2 ms·

Little of what you said is based on fact, only grievance. Very few cities in the us are actively anti car, and the ones that are, are dense enough that vehicle

by karlgkk 2mo ago

Little of what you said is based on fact, only grievance. Very few cities in the us are actively anti car, and the ones that are, are dense enough that vehicle emissions are a local problem for them. We’re not demanding evs for ourselves, we’re demanding gas cars stop gassing our homes. You want to drive a v8 dually? Great, go nuts! Keep it out of SF!

echelon 2mo ago
> only grievance They're ripping up lanes of traffic in my city and replacing them with bike lanes that nobody uses. The busy intersection next to my home used to take all of 15 seconds to turn at, now I get stuck for five to six minutes at a time because they now forbid right turns on red and stuck left turners in front of right turners. Meanwhile, nobody is using the bike lanes. The bike lanes are gender and age inequitable, favor low-commercial activity, and hamper productive economic activities. Not only that, but they're unusable in inclement and hot weather, which my city experiences frequently. I drive a car because I'm buying things, traveling with family, and spending hundreds of dollars. People on bikes are not doing these things and are not contributing to the tax base as much as car drivers. A typical bike rider's coffee and book reading activities do not match a trip to Target and a local restaurant with family in terms of economic impact. Now multiply that times every car rider who is being delayed and disrupted. All of this spending is now being delayed or even prevented. We're going to feel really silly when we need more lanes for all the autonomous vehicles that will come online in the next 15 years. Autonomous vehicles - transportation, logistics, last mile delivery, ordering robotics services, etc. - are going to be a billion times more important than bikes. Just go to a park or get a gym membership if you want to exercise. Or, better yet, take your bike with you on your car and drive to the countryside trails.
- steve_gh 2mo ago
  I think it takes time for demand to build. Certainly cities like London have seen huge growth in bike use. In my own home town(which is by no means flat) I'm seeing lots of cargo bikes, especially around tge school run. To your point on bike owners not contributing to the economy. They probably have a similar income, and are paying similar taxes. They are still buying groceries. But where they choose to spend their money is different. It's all still economic activity though.
- Oanid 2mo ago
  > People on bikes are not doing these things and are not contributing to the tax base as much as car drivers If you live in car dependent suburbia, sure. And it sounds like you do. And again, little of what you said is based on fact, only grievance.
  - quantified 2mo ago
    As someone who enjoys riding their own bike, but uses their car for needs that cannot be met by bikes, I don't think this is just grievance. You can be sour about reality. SF in particular can be a pain in the butt. There are scearios where public transit works, and many where it doesn't. Biking there from anywhere else is not viable. I need to drive into it in cases when transit doesn't work, and the city is hostile to me trying to spend money. Great for some of its own residents, not for all of them, definitely not for visitors.
    - rsynnott 2mo ago
      ... What do you want them to do, demolish buildings to widen the roads? Like, there are limits. > Great for some of its own residents, not for all of them, definitely not for visitors. Cities primarily exist for the convenience of the people who live and work in them, not for people visiting them.
- anon7000 2mo ago
  No turn on red is a pedestrian safety issue. Many intersections don’t have adequate visibility, and right on red is very frequently dicey. So I’m glad that my city (Seattle) is banning it. That’s different for small-town low-traffic areas. On bike lanes, it takes up such a tiny amount of space relative to cars. The real problem is that they are not put in with much thought, not made very safe and are ultimately not very attractive. But in cities with a higher level of decent bike lanes (Seattle), you’ll absolutely get many people using them. But it also depends on the culture. Reality is that Seattle is geographically constrained, and I’m sorry, there is no room for more car lanes essentially anywhere in the city without destroying property. So finding smarter, more efficient, cost-effective ways to use that space (like bikes and public transit, which are vastly more space efficient) is a fantastic idea. If you go all-in on car infra (eg everywhere in the USA, including places like Seattle), you still get congested roads. Cars just use space so poorly that a small increase in number of cars when the streets are full will have massive compounding effect on how long it takes anyone to get anywhere. Besides, your city is already fully designed around the MOST EXPENSIVE form of local transit, by far. You know what might help stimulate the economy? Make it easy for someone to take a bike to a restaurant. No gas or car payment (or parking, in the city), and now you might have more money to treat yourself
