[magduf]

It's some of both. We have fuel taxes which pay for roads, but it's not nearly enough (because the taxes are too low) so a lot of the funds come from general taxes, which everyone pays. So the drivers are paying more for the roads, but the cyclists are also paying for those roads with their income taxes, sales taxes, etc.

[viscanti]

> So the drivers are paying more for the roads, but the cyclists are also paying for those roads with their income taxes, sales taxes, etc.

And cars also put the vast majority of the wear and tear on the roads. So while they might pay more overall, they don't pay their fair share compared to bike riders who fund the roads from their taxes. Bike riders (and people who don't use roads) end up subsidizing roads for people who drive cars.

[magduf]

Yes, that's somewhat correct. I think it's more correct, however, to say that trucks (commercial ones) account for the vast majority of wear and tear. I've read that the wear and tear scales with exponentially with the weight of the vehicle, and trucks can weigh up to 80,000 pounds, far more than your typical car that weighs 3000 or so.

Of course, on residential roads, they don't usually have many large trucks. Also, in areas with snow, it seems that snowplows actually cause most of the potholes.