Comment 32904

By A Smith (anonymous) | Posted August 18, 2009 at 18:02:35

JonC >> So it certainly appears that creating a space for the tax payers to cycle (more) safely, has led to those tax payers to cycling.

If you reduce the amount of lanes for cars and give them to cyclists, of course more people will ride to work. What's your point? If the government gives people free coupons for McDonalds, they will buy more fast food. This doesn't prove that there is a great demand for cycling, just that slow traveling, inefficient modes of transportation (like cycling) need the heavy hand of government to prop up their "green" lifestyle choices.

If cyclists could travel at the same speed as motorcycles, they wouldn't need dedicated SLOW lanes. Therefore, if you want to ride your bikes, keep up with the speed of traffic. If you can't, drop the notion that bikes are an efficient mode of transportation, because they're not. That's why human beings created the internal combustion engine, because it leverages human brain power and lessens our reliance on our limited physical capacity for work.

Does anybody really believe that relying on human locomotion is an efficient way to move goods and services around this city? If so, you should also be in favour of dismantling the power grid and returning to an economy based on hard physical labour. Of course that will mean that our economic output will fall through the floor, but who cares about that? Hamilton is moving in that direction anyway.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds