I was hit by a bicycle - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about sports cars, aeroplanes, ships, rockets etc.

Moderator: PoFo The Lounge Mods

#14949363
SolarCross wrote:Not discussing them is ignoring them.

As for downtown car banning, people should watch out if ideologues disguise themselves as pragmatists to slip in through election.


So we agree that the discussion about limiting car use inside cities has no impact either way on rural popualtions, and so it makes no sense to complain about how urbanites are supposedly pretending that rural people do not exist or are apathetic about how this affects rural people.

As for your other fear, it does not seem like an argument nor is it relevant.
#14949367
@Pants-of-dog they take up as good as a full lane because you need to give them a full car width when overtaking.

I am speaking from my own experience of course which consists of country lanes rather than the inner City where they make a bit more sense.

In terms of money, motorists in the uk are milked to the hilt where As roads are badly underfunded.

Note that trains are subsidised, as are bikes which are both middle class dominated. Cars on the other hand are classless.

Of course the likes of Corbyn is obsessed with middle class subsidies like railways and tuition fees but I digress ....
#14949369
layman wrote:@Pants-of-dog they take up as good as a full lane because you need to give them a full car width when overtaking.


Not really, no.

Mos motorists pass me with less than that. But even if this is the case, this means they take up no more space than a car.

I am speaking from my own experience of course which consists of country lanes rather than the inner City where they make a bit more sense.


People who cannot afford a car still need to get around.

In terms of money, motorists in the uk are milked to the hilt where As roads are badly underfunded.


The UK is the only country that I know of where motorists actually pay the full price of road building and maintenance. Mind you, bicycling does not significantly wear down roads, while motor traffic does.

Note that trains are subsidised, as are bikes which are both middle class dominated. Cars on the other hand are classless.

Of course the likes of Corbyn is obsessed with middle class subsidies like railways and tuition fees but I digress ....


In my neighbourhood, bikes are for poor people, cars are for middle class people.

And not surprisingly, all the bike paths are built in the richer parts of the city.
By layman
#14949382
You are required to leave a full car width when overtaking in the uk. This means cars, busses and business vehicles are slowed down considerably being stuck behind them.

The poor and working class in the uk very much rely on cars and vans but have to pay largely flat taxes.

Bikes are not a progressive thing here. They are not a realistic solution to the environment, and are Disproportionately used by the middle class. The people who’s modest incomes are most impacted by congested roads and road hogs are working class. Taxi drivers, lorry drivers, white van man etc ...

I think the uk might be an exception for a lot of this but that’s my perspective.
#14949431
layman wrote:You are required to leave a full car width when overtaking in the uk. This means cars, busses and business vehicles are slowed down considerably being stuck behind them.


For all I know, we have the same law here. Anyway, this seems more like a criticism of that law than a criticism of bikes.

And when I pass cars, I must give them a full lane by necessity. Cars are not better than bikes in this regard.

The poor and working class in the uk very much rely on cars and vans but have to pay largely flat taxes.


Even if this is true for the UK, it is not the same everywhere. Bicycles are far more cost effective than cars.

Bikes are not a progressive thing here. They are not a realistic solution to the environment, and are Disproportionately used by the middle class. The people who’s modest incomes are most impacted by congested roads and road hogs are working class. Taxi drivers, lorry drivers, white van man etc ...

I think the uk might be an exception for a lot of this but that’s my perspective.


Again, bicycles are not responsible for most road congestion. In my experience, work vehicles (construction, delivery, moving) or rush hour traffic are responsible for far more congestion.
#14949479
layman wrote:Bikes are road hogs. They dont pay tax for the upkeep of the roads but slow down the flow of traffic, usually in an obnoxious and self righteous way.

They should be grateful for the cycle lanes the tax payer subsidies for them and stick to those.

In short they should be restricted to a play/weekend thing. Not a mode of transport. Not for grown ups anyways.


Thanks for posting these three popular lies that car-owned media often publish (to the joy of all those advertising bucks from car and oil companies), and that social media agents are paid to post in comments sections.

But these aren't the LIE I was referring to in the OP. The lie that the OP refutes is the "bikes are dangerous like cars... are a vehicle like cars... can kill you like cars..."

