All tounge in cheek Salmo,.... I would never, and never have intentionally swerved at anybody

I do however take issue with bike riders who take exorbinant risks by riding on highways and other dangerous roads, sometimes during adverse weather and light conditions. They pose a risk to themselves and to motorists. Additionally, these risks are not risks that are mandatory for the rider to take. They do so because they enjoy doing so.

I say this because I have two relatives who have had their lives turned upside down after hitting and killing two riders who were taking particularly extreme risks. One t-boned his bike into my step-father's vehicle while he was turning into his driveway while doing over 50mph down a residential hill in low-light/dusk conditions with zero reflective gear. He's dead. The other was traveling on a narrow, windy highway in a terrential downpour. He was hit and killed by another relative. The particulars of the latter situation are unclear and trial pending, but one thing that is clear is that both parties were at fault.

That said I don't think your comparison to road and highway funding holds water. Sure there are user groups who pay for roads who may not directly benefit from their use, but who are they?

Society as a whole benefits from having the ability to travel from one place to another without a lot of hassle.

Bike paths and trails however are generally utilized by a specific user group, bike riders. Also perhaps some walkers, joggers, roller bladers, and stay-at-home starbucks mothers pushing strollers.

Trust me, I'm no fan of having the gov't register, police, and charge for the registration of a frigging bike, roller skates, strollers, what have you. On the flip side I think there should be a more equitable solution to the funding of something that is only utilized by a small, easily defined user group.