  - pmontra 2mo ago
    > That’s different for small-town low-traffic areas. The two towns close to my home (10k and 5k people each) have 3 and 2 traffic lights. It's a different world with different problems and different solutions than the ones of the cities with 1M people one hour away. It could be a different country with different legislation.
- imtringued 2mo ago
  Right turn on red is an insane idea that any sane person would heavily disagree with. Only North Americans are crazy enough to believe that a red light should mean go. >The bike lanes are gender and age inequitable, How? Everyone can ride a bicycle, even kids and seniors, meanwhile cars are locked behind expensive driving lessons, licenses and exams. Not to mention car ownership is inherently expensive due to fuel, maintenance and insurance requirements. E-bikes give anyone a motor assist and can carry you uphill without any problems while still being good for your health. >and hamper productive economic activities. Most productive economic activities just require people to show up to work. Buying something is not a productive activity by definition and nobody is suggesting that deliveries should be done on bicycles. >I drive a car because I'm buying things, traveling with family, and spending hundreds of dollars. People on bikes are not doing these things and are not contributing to the tax base as much as car drivers. Ok now this is turning into a parody. Do you know what's even more expensive than driving a car? Building and maintaining a road for cars. European bike lanes cost almost nothing in maintenance. Sprawl in North America is actively bankrupting cities because drivers don't bring in enough tax revenue to maintain the roads they drive on. Driving to a property tax optimized big box store at the outskirts of the city doesn't bring in as much property tax as you think it does.
  - jjav 2mo ago
    > Right turn on red is an insane idea that any sane person would heavily disagree with. Obviously not since it is so widely adopted. Right on red is an extremely useful optimization so you don't sit waiting for nothing when it is clearly safe to turn.
    - dns_snek 2mo ago
      If you want to optimize traffic throughput you can replace numerous intersections with roundabouts. Then everyone can go when it's "clearly safe to go", not just those who are turning right. An optimization that sacrifices the lives of cyclists and pedestrians is not acceptable.
      - jjav 2mo ago
- alextingle 2mo ago
  Just get a bike, and stop moaning.
- magicalhippo 2mo ago
  Here in Oslo, Norway they've also been ripping up roads to make bike lanes, make streets one-way to accommodate the bike lane and so on. And yeah, initially not a lot of bikers. But it's been a few years, and in the meantime good e-bikes are affordable for most here now, so these days there's quite a lot of bike riders all over. Of course when the snow and ice sets in there are fewer, though a fair few carry on with studded tires and good clothing. It took some years but there's no denying there are significantly more people riding bikes to and from work, to and from kindergarten or similar. Build it and they will come...
  - pmontra 2mo ago
    However I can see my 80 yo self driving a car (I know plenty of them that still drive) but I can't see my 80 yo self riding a bicycle in winter, especially on snow. I know some 80 yo cyclist but not many of them. So there must be some balance. In cities the balance often takes into account metro, buses and trains. In the countryside it's almost only cars.
    - dns_snek 2mo ago
      Of course it's different in the countryside but we're talking about cities, that's where these changes are taking place, and most 80 year olds shouldn't be driving cars in cities or riding bicycles in the winter. They should have heavily subsidized or free public transport available.
      - magicalhippo 2mo ago
        Yeah my 80 year old mom uses the "pink busses"[1], basically a multi-passenger taxi where she books a trip in advance and they go from A to B, but also the other's trips. So takes a bit longer but it doesn't cost more than a regular bus. [1]: https://ruter.no/planlegg-reise/aldersvennlig-transport https://ruter.no/planlegg-reise/aldersvennlig-transport
- rsynnott 2mo ago
  > A typical bike rider's coffee and book reading activities do not match a trip to Target and a local restaurant with family in terms of economic impact. ... Most people going into cities, whether on bikes or cars or trains or buses or the largely fictitious VTOL aircraft from the article, are doing so to _work_, not to buy stuff. "Buying stuff" has been shifting away from city centers for about fifty years, initially via retail parks, then the internet.

