Living Car Free - Owns a bike shop drives a hummer

Martino's Bike Lane Diary put me on to this.
http://bikelanediary.blogspot.com/2006/04/she-owns-bicycle-shop-she-drives.html

Hypocrisy or just Americanism exceptionalism? Maybe I'm getting too bent out of shape but since I live in Atlanta I've sworn to identify and make sure all my friends know just which bike shop this is so we can avoid it.

It's a poor vehicle choice for the use but I'm not sure it's hypocrasy. Perhaps, instead of outright condemning the owner, you could suggest that she put it to actual use. Suggest that she slap some advertising on the sides and donate its use as an offroad MTB sag-wagon and rescue/recovery vehicle to help transport MTBers to hard-to-reach offroad trails. That might garner a little better publicity.

http://www.bikingdutchman.com/assets/images/one_02.jpg

Lots of high horses around here.

I don't see where it's anyone's business what she drives. If she has the money and wants to drive a Hummer then more power to her.

Not hypocrisy, just decadence. It would be hypocrisy if she was lecturing people on responsible transportation while using it.

Owning a bike shop doesn't mean that you have to be a believer in sustainable transport. It just means that you believe that selling bicycles is an acceptable form of capitalism.

On the otherhand, if your opinions regarding social responsibility are so strong then you are entitled to such a course of action. But in order to be absolutely fair, you should encourage a boycott of the business of anyone who drives a vehicle of unreasonable size/fuel consumption/ etc.

But in order to be absolutely fair, you should encourage a boycott of the business of anyone who drives a vehicle of unreasonable size/fuel consumption/ etc.

+1

Such crap.

Don't blame just the bicycle shop owner for all the mess. People obviously freely chose to be such idiots since they want to sit in the thing, or even being seen around that huge thing. It's suppose to be a free country. If I were in Atlanta, I might go to that shop if it offered the hard-to-get parts my specialty bikes require. But I would freely choose happily not to go anywhere near that tank.

It may be a free country, but we still have the ability to restrict anything that's detrimental to public health. If smoking bans are OK, why not a ban on these polluting behemoths? Or slap a big tax on them, double their price and see who still wants them.

I'm not sure, but i believe there are other vehicles that would be just as useful for LBS owners, even if used as a sag vehicle for MTB races.

Being a LBS owner doesnt have a dam thing to do with what one wants to drive except in somebodys else's mind. If i own a gas station does that mean i cant use a bike? Same fricken thing.

If smoking bans are OK...

...and they're not. Like you said, free country.


I don't see how it is hypocrisy. Maybe she likes bikes. Doesn't mean she's a fan of biking to work.

But in order to be absolutely fair, you should encourage a boycott of the business of anyone who drives a vehicle of unreasonable size/fuel consumption/ etc.
Just as fair as encouraging a boycott of a shop run by people who live lifestyles that are not in accordance with traditional mores, "approved" religous beliefs, or published laws or any or all, eh?

What shall we paint on the shop windows? The Germans have already used up some of the all time favorites of the morally intolerant.

WHOA Guys, wait a sec.

Who ever said that if you support sustainable transportation means you can{t own a Hummer? The problem is not the car OWNERSHIP but the unreasonable use it gets.

Ricardo

Just as fair as encouraging a boycott of a shop run by people who live lifestyles that are not in accordance with traditional mores, "approved" religous beliefs, or published laws or any or all, eh?

What shall we paint on the shop windows? The Germans have already used up some of the all time favorites of the morally intolerant.

Precisely my point, albeit a little less subtle.

"But in order to be absolutely fair, you should encourage a boycott of the business of anyone who drives a vehicle of unreasonable size/fuel consumption/ etc."
And who has the right to decide what is "unreasonable" for the other person? Maybe the Hummer is reasonable for her and she can afford it.

If this were an entirely free country, I'd have the right to drive a car with no muffler or catalytic converter. If this were an entirely free country, I could rig up a sports car with a huge two-stroke engine, notwithstanding the burnt oil i'd be spewing into the air. If it were really a free country, maybe I could even drive without a license, hunt without a license, hunt people without a license...


Just as fair as encouraging a boycott of a shop run by people who live lifestyles that are not in accordance with traditional mores, "approved" religous beliefs, or published laws or any or all, eh?


But in order to be absolutely fair, you should encourage a boycott of the business of anyone who drives a vehicle of unreasonable size/fuel consumption/ etc.

If it were feasible, maybe i'd do exactly that. :) In this country of freedom within reasonable limits, we can boycott almost anybody we want to.

