4 ms·
Not electric motorcycles? They are electric AND require less energy to move from point A to B.
by GrayTextIsTruth 7y ago
Not electric motorcycles? They are electric AND require less energy to move from point A to B.
- gpm 7y agoThey probably require a lot more doctor time to move from point A to point B though.
- llampx 7y agoCars make everyone require a lot more doctor time in the form of treatments for asthma, bronchitis and obesity. Not to mention in the form of making driving so boring that drivers fill the time with texting and cause accidents, killing cyclists in the process.
- devmunchies 7y agoAnd? its an environmental initiative. I'm fine with more human risk. Its the greener option. This is Germany too, so there's already a lot more riders than in the US so drivers are accustomed to see them.
- gpm 7y agoAnd the subsidized medical system is already subsidizing your bike. Call it an environmental subsidy for your bike if you wish. (I don't actually know how healthcare works in Germany, not being German, but I assume it's like other first world countries in that it's subsidized by taxpayers).
- devmunchies 7y agomotorcycle accidents are overwhelmingly caused by car drivers who weren't paying attention. So why would any medical cost be blamed on the motorcyclists?
- Tepix 7y agoI'd like to see them subsidize ebikes (pedelecs) more. Currently you can get a tax break but that's it.
- newnewpdro 7y agoAnd substantially less safe...
- devmunchies 7y agoAnd it'd be safer if more people were subsidized to buy them. Safety in numbers. And aren't we in a climate crisis? If its a question of environmentalism my 125cc minibike gets 150mpg. Its greener than a Tesla.
- newnewpdro 7y agoMotorcycles will never be as safe as cars, period. Source: an experienced rider with over 100,000 miles riding all over the USA and teacher of multiple new riders.
- devmunchies 7y agoDuh, man. Not once did I say they were safer than cars. > over 100,000 miles riding all over the USA Yeah that's actually a good argument for not subsidizing them since it encourages non-green behavior—driving all over the country on joy rides.
- newnewpdro 7y ago> Yeah that's actually a good argument for not subsidizing them since it encourages non-green behavior—driving all over the country on joy rides. More people road-trip in cars than motorcycles. Even among motorcyclists, in the US it's been more common to transport bikes across the country to attend events like Sturgis, Bikeweek, or to ride "the tail of the dragon", than do the trips on two wheels. My extensive touring on two wheels is the exception not the norm, it's fairly unusual, uncomfortable, unsafe, expensive, and inconvenient. This activity isn't even a blip on the environmental impact radar, and never will be. Motorcycles are firmly in recreational use territory, promoting them from an environmental perspective is utterly misguided. People will often be buying them in addition to other more practical and safe vehicles. It's just more consumerism, they'll never represent a bulk of miles traveled nation-wide, but will always cost resources to manufacture. I grew up in the midwest where there's quite a lot of "lifestyle" bikers, their garage queen bikes are ridden so little you can arbitrage buying barely used bikes from the midwest by selling them on the coasts.
- rasz 7y agoVW doesnt plan to make any.