by karlgkk 2mo ago

echelon 2mo ago

> only grievance They're ripping up lanes of traffic in my city and replacing them with bike lanes that nobody uses. The busy intersection next to my home used to take all of 15 seconds to turn at, now I get stuck for five to six minutes at a time because they now forbid right turns on red and stuck left turners in front of right turners. Meanwhile, nobody is using the bike lanes. The bike lanes are gender and age inequitable, favor low-commercial activity, and hamper productive economic activities. Not only that, but they're unusable in inclement and hot weather, which my city experiences frequently. I drive a car because I'm buying things, traveling with family, and spending hundreds of dollars. People on bikes are not doing these things and are not contributing to the tax base as much as car drivers. A typical bike rider's coffee and book reading activities do not match a trip to Target and a local restaurant with family in terms of economic impact. Now multiply that times every car rider who is being delayed and disrupted. All of this spending is now being delayed or even prevented. We're going to feel really silly when we need more lanes for all the autonomous vehicles that will come online in the next 15 years. Autonomous vehicles - transportation, logistics, last mile delivery, ordering robotics services, etc. - are going to be a billion times more important than bikes. Just go to a park or get a gym membership if you want to exercise. Or, better yet, take your bike with you on your car and drive to the countryside trails.

steve_gh 2mo ago
I think it takes time for demand to build. Certainly cities like London have seen huge growth in bike use. In my own home town(which is by no means flat) I'm seeing lots of cargo bikes, especially around tge school run. To your point on bike owners not contributing to the economy. They probably have a similar income, and are paying similar taxes. They are still buying groceries. But where they choose to spend their money is different. It's all still economic activity though.
Oanid 2mo ago
> People on bikes are not doing these things and are not contributing to the tax base as much as car drivers If you live in car dependent suburbia, sure. And it sounds like you do. And again, little of what you said is based on fact, only grievance.
- quantified 2mo ago
  As someone who enjoys riding their own bike, but uses their car for needs that cannot be met by bikes, I don't think this is just grievance. You can be sour about reality. SF in particular can be a pain in the butt. There are scearios where public transit works, and many where it doesn't. Biking there from anywhere else is not viable. I need to drive into it in cases when transit doesn't work, and the city is hostile to me trying to spend money. Great for some of its own residents, not for all of them, definitely not for visitors.
  - rsynnott 2mo ago
    ... What do you want them to do, demolish buildings to widen the roads? Like, there are limits. > Great for some of its own residents, not for all of them, definitely not for visitors. Cities primarily exist for the convenience of the people who live and work in them, not for people visiting them.
anon7000 2mo ago
No turn on red is a pedestrian safety issue. Many intersections don’t have adequate visibility, and right on red is very frequently dicey. So I’m glad that my city (Seattle) is banning it. That’s different for small-town low-traffic areas. On bike lanes, it takes up such a tiny amount of space relative to cars. The real problem is that they are not put in with much thought, not made very safe and are ultimately not very attractive. But in cities with a higher level of decent bike lanes (Seattle), you’ll absolutely get many people using them. But it also depends on the culture. Reality is that Seattle is geographically constrained, and I’m sorry, there is no room for more car lanes essentially anywhere in the city without destroying property. So finding smarter, more efficient, cost-effective ways to use that space (like bikes and public transit, which are vastly more space efficient) is a fantastic idea. If you go all-in on car infra (eg everywhere in the USA, including places like Seattle), you still get congested roads. Cars just use space so poorly that a small increase in number of cars when the streets are full will have massive compounding effect on how long it takes anyone to get anywhere. Besides, your city is already fully designed around the MOST EXPENSIVE form of local transit, by far. You know what might help stimulate the economy? Make it easy for someone to take a bike to a restaurant. No gas or car payment (or parking, in the city), and now you might have more money to treat yourself