The fact is, other people's wastefulness affects me and I can complain about it and make purchasing decisions based on it if I darn well please. People out there who drive single-occupant automobiles to and fro all the time are putting combustion by-products into air and some of that air, I breathe. People that use a 15mpg SUV where a 22mpg station wagon would suffice are misusing a resource that is for all of us, namely, clean air.

...The fact is, other people's wastefulness affects me and I can complain about it and make purchasing decisions based on it if I darn well please. People out there who drive single-occupant automobiles to and fro all the time are putting combustion by-products into air and some of that air, I breathe. People that use a 15mpg SUV where a 22mpg station wagon would suffice are misusing a resource that is for all of us, namely, clean air.

You do realize that a modern SUV is actually pretty clean burning? If you compare a 2006 Hummer to a 1990 Escort Wagon I bet you get similar pollutant output even though the hummer uses more gas.

If this were an entirely free country, I'd have the right to drive a car with no muffler or catalytic converter. If this were an entirely free country, I could rig up a sports car with a huge two-stroke engine, notwithstanding the burnt oil i'd be spewing into the air. If it were really a free country, maybe I could even drive without a license, hunt without a license, hunt people without a license...


Maybe you should be able to. I won't bring my strict liberatarian views into this conversation, but maybe just because the government says we can't do something, doesn't mean we shouldn't be able to.

Maybe you should be able to. I won't bring my strict liberatarian views into this conversation, but maybe just because the government says we can't do something, doesn't mean we shouldn't be able to.

Well, you can say it the other way, too. Just because the government says you can't do something, that doesnt necesarilly mean that you really should just because you think governments are inherently evil, or cannot be trusted(some of the time anyway).

Well, you can say it the other way, too. Just because the government says you can't do something, that doesnt necesarilly mean that you really should just because you think governments are inherently evil, or cannot be trusted(some of the time anyway).

Of course, you're correct. I don't kill people, because it's illegal AND wrong. On the other hand, there are laws I break because I believe the law is wrong.

Maybe you should be able to. I won't bring my strict liberatarian views into this conversation, but maybe just because the government says we can't do something, doesn't mean we shouldn't be able to.

What's the libertarian position on second hand smoke? Serious question...not trolling. How does libertarianism deal with situations where one person's freedom impinges on other people's rights or freedoms?

What's the libertarian position on second hand smoke? Serious question...not trolling. How does libertarianism deal with situations where one person's freedom impinges on other people's rights or freedoms?

If you want to discuss Lib'ism further, we can take it to P&R, but in short, it doesn't impinge on your rights, if done properly. Theoretically, any buildings would be privately owned, and it would be up to the company/owner to determine smoking rules. If you don't like it, don't go there. Outside, there could be laws against littering, but as an avid anti-smoker, even I'll admit that people smoking outside is not a real problem. And of course none of this interferes with the right of the people to advertise, peer pressure, and wag their fingers at smokers.

She owns a bike shop and drives a Hummer? Big whoop.:rolleyes:

What else do you know about her? What are her other vehicle requirements?

Saturday I saw a much maligned, by the sanctimonious on these forums, Ford Excursion at one of the local boat ramps. Launching a boat that made the Excursion look tiny. It really looked like to safely pull a Boston Whaler of that size, the couple needed a bigger truck.

Some people just make do with the smallest suitable thing.

My only question on the matter is what does she price her merchandise and services at to afford a $100,000 truck? I knew a preacher who bought the same model pick-up every year in the same color so his parishiners would not know he could afford a new truck every year.

"The fact is, other people's wastefulness affects me and I can complain about it and make purchasing decisions based on it if I darn well please. People out there who drive single-occupant automobiles to and fro all the time are putting combustion by-products into air and some of that air, I breathe. People that use a 15mpg SUV where a 22mpg station wagon would suffice are misusing a resource that is for all of us, namely, clean air."

You can complain all you want. Don't do business with her if you want, she probably will do just fine without you. You have not right to complain about her being the only one in her vehicle if that is what she chooses to do with the vehicle she OWNS. It's not your decision whether a station wagon would work just as well as an SUV, it's hers since it's her money.

You have high standards to live by.

You have not right to complain about her being the only one in her vehicle if that is what she chooses to do with the vehicle she OWNS. It's not your decision whether a station wagon would work just as well as an SUV, it's hers since it's her money.

The so-called "right" to complain is a figure of speech, that refers not to an actual right, but instead to moral justification. Someone has no "right to complain" either if they're no better than the person they're complaining about, or if they've somehow benefitted from whatever it is they're now slagging.

In this case, we all have a "right to complain" about someone who selfishly pollutes, and hogs the road with an oversized vehicle, blocking the sightlines and crowding her customers.

You might have the right to buy and drive what you want, but it should be important to consider other things as well. How does my actions affect others? just because you CAN do it, doesn't mean you always SHOULD do it.

