I think you could could support for this from the millionaires who file $0 in taxes
1 Like
Far from impossible
In the never ending shit-storm-saga that is/was Sick Bicycle’s… First a whole bunch of frames were stuck at Marino in Peru because Sick wouldn’t/couldn’t pay for them and now their Taiwan built frames (old Maxway folks running their own place) are being picked up by On One/Planet-X for a dime.
https://singletrackworld.com/2019/09/big-pile-of-sick-landing-at-on-one
https://singletrackworld.com/2019/05/sick-bicycles-are-things-as-bad-as-they-sound/
I guess that’s not surprising, but it sounds like there are people who paid money to Sick and who don’t have bikes now and that fucking sucks.
Not On-One/Planet-X’s fault, though. Curious to see what they end up having for sale.
They have spilled the details on their IG:
“New stuff we just got. Sign up for info link in profile. Preorder open very soon. 650b/150-160mm fork/63 head (image1), 29in/140-150/62 head (image2)”
1 Like
The key was the “somehow” part. The govt knows how much money you have (for the most part) even if you don’t pay taxes on it. They could come up with a useful number.
Not like this would ever happen though. Folks would go insane over the idea of penalizing wealth.
1 Like
Ya, not impossible to implement technically. The political will is the hard part.
Let’s talk about bikes.
3 Likes
What’s that quote about the grand majesty of a law that forbids paupers and lords from sleeping under a bridge?
1 Like
In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread.
2 Likes
I’m not sure if you missed my point.
My hypothesis is that a lower income driver will likely alter their behavior sooner, but a fine structure that ramps up extremely fast will likely bring a well off driver to the same personal conclusions soon too, and without burdening the “pauper” with excessive fines initially.
My original take is not that an income based sliding scale isn’t a good idea, rather that the very concept is so diametrically opposed to how our nation views crime and privilege (and yes both ARE wrong) that it would be utterly impossible to implement without a complete upending of American political norms. Sounds good. Impossible to actually legislate (at least in our current reality).
Am increasing fine structure is an already existing tactic that could be better utilized to rein in bad driving behavior.
It’s hard to say, at least here in Richmond though, because we don’t actually have ANY enforcement to begin with.
2 Likes
It’s not that there’s no laws, it’s that there’s no enforcement.
Speeding and other moving violations are entirely voluntary.
1 Like
As a few wags have pointed out, Surly will be god-DAMNED if they’re ever making a headtube long enough, but this seems like a kinda desperate workaround.
It’s a mutated compact rando bar? Okay. Ugly, but I’m sure that there are people out there who will love it.
Specialized beat them to it with the hover bars from the venge
1 Like
Or PvD with his … road … ¿bars?
Yeah these things are a dime a dozen at every Spec dealer. I’ve got some 40cm ones in my shed, I think a customer left them behind
posted some s-works hover bars on the 'bay and I immediately had a bid
they wack though
Not sure if you’re responding to me, but if so I think i was being overly oblique. I think a sliding-scale fine structure would be incredibly effective in actually improving driver behavior. But, as you say, it’ll never happen, one reason being that “we have a law against speeding” which issues a fine to everyone “equally” in a way that is actually incredibly unequal and stupid, which is exactly how we like things in this country.
2 Likes
A couple of years ago I asked one of the Surly folx about their bikes’ head tube lengths. They said the head tubes were shorter in order to enable more consistent standover height along the top tubes’ effective length.