- pmontra 2mo ago
  > That’s different for small-town low-traffic areas. The two towns close to my home (10k and 5k people each) have 3 and 2 traffic lights. It's a different world with different problems and different solutions than the ones of the cities with 1M people one hour away. It could be a different country with different legislation.
imtringued 2mo ago
Right turn on red is an insane idea that any sane person would heavily disagree with. Only North Americans are crazy enough to believe that a red light should mean go. >The bike lanes are gender and age inequitable, How? Everyone can ride a bicycle, even kids and seniors, meanwhile cars are locked behind expensive driving lessons, licenses and exams. Not to mention car ownership is inherently expensive due to fuel, maintenance and insurance requirements. E-bikes give anyone a motor assist and can carry you uphill without any problems while still being good for your health. >and hamper productive economic activities. Most productive economic activities just require people to show up to work. Buying something is not a productive activity by definition and nobody is suggesting that deliveries should be done on bicycles. >I drive a car because I'm buying things, traveling with family, and spending hundreds of dollars. People on bikes are not doing these things and are not contributing to the tax base as much as car drivers. Ok now this is turning into a parody. Do you know what's even more expensive than driving a car? Building and maintaining a road for cars. European bike lanes cost almost nothing in maintenance. Sprawl in North America is actively bankrupting cities because drivers don't bring in enough tax revenue to maintain the roads they drive on. Driving to a property tax optimized big box store at the outskirts of the city doesn't bring in as much property tax as you think it does.
- jjav 2mo ago
  > Right turn on red is an insane idea that any sane person would heavily disagree with. Obviously not since it is so widely adopted. Right on red is an extremely useful optimization so you don't sit waiting for nothing when it is clearly safe to turn.
  - dns_snek 2mo ago
    If you want to optimize traffic throughput you can replace numerous intersections with roundabouts. Then everyone can go when it's "clearly safe to go", not just those who are turning right. An optimization that sacrifices the lives of cyclists and pedestrians is not acceptable.
    - jjav 2mo ago
alextingle 2mo ago
Just get a bike, and stop moaning.
magicalhippo 2mo ago
Here in Oslo, Norway they've also been ripping up roads to make bike lanes, make streets one-way to accommodate the bike lane and so on. And yeah, initially not a lot of bikers. But it's been a few years, and in the meantime good e-bikes are affordable for most here now, so these days there's quite a lot of bike riders all over. Of course when the snow and ice sets in there are fewer, though a fair few carry on with studded tires and good clothing. It took some years but there's no denying there are significantly more people riding bikes to and from work, to and from kindergarten or similar. Build it and they will come...
- pmontra 2mo ago
  However I can see my 80 yo self driving a car (I know plenty of them that still drive) but I can't see my 80 yo self riding a bicycle in winter, especially on snow. I know some 80 yo cyclist but not many of them. So there must be some balance. In cities the balance often takes into account metro, buses and trains. In the countryside it's almost only cars.
  - dns_snek 2mo ago
    Of course it's different in the countryside but we're talking about cities, that's where these changes are taking place, and most 80 year olds shouldn't be driving cars in cities or riding bicycles in the winter. They should have heavily subsidized or free public transport available.
    - magicalhippo 2mo ago
      Yeah my 80 year old mom uses the "pink busses"[1], basically a multi-passenger taxi where she books a trip in advance and they go from A to B, but also the other's trips. So takes a bit longer but it doesn't cost more than a regular bus. [1]: https://ruter.no/planlegg-reise/aldersvennlig-transport https://ruter.no/planlegg-reise/aldersvennlig-transport
rsynnott 2mo ago
> A typical bike rider's coffee and book reading activities do not match a trip to Target and a local restaurant with family in terms of economic impact. ... Most people going into cities, whether on bikes or cars or trains or buses or the largely fictitious VTOL aircraft from the article, are doing so to _work_, not to buy stuff. "Buying stuff" has been shifting away from city centers for about fifty years, initially via retail parks, then the internet.