. It never was. But the minute some tosser got the idea of 'risk', we were fucked.
It would be a stupid person indeed who claimed that bikes do not carry a higher degree of risk in terms of injury and severity of same. But at the end of the day, a little under half of all bike crashes are caused by another vehicle so why shouldn't that class of vehicle carry it's share of the cost to all of us*? That is how it was. It should never have changed.

* Using that logic, since those crashes we have involving a car, that were our fault, seldom cause any injury to those drivers - then we should get lower levies than them.

[oneofsix]

How'd this become an ACC thread???

Because the only message that seems to come anywhere close to uniting all bikers in all our different forms seems to be "ACC is broken" and even then there is disagreement on how and why it is broken, perhaps not the why as that is the politicians fault.

[jafar]

But the scooter does less damage to the roads, and the modern 4 stroke scooters spew out far fewer emissions than an average fossil fuelled car. Scooters also burn a lot less fossil fuel and contribute less to road congestion.

You have a crash situation with a scooter & a V8, which one is more likely to have been injured, the V8 driver or the scooter rider ??

Now I know that ACC don't build the roads, and that ACC doesn't have anything to do with air pollution, but it's still government money.

ACC is NOT the government, it is a state owned enterprise. not the same thing.

[MSTRS:Me]

How'd this become an ACC thread???

Because it's the one thing that is still a very raw issue for so many of us? And Conquistador was asking if there was ONE THING that could unite us.
Trouble is, none of us is united over ACC either, except insofaras many of us have strong views one way or the other about the whole debacle.

[jafar]

So do I mate, so do I. And you are right, Fault is not an issue to ACC. It never was. But the minute some tosser got the idea of 'risk', we were fucked.
It would be a stupid person indeed who claimed that bikes do not carry a higher degree of risk in terms of injury and severity of same. But at the end of the day, a little under half of all bike crashes are caused by another vehicle so why shouldn't that class of vehicle carry it's share of the cost to all of us*? That is how it was. It should never have changed.

* Using that logic, since those crashes we have involving a car, that were our fault, seldom cause any injury to those drivers - then we should get lower levies than them.

Now if it was a licence based system & the levy paid would be the same regardless of type of vehicle . The increases or reductions in ACC levy could then be done on a more personal level. No at fault claims = lower levy's. Multiple at fault claims = higher levy's.

[jafar]

How'd this become an ACC thread???

Evolution, the one thing that came close to uniting motorcycists was & still is the ACC system & it's many failings.

Oddly enough the shirts we all paid out for with "ACC who's next" was the closest we have ever got to being a united force.

It came as a great surprise to many ute owners that they were the next ones to be arse raped by ACC & they didn't know until they went to re register their personal transport.

[Scuba_Steve]

Well then while ya'll arguing about how to charge it, I say your all wrong!!! You keep focusing on 1 section of ACC, I say drop the segmented ACC collection & add it all to GST that way everyone uses, everyone pays.
No fault, no blame, no "divide & conquer" system that the Govt is currently using. From the 5yr old buying lollies & drink to the 30yr old buying household items to the 80yr old buying drinks at bingo everyone pays their share.

But I would also extend this & drop ACC altogether in favour for a health system where the whole thing is free, from doctors to hospital all free. Tho that's another story

[oneofsix]

Evolution, the one thing that came close to uniting motorcycists was & still is the ACC system & it's many failings.

Oddly enough the shirts we all paid out for with "ACC who's next" was the closest we have ever got to being a united force.

It came as a great surprise to many ute owners that they were the next ones to be arse raped by ACC & they didn't know until they went to re register their personal transport.

so the next uniting message should be "told you so..."?

[jafar]

so the next uniting message should be "told you so..."?

I hope not

[jafar]

Well then while ya'll arguing about how to charge it, I say your all wrong!!! You keep focusing on 1 section of ACC, I say drop the segmented ACC collection & add it all to GST that way everyone uses, everyone pays.
No fault, no blame, no "divide & conquer" system that the Govt is currently using. From the 5yr old buying lollies & drink to the 30yr old buying household items to the 80yr old buying drinks at bingo everyone pays their share.

But I would also extend this & drop ACC altogether in favour for a health system where the whole thing is free, from doctors to hospital all free. Tho that's another story

We had that & it didn't work. Although I have no idea why it didn't. Mabey it was so the gubbermint could use the ACC system to scrounge more revenue & to allow for a private medical insurance industry which also pays taxes

[Swoop]

Post #175 has all the info.

Plus full cover through fuel gets all the boaties. And, best of all, the offroaders would finally pay more of their share. Let's face it, we know that a substantial number of injury claims from dirtbikers are paid out of the road fund...
The claim form asks "Was a vehicle involved" or something like that.

Unfortunately that group who like to injure themselves, but who do not pay ACC levies, (psychlists) are missed out again.

[jafar]

Post #175 has all the info.


Unfortunately that group who like to injure themselves, but who do not pay ACC levies, (psychlists) are missed out again.

they would be included if the licence system was used. class 7 psychlist