Author Topic: Cycling infrastructure built to encourage commuting by bike?? Crazy talk!!  (Read 8513 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

shovelhd

  • Guest

You are so far right that you think Libertarians are leftist?  Yikes!

No. Read his statement again.

EDR

  • Guest
No. Read his statement again.


Okay then how can you call what I suggest a liberal idea. 


Do you think the our nations armed forces should be the defacto security force for oil company's?


Do you think that letting market forces decide on the type of transportation on chooses is a bad solution?


Do you think that Americans should pay with our blood and treasure to ensure low gasoline prices?


If answer yes to any of these you are closet Socialist.

Offline WCroadie

  • Forum Friend
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 9,344
  • Location: Not Philly, PA
    • Strava Profile
It will never work, people are too spread out for the public transportation to work and it would be impossible for me to ride to work in the fall/winter.  So if gas prices reach 5-6-7 dollars a gallon, I am screwed as are a whole bunch of others.  So where will the money to build up the public transportation infrastructure come from?  And buses run on fuel which would be costly making bus fare expensive too.


Not to mention being able to go grocery shopping, etc. there is no bus that goes from my house to the grocery store, how would we get to church, to my extended family?  There are absolutely no buses or trains where my dad lives, 14 miles west of here.


I wish I wasn't dependent on a car, but in the good ole U.S. of A., unless you live in the city, you are dependent on a car.  Well perhaps if I were single and had a different job I could make it work.
WC is the Debil.

RUOkie

  • Guest
Let alone what will happen to food prices once the trucking industry has to raise rates for transportation of food. And don't give me that "buy local" BS.  That would work for me, but not for the east coasters.

shovelhd

  • Guest

Okay then how can you call what I suggest a liberal idea. 


Do you think the our nations armed forces should be the defacto security force for oil company's?


Do you think that letting market forces decide on the type of transportation on chooses is a bad solution?


Do you think that Americans should pay with our blood and treasure to ensure low gasoline prices?


If answer yes to any of these you are closet Socialist.

According to you, maybe, but not me.

1. A ridiculous assumption, but one I have heard before. Doesn't deserve a yes or no answer.
2. No. This is America.
3. See #1. It's the same question phrased a different way.


EDR

  • Guest
According to you, maybe, but not me.

1. A ridiculous assumption, but one I have heard before. Doesn't deserve a yes or no answer.
2. No. This is America.
3. See #1. It's the same question phrased a different way.


So you don't see our armed forces and foreign defense policy's in any way ensuring the cheap flow of oil to the United States?  Or are you of the belief that we put the Shaw of Iran in power because he was a such a good guy. Or that we overlook all the human rights issues in Saudi Arabia because of anything other than oil. Or that nearly all the 9/11 attackers were from SA.


If tomorrow this country stopped being the defacto security force for big oil they would have to do this for themselves.  Then the free market would decide on how they would get from point A to point B. People wouldn't live 45 miles from work, cities would be build more rapid transit. Would it happen over night no of course not but it would happen. 


I love the right when you point out that this is how they claim the free market should work but baulk at the notion that it should be forced on Big Oil.  Or defense contractors. 




Offline globecanvas

  • Ninny
  • 2,000 and up!
  • **
  • Join Date: Mar 2012
  • Posts: 2,404
  • Location: The Gunks
    • Strava Profile
Everything comes out in the wash eventually.  Unsustainable policies end.  I just hope we reach the place where we have good cycling and public transportation infrastructure before we are in a crisis.

Quel

  • Guest
Until recently, I spent the last 5 years working with a few different groups in transportation, both on the alternative and conventional fuel side.  I wouldn't say it's the Navy subsidizing Exxon...I'd say it's support for a global economy that relies on cheap (not really cheap anymore...) oil.  It fuels every other American industry, including all their exports to all the other developing countries that rely on American products (and cheap oil!).  So it serves a much bigger purpose than enlarging the pocketbook of a few integrated oil companies.  It isn't so much a "cheap oil" factor as "stable oil" factor too. 


But EDR is right that it comes at a big cost too.  It upends city planning and rewards sprawl versus density.  It's overwhelmingly simplified, but I generally see people loving pedestrian life versus settling on car-bound life.   Most people (though not nearly all) that think otherwise just have never lived in a place where they could walk down the block to grab a gallon of milk. 


There's also a social factor.  Expensive cars and bigger and bigger homes have been the main status symbol for the last 50 years, but I think that's changing too. 


Anyway.  That's just rambling:)  Overall, I think things are moving in the right direction for pedestrian friendly infrastructure.  It will take a long time to change though.

dragonfly

  • Guest
why is the term "socialism" so bad?


The Netherlands has socialized medicine. Yes they pay a lot in taxes but the medical care is good and available to everyone. My grandmother is slowly going blind and as her vision gets worse she gains access to more and more aids to help her stay dependent. She pays very little or nothing for these services. To get that same level of care here would require a person to be independantly wealthy.


Why do people here think that socialized medicine is EVIL?


