Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Advocacy & Safety Cyclists should expect and demand safe accommodation on every public road, just as do all other users. Discuss your bicycle advocacy and safety concerns here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 06-30-14, 08:31 AM   #26
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by rydabent View Post
chicago

And what has Washington "done right" in the last few years? While of course I want cycling infrastructure improved, remember the country is 17 TRILLION DOLLARS in the hole.
Then perhaps the country should stop trying to save the middle east and quit doing "nation building" somewhere other than home. Some of the biggest "dents" in the national budget go to keeping the war machine running... while things like local bridges and roads crumble.

And from a budgetary standpoint, that "hole" will never be filled, so no point in dragging it into discussions.
genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-14, 09:18 AM   #27
mconlonx 
Nobody
 
mconlonx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 7,004
Quote:
Originally Posted by rydabent View Post
And what has Washington "done right" in the last few years?.
Steadily increasing spending for cycling?

But don't let facts get in your way...
__________________
I know next to nothing. I am frequently wrong.
mconlonx is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-14, 10:23 AM   #28
Chicago Al 
Senior Member
 
Chicago Al's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Chicago, the leafy NW side
Bikes:
Posts: 2,332
Quote:
Originally Posted by rydabent View Post
chicago

And what has Washington "done right" in the last few years? While of course I want cycling infrastructure improved, remember the country is 17 TRILLION DOLLARS in the hole.
I'm not going to answer that question, because it would be off-topic as far as cycling advocacy and the rules for this forum.

So you 'of course' want cycling infrastructure improved, but it actually sounds like you agree with Sen Toomey.

If that's the case, just man up and say so.

This 'all politicians are dumb' stuff gets tiresome, and it's an obvious ploy to get people to NOT advocate for their interests---like infrastructure.
__________________
I never think I have hit hard, unless it rebounds.

- Dr Samuel Johnson
Chicago Al is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-14, 03:30 PM   #29
CrankyOne
Senior Member
 
CrankyOne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Bikes:
Posts: 1,811
Quote:
Originally Posted by dynodonn View Post
No 400 dollar hammers ended up in my locale, only some long needed sidewalks to replace some well worn, tree root lined, dirt foot paths that paralleled along next to some nicely paved roads.
The problem is that money routed through the federal gov't looses much of its spending power. Much better for the federal gov't to tax a bit less, local gov't a bit more, and local gov't pay for local needs like sidewalks, bike paths, etc. For the same money I'm taxed I'd much rather have 200 miles of local cycletracks than 100.
CrankyOne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-14, 04:07 PM   #30
headloss 
Senior Member
 
headloss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Western PA
Bikes:
Posts: 933
Sadly, I follow Toomey on FB as he is my jr. Senator. I really hope that he is not my Senator much longer... I can't stand the guy. He's a far-right darling that represents an ideology instead of his home state. Every other post he makes on FB is polarizing as he tries to keep the base happy; I hope he's digging his own political grave at the same time.

I do write to him often, but it seems like a pointless effort.
headloss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-14, 08:54 PM   #31
mconlonx 
Nobody
 
mconlonx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 7,004
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrankyOne View Post
The problem is that money routed through the federal gov't looses much of its spending power. Much better for the federal gov't to tax a bit less, local gov't a bit more, and local gov't pay for local needs like sidewalks, bike paths, etc. For the same money I'm taxed I'd much rather have 200 miles of local cycletracks than 100.
BS. For what it would cost at the local level, you'd balk at it, let alone your non-cycling neighbors. There's some things which need to happen top-down where minorities are concerned and we're one of them.
__________________
I know next to nothing. I am frequently wrong.
mconlonx is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-14, 09:18 PM   #32
Chicago Al 
Senior Member
 
Chicago Al's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Chicago, the leafy NW side
Bikes:
Posts: 2,332
Quote:
Originally Posted by mconlonx View Post
BS. For what it would cost at the local level, you'd balk at it, let alone your non-cycling neighbors. There's some things which need to happen top-down where minorities are concerned and we're one of them.


And this is part of a national transportation funding bill. Cranky may be right in an ideal sense but this is what can be done now with the way funding is allocated.
__________________
I never think I have hit hard, unless it rebounds.

- Dr Samuel Johnson
Chicago Al is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-14, 09:50 PM   #33
dynodonn 
Senior Member
 
dynodonn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 7,244
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrankyOne View Post
The problem is that money routed through the federal gov't looses much of its spending power. Much better for the federal gov't to tax a bit less, local gov't a bit more, and local gov't pay for local needs like sidewalks, bike paths, etc. For the same money I'm taxed I'd much rather have 200 miles of local cycletracks than 100.
Trying to get locals to raise their taxes is about impossible, the last such increase went to law enforcement and emergency services, good luck in trying to vote in tax increases for sidewalks or cycling infrastructure. The dirt paths that were finally replaced with sidewalks were there since the formation of the roadway, generations ago.
dynodonn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-14, 10:10 PM   #34
katsrevenge
covered in cat fur
 
katsrevenge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Willkes-Barre, PA
Bikes: Papillionaire Sommer, '85 Schwinn World Tourist, 2014 Windsor Kensington 8, SixThreeZero SS Cruiser
Posts: 614
Quote:
Originally Posted by JTriumph View Post
OP here.

The intention of the post was to get on people's radar a current initiative to zero TAP. I personally will be engaged by writing to my Senators, since there is a definitely IMO a role for the federal DoT to account for pedestrians and cyclists in their projects. As far as I can tell, this subject fits exactly the mission statement of A&S.

Junior senators from Pennsylvania (my home state and now my neighboring state) have been easy targets for snark for some time now. Rather than engaging in this kind of baiting, Toomey should be reflecting about how the feds can help in his home state, for example, accelerate and improve (with additional funds) ongoing efforts to reconnect pedestrians and cyclists to the Delaware Riverfront waterfront, which is in many places in Philly is separated by an interstate highway (I95).
Toomey is a peice of work. I've told that man i'm not voting for him so many times. I suppose once more won't hurt.
katsrevenge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-14, 10:15 PM   #35
CbadRider
Administrator
 
CbadRider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: On the bridge with Picard
Bikes: Specialized Allez, Specialized Sirrus
Posts: 5,963
This thread is taking a more political path. If it continues it will be moved to P&R.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xerum 525 View Post
Now get on your cheap bike and give me a double century. You walking can of Crisco!!

Forum Guidelines *click here*
CbadRider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-14, 12:57 AM   #36
howsteepisit
Senior Member
 
howsteepisit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Eugene, OR
Bikes: Mecian
Posts: 3,605
It"s been political since post 1, its a debate about how Federal government should allocate funds, and what part states need to pick up. All highly political and based on philosophical leanings.
howsteepisit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-14, 03:52 AM   #37
Rollfast
Not That Senior A Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Around here somewhere
Bikes:
Posts: 3,194
It's my fault...I took a vacation from A&S for awhile and did not keep the chortling dechortled. Thanks, cbad.
__________________
Smile at miles with TWO Rollfasts! And stay cool and hydrated!
Rollfast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-14, 05:49 AM   #38
Chris516
24-Speed Machine
 
Chris516's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Wash. Grove, MD
Bikes: 2003 Specialized Allez 24-Speed Road Bike
Posts: 6,054
Every time I hear garbage like this. I wonder what the politician/person espousing this dribble would think if they couldn't drive a car anymore.

They don't think about those with disabilities all their life, that make it impossible for them to drive.(While I chose not to get a drivers' license. I chose not to because there are too many morons on the road. Not because of my disabilities. I still could have obtained a drivers' license.) Then, What about all the military veterans that, due to physical combat injuries, can no longer drive. What about those combat veterans with severe PTSD, to the point that they can't drive because of their PTSD.

To me, the only aspect of Sen. Toomey's statement should remain noteworthy in the vein of A&S. Is not the party affiliation. Since both Democrats and Republicans are guilty of this kind of behavior. But the egregious car-centric attitude. Cyclists' need better infrastructure, yet they still have a choice of where to ride. Pedestrians, unless they don't go on foot, don't have a choice on how to get from Point A to Point B(they can't 'take the lane', on foot).
Chris516 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-14, 07:29 AM   #39
dynodonn 
Senior Member
 
dynodonn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 7,244
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris516 View Post
I wonder what the politician/person espousing this dribble would think if they couldn't drive a car anymore.
They would be like many in the general public, they would be using some form of motorized transportation to get around, whether it was mass transit or a personal vehicle driven by someone else, with little walking or bicycling involved.
dynodonn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-14, 07:39 AM   #40
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by dynodonn View Post
They would be like many in the general public, they would be using some form of motorized transportation to get around, whether it was mass transit or a personal vehicle driven by someone else, with little walking or bicycling involved.
Or they could be rolling about in wheel chairs... which work best on smooth sidewalks. Or should the motorized wheelchair folks simply "take the lane?"
genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-14, 08:19 AM   #41
kickstart 
Senior Member
 
kickstart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Kent Wa.
Bikes: 2005 Gazelle Golfo, 1935 Raleigh Sport, 1970 Robin Hood sport, 1974 Schwinn Continental, 1984 Ross MTB/porteur, 2013 Flying Piegon path racer, 2014 Gazelle Toer Populair T8
Posts: 4,715
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris516 View Post
Every time I hear garbage like this. I wonder what the politician/person espousing this dribble would think if they couldn't drive a car anymore.