My only question on the matter is what does she price her merchandise and services at to afford a $100,000 truck?

As a small business woman with the tax breaks made available to her she'd be stupid NOT to buy some large truck. Here's one explanation of the law. It's from 2004 and I'm not sure if the loop hole has been closed yet or not. I just know that alot of small business people are driving around in huge trucks courtesy of us taxpayers :mad:


According to Bush in his January 9 unveiling of the initiative: "This is a plan that says that if you are willing to take risk and invest more, that there's a benefit for doing so. It's an incentive for small business to increase... And it will have a positive effect throughout our entire economy."

The tax break was originally intended for business owners such as farmers and construction workers, so their pickup trucks and cargo vans would not be treated as "luxury vehicles" - for which the code was not as generous. At the time, nobody considered SUVs and pickup trucks as "luxury" vehicles. But the tax code defines industrial vehicles by weight instead of function, and the parameter that the vehicle must be over 6,000 pounds fits the original intent of the legislation to help small family farmers. Due to the fact that SUVs are today classified as "light trucks," SUV owners who are also business owners can now take advanatage of such benefits.

With their recent rise in popularity, accountants have been advising more and more of their clients to take advantage of this loophole in the law. The tax break applies specifically to small business owners — including doctors, lawyers, financial advisers, real estate agents, and independent contractors — who buy a truck or SUV for business purposes. Thus, the deduction is legal whether the vehicle is used to haul seven construction workers, 3,000 pounds of plumbing tools, or one certified public accountant. The main requirement is that the buyer uses their SUV more than 50% of the time in their business.
So, for example, last year a business owner could deduct $25,000 outright off the cost of a new SUV. Under Bush's economic stimulus package (which became law last year) the purchaser got an extra 30% bonus deduction off the balance of the sticker price. Subtract another 20% a year in depreciation over five years, and business owners who purchased SUVs already got a hefty tax write-off. Now, Bush wants to increase the small business deduction from $25,000 to $75,000.

In fact, raising the cap on business equipment to $75,000 will make it possible to write off the entire cost of most SUVs (including the Hummer H2 - MSRP $49,270 and BMW X5 - MSRP $40,195) in the first year. Others, like the Hummer H1 will be practically free to the business owner.

Maybe she does not consider it selfishly polluting.
Where do some of you get off telling someone they can't do with their money what they choose to do as long as it is legal? It's still none of your business if she chooses to own a Hummer plain and simple. It's not illegal to own one, so she can if she has the financial ability to do so? I think the argument could also be made, why spend $3000 on a bike when a $750 will work just the same?

It wastes gas, it pollutes with a big V8 engine in a heavy body, it's big enough to kill anything it hits easily, it can't off-road, it handles like a boat, it has huge blind spots, it's a re-badged GMC with a more uncomfortable interior. I guess if gas was free and renewable, gas engines didn't pollute, the vehicle could handle well, and I was impervious to damage like Superman, I wouldn't have a problem with Hummers driven on the street.

If you're stupid enough to buy and drive a Hummer, I have the right to flip you the bird. As long as I'm living in America this is my god given moral duty. Call it freedom ;) Leave the Hummers to our hard working military.

As a small business woman with the tax breaks made available to her she'd be stupid NOT to buy some large truck. Here's one explanation of the law. It's from 2004 and I'm not sure if the loop hole has been closed yet or not. I just know that alot of small business people are driving around in huge trucks courtesy of us taxpayers :mad:

Thats just crap. You cant just write it off. My wife is a small business owner for 25 years and can not write it off because it has nothing to do with her business.

"It wastes gas, it pollutes with a big V8 engine in a heavy body, it's big enough to kill anything it hits easily, it can't off-road, it handles like a boat, it has huge blind spots, it's a re-badged GMC with a more uncomfortable interior. I guess if gas was free and renewable, gas engines didn't pollute, the vehicle could handle well, and I was impervious to damage like Superman, I wouldn't have a problem with Hummers driven on the street.

If you're stupid enough to buy and drive a Hummer, I have the right to flip you the bird. As long as I'm living in America this is my god given moral duty. Call it freedom Leave the Hummers to our hard working military."

What you state MAY be true, but if she can afford it and pays for it, it doesn't matter what you think. I've ridden in some Hummers and wouldn't own one, but if she can, more power to her. Funny, freedom must work only one way and not for her to have the freedome to purchase what she wants with her money.

Where do some of you get off telling someone they can't do with their money what they choose to do as long as it is legal?
I can tell anybody anything I want...what are you advocating - censorship?



It's still none of your business if she chooses to own a Hummer plain and simple. It's not illegal to own one, so she can if she has the financial ability to do so? I think the argument could also be made, why spend $3000 on a bike when a $750 will work just the same?

