5 ms·
>There is no institutional inertia or political organizing involved in walking, riding your bike, or taking the bus for your next trip. you're right, Inertia i
by bluntfang 9y ago
>There is no institutional inertia or political organizing involved in walking, riding your bike, or taking the bus for your next trip.
you're right, Inertia isn't the right word. More like "institutional aggression against not using cars".
Go to town hall meetings in developing cities about installing bike lanes. Many people, even when presenting with well done studies that state the contrary, believe biking and bike lanes will take from their profits. Taking away a parking spot for a bike lane or funding public transportation just doesn't happen as much as it could in urban areas today.
- closeparen 9y agoAgain, developing infrastructure is distinct from influencing mode choices under existing infrastructure. "Driving is far and away your best option today" and "we should add a bike lane" are simultaneously true.
- ergothus 9y agoI don't share your confidence in the distinction. Both statements can be true today, but as a result of those being true people will not build bike lanes and will cater to drivers. The fewer bike riders you have, the less it is that likely new development will accommodate bike riders, which means you have even fewer bike riders. Obviously people CAN overcome these tendencies, but it requires a stronger push (which is why we have unhappy bike riders everywhere, or Americans that disapprove of the electoral college, or terrible public transit) "Inertia" seems a very apt metaphor.