They don't think about those with disabilities all their life, that make it impossible for them to drive.(While I chose not to get a drivers' license. I chose not to because there are too many morons on the road. Not because of my disabilities. I still could have obtained a drivers' license.) Then, What about all the military veterans that, due to physical combat injuries, can no longer drive. What about those combat veterans with severe PTSD, to the point that they can't drive because of their PTSD.

To me, the only aspect of Sen. Toomey's statement should remain noteworthy in the vein of A&S. Is not the party affiliation. Since both Democrats and Republicans are guilty of this kind of behavior. But the egregious car-centric attitude. Cyclists' need better infrastructure, yet they still have a choice of where to ride. Pedestrians, unless they don't go on foot, don't have a choice on how to get from Point A to Point B(they can't 'take the lane', on foot).
The issue isn't about "car-centric" attitude, its about funding.
Many people believe federal transportation funds should only be used for national infrastructure like the national highway network, seaports, and airports, while local infrastructure such as city streets, sidewalks, and bike lanes should be the responsibility of the community they're in.

There's advantages and disadvantages to both theories.
kickstart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-14, 08:19 AM   #42
mconlonx 
Nobody
 
mconlonx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 7,004
Quote:
Originally Posted by genec View Post
Or should the motorized wheelchair folks simply "take the lane?"
I've seen that...
__________________
I know next to nothing. I am frequently wrong.
mconlonx is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-14, 09:27 AM   #43
crawstuff
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Southern Redneckistan
Bikes: An inexpensive newer bike with stem shifters and stuff
Posts: 46
+1 Chris516
The national highway infrastructure should be more amenable to the non-motorized, but I guess that is more of an education and acceptance issue.
crawstuff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-14, 05:48 PM   #44
Chris516
24-Speed Machine
 
Chris516's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Wash. Grove, MD
Bikes: 2003 Specialized Allez 24-Speed Road Bike
Posts: 6,054
Quote:
Originally Posted by kickstart View Post
The issue isn't about "car-centric" attitude, its about funding.
Many people believe federal transportation funds should only be used for national infrastructure like the national highway network, seaports, and airports, while local infrastructure such as city streets, sidewalks, and bike lanes should be the responsibility of the community they're in.

There's advantages and disadvantages to both theories.
Car-centric like I said
Chris516 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-14, 05:51 PM   #45
Chris516
24-Speed Machine
 
Chris516's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Wash. Grove, MD
Bikes: 2003 Specialized Allez 24-Speed Road Bike
Posts: 6,054
Quote:
Originally Posted by dynodonn View Post
They would be like many in the general public, they would be using some form of motorized transportation to get around, whether it was mass transit or a personal vehicle driven by someone else, with little walking or bicycling involved.
Not 'would' but, 'would have to even though they didn't like it'.
Chris516 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-14, 07:53 PM   #46
dynodonn 
Senior Member
 
dynodonn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 7,244
Quote:
Originally Posted by genec View Post
Or they could be rolling about in wheel chairs... which work best on smooth sidewalks. Or should the motorized wheelchair folks simply "take the lane?"
I seldom see very many wheelchair users out and about on my commutes, many travel by some form of transit service or specially modified personal vehicle that takes the wheel chair user from door to door, or as close as possible.
dynodonn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-14, 12:13 AM   #47
Rollfast
Not That Senior A Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Around here somewhere
Bikes:
Posts: 3,194
Our town has 'expansion joints' made of asphalt that are really just speed bumps, basically...smooth sidewalk would be an oxymoron.
__________________
Smile at miles with TWO Rollfasts! And stay cool and hydrated!
Rollfast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-14, 01:09 PM   #48
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by dynodonn View Post
I seldom see very many wheelchair users out and about on my commutes, many travel by some form of transit service or specially modified personal vehicle that takes the wheel chair user from door to door, or as close as possible.
Is there a VA hospital in your town? My town ends up with lots of wounded vets... some of whom seem to like the independence of a powered wheelchair. They tend to use transit services when going long distances, and sidewalks for local errands. They like to fly the flag from their chairs.
genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-14, 10:05 PM   #49
dynodonn 
Senior Member
 
dynodonn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 7,244
Quote:
Originally Posted by genec View Post
Is there a VA hospital in your town? My town ends up with lots of wounded vets... some of whom seem to like the independence of a powered wheelchair. They tend to use transit services when going long distances, and sidewalks for local errands. They like to fly the flag from their chairs.
No VA hospital, but a large VA clinic, but still no powered wheel chair armadas traveling around my locale.
dynodonn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-14, 01:16 AM   #50
Rollfast
Not That Senior A Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Around here somewhere
Bikes:
Posts: 3,194
So you are dodging rascals in Rascals?
__________________
Smile at miles with TWO Rollfasts! And stay cool and hydrated!
Rollfast is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:12 AM.