Comment 32959

By arienc (registered) | Posted August 20, 2009 at 10:55:11

A Smith >> Perhaps cyclists have more fun BECAUSE of the extra danger involved, kind of like why people ride roller-coasters.

Unlikely, or you would not see cyclists looking for bike lanes and more cyclists on the roads to REDUCE danger.

Imagine if you could take back the taxes you pay for the current car centric roads we have today and put them towards a private bike network.

Would LOVE to take you up on that offer, so long as each moad of travel pays fully for the costs of running it AND accounts fully for all of the externalities it imposes on society. Still you're talking about utopian solutions, not real-world ones. Blind adherence to free market and/or communist dogma only work in utopia.

I have to state that based on the amount of opposition you have put up to bike lanes, as a self-proclaimed "conservative", you are ignoring the issues you say you care about and spending all your effort in search of a very small one.

If you spent 99% of your time arguing for user fees on public roads, and 1% of your time arguing against public cycling lanes, your position would be consistent. But you do not, and your hypocrisy is exposed.

But they're not welcome, that's the point. Drivers don't like the fact that slow moving vehicles get in their way and that's just the reality.

While you may not feel cyclists are welcome, in the real world that only applies to limited access highways like the 403/Linc/RHVP etc.

As a driver, I appreciate those who choose to cycle, because by doing so, they allow me to get to my destination with less congestion.

I recognize that there are many citizens who don't share that view, and have the perception that streets are exclusively for cars. That view evolved as the automobile became more and more dominant, and can easily evolve the other way.

If the government forces people to cycle, by taking away car lanes, the only people who will benefit are people that hate cars.

That's a steaming hunk of BS and you very well know it!

Firstly it is not necessary that creating spaces to cycle must take away car lanes. Look at York Blvd - the car lanes were reduced to the minimum safe width, and bilke lanes were added. Bike lanes can also replace lanes which are currently used for on-street parking, or use underutilized land such as abandoned railways.

If a few automobile lanes in the city are converted to bike lanes, the government is not "forcing you to cycle". For every 10 lanes you could currently choose to use to get from one side of town to the other, you might have the choice of 9 car lanes and a bike lane. Just as drivers change their routes when lanes are blocked due to construction or accidents, they will likewise adapt and plan their travels accordingly without needing to hop on a bike if they choose not to.

As it stands, the government is effectively forcing people to drive, by not providing continuous bike lanes that go anywhere.

In addition, as I previously pointed out, not only "those who hate cars" benefit. Everyone who breathes air, travels on the roadways, owns property, buys gas or earns income receives tangible benefits when their fellow citizens choose cycling.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds