> > 30 miles is my warm up/recovery distance > That's absurd and you know it. That is wilful rejection of facts. You defined the upper bound of possibility b

> > 30 miles is my warm up/recovery distance > That's absurd and you know it. That is wilful rejection of facts. You defined the upper bound of possibility by invoking crazy fitness nuts - well, here I am to tell you how wrong you were. > You expect regular people to ride 1-2 hours to work each day? I know many people (who would not describe themselves as "crazy fitness nuts") who do just that. Yes, they do rely on high quality end-of-trip facilities, but many of our urban employers and councils now offer these. I also know people who commute in a car for longer than that. As commute durations go, measurement in hours is far from unusual. > Completely absurd and out of touch with reality. That's insane pacing - that's race pacing It's true. I won at least one nationally sanctioned bike race every year from 2011-2015. Sorry, what was your problem with that? You invoke crazy fitness nuts, we show up like Candyman. > Most cyclists will do 20-30 miles for an entire ride Again, I was speaking to your incorrect claim of the upper bound of the possible. But sure, move the goalposts if you like, because: > You probably work at an area near the train station then - perhaps a Downtown location or similar I simply live in a country and a state that didn't pathetically lowball its rail infrastructure and intermodal transit options. > actual working circumstances for many people You get what you voted for, based on what you believed was possible, and suggesting things are impossible is just wilful, pig-headed rejection of what can be achieved if the people actually want it, with the simple evidence that it's been achieved elsewhere. Cars are a useful tool, but the claim that they simply are an essential element of a functioning modern society begs the question of why certain societies are so automobile dependent, and wilfully ignores those that aren't.