There are other "socialist" concepts that would go a long way to improving the quality of life of the average person here.  But put that term out there and it will never get the necessary vote because we have been brainwashed into categorizing anything with that label as bad or evil.  Drives me nuts!

rog

  • Guest
There are a ton of socialized programs here, from the yellow school bus program to VA hospitals. Don't tell a Republican that that's what they are, though! That's anti-American!

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

Offline ygduf

  • internet bully
  • Forum Friend
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 7,282
  • Location: Mountain View
    • Strava Profile
    • 2837
There are a ton of socialized programs here, from the yellow school bus program to VA hospitals. Don't tell a Republican that that's what they are, though! That's anti-American!



public schools, fire departments, police departments, utilities and public works, the military, etc... pretty much anything supported by taxes.


That said, the reason it's a dirty word is because the capitalists (who have all the money) have a vested (and invested) interest in making it a dirty word.




Offline WhyFi

  • General Member
  • *
  • Join Date: Feb 2012
  • Posts: 571
  • Member
The number of regular bicycle commuters in NYC has exploded in the last several years. Bike lanes, separated or not, were a big part of it. And I've got news for those that say that there just isn't enough room in their city to carve out lanes - you've got a hell of a lot more room than us. Have some car-lovin' folks been pissed off here and there? You bet, but that seems to have been a desired result - bike lanes in NYC have been laid down to control (slow down) traffic and discourage driving just as much as they've been laid down to encourage cycling. One particularly contentious bike lane, which narrowed the street from three to two traffic lanes, resulted in lowering average automobile speeds by ~10 mph or so, which brought traffic back in line with the speed limit.

It can be done, and it can be done with not much more than some buckets of paint if the transportation czar has brass balls and a plan. 
« Last Edit: July 20, 2012, 06:23:28 PM by WhyFi »

Offline WCroadie

  • Forum Friend
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 9,344
  • Location: Not Philly, PA
    • Strava Profile
The number of regular bicycle commuters in NYC has exploded in the last several years. Bike lanes, separated or not, were a big part of it. And I've got news for those that say that there just isn't enough room in their city to carve out lanes - you've got a hell of a lot more room than us. Have some car-lovin' folks been pissed off here and there? You bet, but that seems to have been a desired result - bike lanes in NYC have been laid down to control (slow down) traffic and discourage driving just as much as they've been laid down to encourage cycling. One particularly contentious bike lane, which narrowed the street from three to two traffic lanes, resulted in lowering average automobile speeds by ~10 mph or so, which brought traffic back in line with the speed limit.

It can be done, and it can be done with not much more than some buckets of paint if the transportation czar has brass balls and a plan.
That's key. Most won't cause it will upset the majority and that will hurt his/her chances of getting re-elected
WC is the Debil.

shovelhd

  • Guest

So you don't see our armed forces and foreign defense policy's in any way ensuring the cheap flow of oil to the United States?  Or are you of the belief that we put the Shaw of Iran in power because he was a such a good guy. Or that we overlook all the human rights issues in Saudi Arabia because of anything other than oil. Or that nearly all the 9/11 attackers were from SA.


If tomorrow this country stopped being the defacto security force for big oil they would have to do this for themselves.  Then the free market would decide on how they would get from point A to point B. People wouldn't live 45 miles from work, cities would be build more rapid transit. Would it happen over night no of course not but it would happen. 


I love the right when you point out that this is how they claim the free market should work but baulk at the notion that it should be forced on Big Oil.  Or defense contractors.


No I don't. I simply do not believe that the price of oil is primarily dictated by our political relationship with the Middle Eastern oil producing countries, and all the stuff you imply that revolves around that. I think that's a simplistic, myopic view. Please note that I do not believe that you are a simplistic, myopic person. Quite the opposite. You are a bright, intellectually captivating person. I am referring only to the argument that you are making.

The price of oil and oil products is complex, too complex to distill into a simple political argument. A significant chunk of our oil comes from a cartel over which we have little to no influence. The price of oil in America as primarily driven by commodities speculators, who can give any reason under the sun for why they think oil futures should go up or down. These are the people that directly affect your everyday life by altering you household cash flow. Those are the people you should be angry at.

Removing the political angle, you're preaching to the choir here. Remember that, when I can, I commute to work by bike, under almost any conditions. I built a bike specifically for commuting, so that I can commute in the dark, in the winter, down to the teens. I am passionate about bicycle commuting. I would gladly pay, say, 5 cents more per gallon of gas if I knew that at least half of the money would go directly to building more bike paths, support bike share programs, cycling clubs, etc. The problem with the gas tax, like almost every other tax, is that it never really goes to the intended use. It just becomes another tax.

Of course, we all know that the real reason that I disagree with you is because I don't want the roads clogged with Freds on bikes like 1950's Shanghai.

Quel

  • Guest
The price of oil is like anything else.  Supply and demand.  Tons of demand and limited supply.  It makes for volatile and elastic situation, where speculators and relatively minor supply disruptions can play bigger roles than you'd think.  I don't think that either speculators or mid-east policy are the primary drivers, but both are big factors. 

The federal gas tax goes almost entirely in to the Highway Trust Fund, so its one you don't have to worry about from that angle.  None of it goes to the general coffers to be available for anything else.