What are the Chances?

drstawl said:
It's a no-brainer that investment in getting people onto bikes and out of cars will reduce costs for everyone while allowing them to transport their sorry ass any way that they want while making it less annoying for all to do so.
Click to expand...

I am not really sure if raising taxes to pay for campaigns promoting "get up early and ride a bike really far to work and back" is going to make people less annoyed.
 
Supercreep said:
I am not really sure if raising taxes to pay for campaigns promoting "get up early and ride a bike really far to work and back" is going to make people less annoyed.
Click to expand...
That's not annoyance- that's terror.

The annoyance is bleary eyed robots of the blah-blah-industrial complex dragging their pitiful bodies to work before they have fully regained consciousness having to deal with a slow-moving narrowing of their only path.

Or worse, when these same weary robots are trying to get home after being beaten down like burros all day.
 
drstawl said:
That's not annoyance- that's terror.

The annoyance is bleary eyed robots of the blah-blah-industrial complex dragging their pitiful bodies to work before they have fully regained consciousness having to deal with a slow-moving narrowing of their only path.

Or worse, when these same weary robots are trying to get home after being beaten down like burros all day.
Click to expand...

Maybe, if you are really into dramatizing fairly practical decisions like whether to be at work in 30 minutes driving or two hours and needing a shower on a bike.
 
Supercreep said:
I am not really sure if raising taxes to pay for campaigns promoting "get up early and ride a bike really far to work and back" is going to make people less annoyed.
Click to expand...

For some people, being annoyed is the only reason to get out of bed.
 
Supercreep said:
Maybe, if you are really into dramatizing fairly practical decisions like whether to be at work in 30 minutes driving or two hours and needing a shower on a bike.
Click to expand...
If you can't commute, you can't commute. It is what it is. But that should not intrude on those who can easily do so but haven't quite figured that out.
 
kcearl said:
booting it = going as fast as you can between traffic lights.

is there another way to drive??
Click to expand...
Well- there are several. Much like photography where you can choose aperture, shutter or exposure and the camera adjusts the other variables, you can choose safety priority, no cop stop priority, or more colorful alternatives like trip to the hospital priority, night in jail priority, jack your insurance rate priority or lose your license priority.
 
drstawl said:
Well- there are several. Much like photography where you can choose aperture, shutter or exposure and the camera adjusts the other variables, you can choose safety priority, no cop stop priority, or more colorful alternatives like trip to the hospital priority, night in jail priority, jack your insurance rate priority or lose your license priority.
Click to expand...

Im thinking you can boot it :)


Ive had two driving bans, but I dont think it was because people in the cave reported me :)
 
Armistice said:
I ride a bike. I drive a car. I pay tax. I live in a very big city that will eventually, in the inner areas, experience gridlock unless cars come off the roads. Public transport. Bikes.

There are advantages to everyone for separated cycleways paid for by the same agency that pays for roads (ie. the taxpayer) to be introduced wherever possible as it can reduce future expenditure on roads and, when cycling generally (via separated carriageways) reaches a safety level at which people will no longer automatically reach for the car keys, and get out on the deadly treadly instead, reduced expenditure on health via the increased fitness/health of said cyclists.

My biggest problem is that I can't be bothered dealing with business clothes after riding into work, so I gave it up.
Click to expand...

Thats all very well but it has been piloted here quite a bit. It doesn't work and the program has subsequently been scaled back and abandoned. Who'da thought...
 
drstawl said:
It's a no-brainer that investment in getting people onto bikes and out of cars will reduce costs for everyone while allowing them to transport their sorry ass any way that they want while making it less annoying for all to do so.
Click to expand...

I agree to think it would work would indicate the absence of a brain.
 
drstawl said:
How far did they get in building this to determine if it would work?
Click to expand...

Completed, many of the new towns here have miles of dedicated cycle ways. They are pretty much unused. Seems the cyclists prefer to use the highway. It's been piloted in some areas of London, same result but cycles go where the fuck they like there anyway. Always have. Cambridge is also a cycle town and it's a mess..
 
We have the same insanity here in Toronto. Total traffic gridlock for 4 hours in the morning and 4 hours of the same when everyone goes back home. And yes, bike lanes all over the place that barely get used and especially so in the winter when only a handful of the Kamikaze bike couriers are out. They pissed away hundred of millions on this shit while the water and sewer infrastructure is falling apart faster then they can patch it up. :facepalm:

Cheers! :)
 
I dont believe the stats. Because no one is supplying any. There's a section of bike path that feeds into the Docklands area of the Melbourne CBD and throngs or cyclists glide past the banked up traffic every morning and arvo. So, there's my anecdotal evidence.

Dedicated elevated bike ways would work, at least in sport savvy/semi socialist Australia.

Links pls to the failed bike path projects, and, no, not the failed bike path sections interspersed with 10 km of negotiating road traffic, but dedicated bike carriageways like in the OP's proposal.

Next we need to lapse office dress codes and have staggered business hours.
 
lol... so now the onus of justification lies with those who think they are a waste of money and not those that want them,...lol

The evidence is out there find them. Take a look around. Come to the UK on any but about two weeks of the year.

Seriously you can have as many cycleways as you like but in return cycles should be barred from using motor traffic highways, pavements/sidewalks, one way streets the wrong way, they should be made to demonstrate a level of awareness and proficiency and made to accountable with insurance or otherwise for the accidents and chaos they cause. They should also be made to pay for their upkeep.

I cycle quite a bit BTW did I mention that...? Yes Mutt you did, and you mentioned that you are often appalled by the attitude and behavior of many many cyclists..:thumbs up:
 
muttley600 said:
lol... so now the onus of justification lies with those who think they are a waste of money and not those that want them,...lol

The evidence is out there find them. Take a look around. Come to the UK on any but about two weeks of the year.

Seriously you can have as many cycleways as you like but in return cycles should be barred from using motor traffic highways, pavements/sidewalks, one way streets the wrong way, they should be made to demonstrate a level of awareness and proficiency and made to accountable with insurance or otherwise for the accidents and chaos they cause. They should also be made to pay for their upkeep.

I cycle quite a bit BTW did I mention that...? Yes Mutt you did, and you mentioned that you are often appalled by the attitude and behavior of many many cyclists..:thumbs up:
Click to expand...
So am I, but I'm not the bicycle etiquette police so I'm not going to chase these jerks down and tell them how embarrassed I am about their behavior.

Your logic states that the program, is, in your estimation, a failure because it has not resulted in cyclists being banned from sharing the road with motorists. In a transportation context, the paths allotted for cyclists have to go somewhere, not just be pretty paved portions of park. The beautiful Santa Ana River Bike Trail pretty much bisects the County, but it can't take you where it doesn't go. That "last mile or 20" demands the shared use of ordinary roads.

Basically segregation is an improvement, not a panacea. Those who expect the latter will always believe that the idea has failed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top