I have no objection to people riding expensive bikes...it has no impact on me. I object to oversized vehicles because they pollute the air I breathe, they block my view ahead when I'm driving on the highway putting me more at risk of participating in a multivehicle crash, they cause excessive wear on publically funded roads, and they're far more lethal to me as a pedestrian than a normal size car. How dare you tell me that's none of my business?

As for their legality, ROFL! This may not apply to the woman we're talking about in this thread, but did you know that H2s and other larger SUVs are actually illegal in many of the swank California nighbourhoods they are so often found in? They're actually over the weight limit for those roads, but the state or municipality doesn't have the balls to enforce the law because it apparently doesn't apply to the rich. http://www.slate.com/id/2104755/

In another bike shop in Atlanta, one of the mechanics drives a 'Vette...

and *****es about the cost of gas. He also owns a motorcycle, and bicycles. Go figure...

I could care less what he drives, but quitcher*****in. It's like bad drivers that complain about speeding tickets...

Az

. You cant just write it off. My wife is a small business owner for 25 years and can not write it off because it has nothing to do with her business.
Well duh...
You can write it off as a business expense if (you can get away with claiming) you use it 50% or the time for business. Your wife might just need to think more creatively :)

It's still none of your business if she chooses to own a Hummer plain and simple.

It works both ways. You have no business telling other people what they can't or can say to others either :p

Oh wait, it's been mentioned.

No, cooker, I'm not suggesting censorship. I bet the oversized Hummers don't pollute as much as many much older vehicles. If you are riding so close to the vehicle in front of you to avoid a crash, then you are not maintaining a safe driving distance. Getting hit by either a hummer or a Yugo can both cause death or serious injury. I guess the taxes of the people who own Hummers pay must not be used to pay for roads, only yours are? As far as them being in some neighborhoods illegally, I guess the neighbors need to make a stink about it and get something done.

Wait, isnt the question of who pays for the road we are sharing with usually asked by people who owns Hummers to bicyclists like us?

I drive both a take home police car and a 1996 Ford Explorer. But isn't it true, if they pay road taxes and have just as much right to use the road as anyone does?

Going by some of these responses, it must be perfectly okay for drivers to tell cyclists anything they want. After all, cylists break traffic laws whenever they want, they're unpredictable, they're in the way and they slow the flow of traffic. BS goes both ways.

The reality of it is, the roads and highways are public access, mutiple use facilities. People that dislike sharing the roads with others should stay off them.

If you are riding so close to the vehicle in front of you to avoid a crash, then you are not maintaining a safe driving distance.

I assume you sometimes drive on congested freeways. I do. There are cars in front of me, behind me, and beside me. You know that I can't maintain a "safe" distance from all of them. You also know that in heavy traffic, if I leave a safe gap, someone will fill it.

The point is that large SUVs block the sightlines and prevent you from seeing what's going on ahead of them. With ordinary sized cars you can easily see past them because they don't fill the lane.

It is still your obligation to maintain a safe driving distance between what is in front of you. I understand it is not easy to maintain that safe distance. If you are in a small two door sports car, then maybe a full sized Cadillac sedan may block your line of sight?

My only question on the matter is what does she price her merchandise and services at to afford a $100,000 truck? I knew a preacher who bought the same model pick-up every year in the same color so his parishiners would not know he could afford a new truck every year.

Remember: that truck also comes with a $100,000 tax break. Thanks to W, hummers are FREE to small business owners.

But isn't it true, if they pay road taxes and have just as much right to use the road as anyone does?

Not necessarily. The road taxes may or may not provide a reasonable incentive not-to-pollute.

I'm a borderline asthma case and my partner has asthma, so it affects me a lot when large numbers of people choose to drive vehicles that pollute. I can't change the laws by myself, but believe me, I'll vote for people who want to change the laws in order to make it more expensive to pollute- and I'll encourage people I know to do the same.

But the road taxes do provide the right to drive on them if you are paying for their upkeep.

Well duh...
You can write it off as a business expense if (you can get away with claiming) you use it 50% or the time for business. Your wife might just need to think more creatively :)

So cheating is ok but dam it,dont drive that hummer?

I assume you sometimes drive on congested freeways. I do. There are cars in front of me, behind me, and beside me. You know that I can't maintain a "safe" distance from all of them. You also know that in heavy traffic, if I leave a safe gap, someone will fill it.

The point is that large SUVs block the sightlines and prevent you from seeing what's going on ahead of them. With ordinary sized cars you can easily see past them because they don't fill the lane.

So do mini-vans,trucks and campers,motorhomes,trucks hauling bicycle to lbs,

Nice reply shokhead