3 ms·

I think you got it backwards mate. your basically asking hundreds of thousands of cars to suffer in favor of a few hundred bicyclists. Most people who bike st

I think you got it backwards mate. your basically asking hundreds of thousands of cars to suffer in favor of a few hundred bicyclists. Most people who bike strangely think most people want to bike but just cant. most dont want to. as an aging nation, most cant.

dfgdghdf 6y ago
We can't all drive though. There is not physically enough space in an urban environment. If you don't provide good alternatives - cycling is one, trains and buses are also key - then everyone will be stuck in traffic.
- autokad 6y ago
  I didn't say we all should drive. I am just pointing out the backwards logic of the commenter, which I am 100% correct on. Hint: I don't drive, I walk.
sergeykish 6y ago
Imagine if we decided to completely eliminate sidewalk, how would it change traffic? It is not about forcing others, it is about freedom of choice. Bycicle is just one of the modes of transportation. People without choice have to use car.
- autokad 6y ago
  that's a strawman. and also not very much. A lot of places either have no sidewalk or were already designed with a side walk and street in mind. so given that side walks usually don't even have enough space for a full lane of traffic, it would have 0 impact on traffic. Personally, I think subways should be the backbone of every city transportation system. But surprisingly even very environmentally conscious cities choose to forgo subway systems.
  - sergeykish 6y ago
    Yes, that's a strawman. Subways, roads and no sidewalk at all. And your answer is 0... How? Bridges and tunnels between buildings? People evolving to fly? Every person would require door to door taxi — tremendous increase in traffic. Same with bike lanes, take them away from Amsterdam and city would choke. Every Amsterdam driver benefits from less cars on the road.

3 ms·

I think you got it backwards mate. your basically asking hundreds of thousands of cars to suffer in favor of a few hundred bicyclists. Most people who bike st

by autokad 6y ago

dfgdghdf 6y ago
We can't all drive though. There is not physically enough space in an urban environment. If you don't provide good alternatives - cycling is one, trains and buses are also key - then everyone will be stuck in traffic.
- autokad 6y ago
  I didn't say we all should drive. I am just pointing out the backwards logic of the commenter, which I am 100% correct on. Hint: I don't drive, I walk.
sergeykish 6y ago
Imagine if we decided to completely eliminate sidewalk, how would it change traffic? It is not about forcing others, it is about freedom of choice. Bycicle is just one of the modes of transportation. People without choice have to use car.
- autokad 6y ago
  that's a strawman. and also not very much. A lot of places either have no sidewalk or were already designed with a side walk and street in mind. so given that side walks usually don't even have enough space for a full lane of traffic, it would have 0 impact on traffic. Personally, I think subways should be the backbone of every city transportation system. But surprisingly even very environmentally conscious cities choose to forgo subway systems.
  - sergeykish 6y ago
    Yes, that's a strawman. Subways, roads and no sidewalk at all. And your answer is 0... How? Bridges and tunnels between buildings? People evolving to fly? Every person would require door to door taxi — tremendous increase in traffic. Same with bike lanes, take them away from Amsterdam and city would choke. Every Amsterdam driver benefits from less cars on the road.