Your try riding that bicycle to work her in the NE in the wintertime when there is 2 feet of snow on the ground. This idiocy represents how the present administrition fails to think things through or get other opinions before enacting law.
@Texmurphy51 Bikes are not proposed as a full alternative, but as part of the solution, get your head out of your butt and actually listen to the whole policy, not just the speech focusing on a bikers summit interests.
@waltermh111 Well I would like to see how much money has been spent on bicycle paths when they could simply ride on the roads. Non of the bike paths around where I live come anywhere near places of employment. They are in the wilderness so to say use these to ride to work is BS. I dont care if you walk, ride a bike or whatever just dont waste my tax money.
Bike paths are not equal with highways. That is the stupidest Idea I've ever heard. I would like to see a bike bring a 40' trailer full of food to the store.
@morrisonak Highways are not equal with raillines. I would like to see a truck bring a mile of [corn, stone, chemicals, etc] out of port at a tenth of the fossil fuel use.
Questions continued: During that year's time I had no accidents with other traffic because I paid attention and practiced defensive and accident avoidance "driving". So I question the real need for special bicycle corridors. Eventually bicycling became too much of a hassle. Trying to compensate for seasonal weather extremes and sudden weather changes between mornings and evenings
@jihadforwhat Your forgetting that we want more kids riding bikes and they may not be as safe as you.
Your anecdotal evidence and great sense of survival also dont mean that others less skilled or with less luck shouldnt be able to have safer paths.
Most paths take up little extra space on the sides of roads and do make it less inconvenient for the vehicles on the road who, from my experience, will normally slow down or in other ways hinder their driving to deal with bicyclers.
Based on past experience special bicycle corridors may not, in fact, be required. In the early 1980's I rode a bicycle for my daily commute between Los Gatos and Santa Clara sharing the roads and streets with vehicular traffic for over 1 year. In California as in most jurisdictions laws clearly state the bicycles have equal rights to the road with cars and trucks.
@jihadforwhat Back in the early 80's not everyone had SUV's, cell phones, ipods, etc, that keep drivers distracted. It would be safer for a lot of cyclists to get them away from car traffic.
@ironskar and @spadata: So you prefer spending billions of tax dollars and potentially thousands of american soldiers' lives fighting wars in the middle east to support your gas-habit? Get over yourself and think before you comment... Typical self righteous attitude of an ill informed tea-bagger. It's not the stone age, it's the future.
It may be your vision of the future but that does not equate to an improvement in our quality of life or even progress.
We could quite easily quit spending human lives and billions of dollars overseas by utilizing our own domestic energy reserves. But NO! a 2" inch minnow in Nancy Pelosi's backyard is important than farmers, our food supply, and people.
This is one example why environmentalists and animal rights activists are seen as a cure worse than the disease.
We have alot of reserve, but its not only expensive, its dangerous to gather.
We subsidize nonrenewables by the billions, still much more than our investment in green energy.
But whether foreign or domestic, our nonrenewables are getting more expensive to gather and renewables are getting cheaper to make and more efficient at the same time, year on year.
The cure is definitely better than the disease of oil.
@ironoskar I would like to retain my freedom also. I would like the choice to be able to ride a bike to work, every once in a while, instead of having to drive a car all the time. I don't see why more conservative types are not on board. It is a cost effective way to transport more people for less money.
@ironoskar This speaker is a republican, and has no progressive history. Unless your talking about somebody else but didnt keep the reply name.
Fact is, your being left in the stone age if you keep that attitude, while we increase our tech while living better with our environment and getting off of fossil fuels and moving to more efficient energies like renewables while using less energy for better living.
@ironoskar if stone age is maglev rail travel, and other high tech modes of mass transit, then send me there. This was a bike summit so he focused on our encouraging of that, but the overall plan puts that as only a part of the solution. Though a bigger part than before.
Many countries, including the very high tech japan use bikes extensively, and its not stone age at all, but a practical and healthy mode of transport in so many ways.
Ray LaHood for president!
BrockForeman 1 year ago
Your try riding that bicycle to work her in the NE in the wintertime when there is 2 feet of snow on the ground. This idiocy represents how the present administrition fails to think things through or get other opinions before enacting law.
Texmurphy51 1 year ago
@Texmurphy51 Bikes are not proposed as a full alternative, but as part of the solution, get your head out of your butt and actually listen to the whole policy, not just the speech focusing on a bikers summit interests.
waltermh111 1 year ago
@waltermh111 Well I would like to see how much money has been spent on bicycle paths when they could simply ride on the roads. Non of the bike paths around where I live come anywhere near places of employment. They are in the wilderness so to say use these to ride to work is BS. I dont care if you walk, ride a bike or whatever just dont waste my tax money.
Texmurphy51 1 year ago
Bike paths are not equal with highways. That is the stupidest Idea I've ever heard. I would like to see a bike bring a 40' trailer full of food to the store.
morrisonak 1 year ago
@morrisonak Highways are not equal with raillines. I would like to see a truck bring a mile of [corn, stone, chemicals, etc] out of port at a tenth of the fossil fuel use.
eustatic 1 year ago 5
@morrisonak Bike paths are not equal with highways, they are better. I would like to see a truck transport thousands of people without using fuel.
orty69 1 year ago
Questions continued: During that year's time I had no accidents with other traffic because I paid attention and practiced defensive and accident avoidance "driving". So I question the real need for special bicycle corridors. Eventually bicycling became too much of a hassle. Trying to compensate for seasonal weather extremes and sudden weather changes between mornings and evenings
jihadforwhat 1 year ago
@jihadforwhat Your forgetting that we want more kids riding bikes and they may not be as safe as you.