OP review: I was hit by a bicycle, and the cyclist was hurt and fell off his bike.

If you want to argue in favor of the car-brained LIE in the OP, just tell us your story about that one time when you were hit by a cement mixer, and the driver fell out of the vehicle and was hurt while you just kept on walking... Then you will have proven the car-brained LIE that I have chosen to mock.
User avatar
By Godstud
#14949483
Everything you have is shipped by motor vehicle from far away places. Even your bicycle. Your anti-car rhetoric is childish, and myopic, @QatzelOk.
#14949489
Godstud wrote:Everything you have is shipped by motor vehicle from far away places. Even your bicycle. Your anti-car rhetoric is childish, and myopic, @QatzelOk.

Yes, and all cotton shirts were produced by slaves in 1800, so fighing slavery was equally childish and myopic.

Human Extinction is obviously realistic for you, and survival is impractical. If I may make a recommendation: stop watching commercial propaganda. Now.

The human race will be thankful if you do this.
By Sivad
#14949559
By layman
#14949610
@Pants-of-dog i never said they are responsible for most congestion. Obviously there are far fewer of them. If there were as many bikes as cars in these roads then cars would be useless and unable to move. Commerce would dry up and people would literally starve.

The reason this doesn’t happen is most people are sensible enough to use them for liesure, not transport.
#14949631
Pants-of-dog wrote:Again, bicycles are not responsible for most road congestion. In my experience, work vehicles (construction, delivery, moving) or rush hour traffic are responsible for far more congestion.

That is because most people don't ride them, if you had your way most people would. For those that don't fetishise the bicycle like it was some holy object, bikes have a narrow utility for a narrow demographic but for those people and uses outside that bikes are a poor solution. Think about this: a single light truck can carry a few tons of goods on a chassis scarcely bigger than a regular car. If you wanted to distribute those goods by bike, you'd need a thousand bikes and a thousand riders and what would that do for congestion?

What you don't understand is that cars are more popular than bikes not because people are stupid but because they are much better than bikes for a much wider range of uses, so much so that they still come out as the better choice despite being a lot more expensive.

A good city planner does not push people into his fetishes but tries to facilitate what people want to do.
Last edited by SolarCross on 29 Sep 2018 04:17, edited 1 time in total.
#14949636
It depends very much on where you live. In South Africa, you need a car if you want to get most places. In southern California, you don't necessarily need a car, but it's a necessity of life to have one. Public transportation exists, but it can be pretty inconvenient and not very pleasant.

In big cities, you don't need a car. You can get by in New York City and Shanghai equally well without a car. Here in Shanghai, the vast majority of people walk, use the metro system, the buses, taxi services, and also bikes. You don't need a taxi service most of the time: it provides a quick convenience, but it obviously costs more than the other options. If you have a lot of goods and heavy objects, you can simply have it delivered. There are people and businesses with cars and trucks who provide such services. Also, owning a car is very expensive, so most people simply don't have one.

In big cities like that, it makes perfect sense for urban planners to encourage people to use public transportation, bicycles, and so on, and for less people to own cars. In other places the situation is different.
#14949658
layman wrote:@Pants-of-dog i never said they are responsible for most congestion. Obviously there are far fewer of them. If there were as many bikes as cars in these roads then cars would be useless and unable to move. Commerce would dry up and people would literally starve.

The reason this doesn’t happen is most people are sensible enough to use them for liesure, not transport.


This sounds very unrealistic.

Considering the fact that cars take up more space and an individual car causes more congestion than an individual bike, it would make more sense to argue that there would be significantly less congestion.

-----------------

@SolarCross

Do you have an actual argument?
#14949841
Have a good day, SC!

Also, your first claim that cars are perfectly safe unless you are in front of a moving one is objectively wrong: air pollution from automobiles kills hundreds of people every year in a city the size of Toronto. I assume it is hundreds of thousands or milions worldwide.

Trump has supposedly lost a billion dollars since[…]

Should Consistent Leftists Be Pro-Gun?

@AFAIK , @Pants-of-dog once made the argument[…]

Orwell was definitely talking about the Commie di[…]

A not particularly modest proposal.

When I read the title of the thread, I was expecti[…]