Your anecdotal evidence and great sense of survival also dont mean that others less skilled or with less luck shouldnt be able to have safer paths.
Most paths take up little extra space on the sides of roads and do make it less inconvenient for the vehicles on the road who, from my experience, will normally slow down or in other ways hinder their driving to deal with bicyclers.
waltermh111 1 year ago
Questions continued:
Based on past experience special bicycle corridors may not, in fact, be required. In the early 1980's I rode a bicycle for my daily commute between Los Gatos and Santa Clara sharing the roads and streets with vehicular traffic for over 1 year. In California as in most jurisdictions laws clearly state the bicycles have equal rights to the road with cars and trucks.
jihadforwhat 1 year ago
@jihadforwhat Back in the early 80's not everyone had SUV's, cell phones, ipods, etc, that keep drivers distracted. It would be safer for a lot of cyclists to get them away from car traffic.
orty69 1 year ago
questions continued:
4'th Will pedestrian and/or bicycle corridors be integral with powered vehicular corridors?
5'th How much wider would mixed traffic corridors become to safely accommodate all modes of transportation.
6'th what will be environmental impacts of creating wider, or expanded existing, corridors to accommodate these mixed traffic patterns?
jihadforwhat 1 year ago
This is an interesting, yet utopian concept. It may sound good and seem good on paper but envisioning its real world application seems nightmarish.
1'st If we suddenly have 100's of "new" cyclists and pedestrians will they share a common corridor?
2'nd If they share a common corridor who will have the right-of-way?
3'rd Will bicycle corridors be two way and will they be wide enough to allow for safely passing other cyclists?
jihadforwhat 1 year ago
@jihadforwhat Yes, yes, and yes.
Not hard to consider at all.
Your saying management is any harder than our planning of the automobile management system?
Seriously, will auto roads be 2 lane, will be have 2 way, who will have the right of way.
Such thinking can sound limiting to every position. But we are so used to one way, i can see how its hard for some to imagine another.
But for a real world example, look to other countries where bikes work well alongside autos. Theres plenty.
waltermh111 1 year ago
@ironskar and @spadata: So you prefer spending billions of tax dollars and potentially thousands of american soldiers' lives fighting wars in the middle east to support your gas-habit? Get over yourself and think before you comment... Typical self righteous attitude of an ill informed tea-bagger. It's not the stone age, it's the future.
tarkawilcox 1 year ago
@tarkawilcox
It may be your vision of the future but that does not equate to an improvement in our quality of life or even progress.
We could quite easily quit spending human lives and billions of dollars overseas by utilizing our own domestic energy reserves. But NO! a 2" inch minnow in Nancy Pelosi's backyard is important than farmers, our food supply, and people.
This is one example why environmentalists and animal rights activists are seen as a cure worse than the disease.
jihadforwhat 1 year ago
@jihadforwhat You make no sense.
We have alot of reserve, but its not only expensive, its dangerous to gather.
We subsidize nonrenewables by the billions, still much more than our investment in green energy.
But whether foreign or domestic, our nonrenewables are getting more expensive to gather and renewables are getting cheaper to make and more efficient at the same time, year on year.
The cure is definitely better than the disease of oil.
Plus renewables are more efficient.
waltermh111 1 year ago
No, I choose to retain my freedom. I choose to support the U.S. as the greatest nation on the earth.
Going back to bicycles is the thinking of someone who has mentally capitulated and is engaged in regressive thinking.
I bet you call yourself a progressive, don't you? How is going back in time progressive?
ironoskar 1 year ago
@ironoskar I would like to retain my freedom also. I would like the choice to be able to ride a bike to work, every once in a while, instead of having to drive a car all the time. I don't see why more conservative types are not on board. It is a cost effective way to transport more people for less money.
orty69 1 year ago 2
@orty69 Go ahead. Ride your bike. No one is stopping you. What the liberals want is to force everyone on bikes.
I don't understand where you get the idea that you can't ride your bike.
ironoskar 1 year ago
@ironoskar Wanting to put more bike and walk paths into road and neighborhood plans is not forcing people to ride bikes.
Its getting bikers off of the road where its dangerous and helping to encourage biking by making it safe.
Maybe you just see what you want to because you can only think along party lines.
waltermh111 1 year ago
@ironoskar This speaker is a republican, and has no progressive history. Unless your talking about somebody else but didnt keep the reply name.
Fact is, your being left in the stone age if you keep that attitude, while we increase our tech while living better with our environment and getting off of fossil fuels and moving to more efficient energies like renewables while using less energy for better living.
waltermh111 1 year ago
OBAMA AKHBAR !!
We now go back to goat cart transports!
spadata 1 year ago
Another room full of kool aid drunk people who think that going back to the stone age is a good idea.
ironoskar 1 year ago
@ironoskar Hey, us KoolAidDrunk people are awesome :p
KoolAidDrunk 1 year ago
@ironoskar if stone age is maglev rail travel, and other high tech modes of mass transit, then send me there. This was a bike summit so he focused on our encouraging of that, but the overall plan puts that as only a part of the solution. Though a bigger part than before.
Many countries, including the very high tech japan use bikes extensively, and its not stone age at all, but a practical and healthy mode of transport in so many ways.
waltermh111 1 year ago
Lovely lovely speech!
Sibadd 2 years ago 3