Fifty Plus (50+) - Any thoughts on this news item?

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/09/14/bike_paths/

(Granted, this has a touch of "Salon lefty hysteria.")

I do agree that the cycling activists have blown one phrase in one sentence of the interview into an anti-cycling position by the administration, but I also think that at her level she needs to understand that when she says things, they are taken seriously.

Bike paths, and other cycling initiatives do take an extreemely small portion of transportation funding, and I do actually agree with the cycling advocates positions in this case, but I think they are painting with far too broad a brush, as do most advocacy groups.

My sentiments exactly, L-Dar...

Am I the only one who thought it very odd indeed that she decided to pick on bikes as not being real transportation when the president who appointed her very likely has more time on a bike than all of his predecessors combined?

I thought her comments were very ill advised and reflective of poor public policy speech that the Bush Administration sadly seems to frequently commit.

Am I the only one who thought it very odd indeed that she decided to pick on bikes as not being real transportation when the president who appointed her very likely has more time on a bike than all of his predecessors combined?

This is true TM, but W's time on a bike has never been transportation, but recreation. I think this is the distiction she was making.

Of course, if we could use bikes as transprotation with more ease and less danger, then cycling would become transportation in this country.

<Sarcasm on> Yes, there isn't enough money to properly maintain our roads and bridges because too much of the budget is taken up by bike paths and such. It's not the fraud, corruption and down right theft that takes place on an hourly basis. It's those damn bike paths.</sarcasm off>

... Brad

I have no thoughts on this news item.

I got to the evening class I teach in center city Philadelphia early yesterday. It was such a beauitful day that I wanted to be riding instead of teaching. So, before class started, I sat outside and counted the number of people I saw riding bicycles. In just over 20 minutes I counted over 70. Most of these were people who were commuting, delivering something, etc. I suspect none of the ones I saw (based on attire and what they were carrying) were riding for recreational purposes. Funny thing is that the week before I wasn't aware of any cyclist as I pulled up to the university's parking lot in my car. Advocacy groups often find that they almost have to take extreme positions just to get an issue noticed. In a culture gone mad with automobiles, I don't take offense when cycling advocates get a little loud and/or extreme. Heavens knows the trucking industry, center city cab drivers, and others lobby just as hard for motor vehicles. We're one of the wealthiest countries on the planet. We just don't make somethings a priority (like taking care of bridges). Public officials would do well to learn the discipline of avoiding placing blame and rather always focusing on solutions.

It's hard to imagine that anyone who has experienced numerious Washington DC rush hours would consider cars to be viable transportation.

Paul

I think this article just points out that
1) The percentage of cyclists in the general population is small.
2) bicycling is considered a children's activity in the US, and
3) This doesn't look like it will change anytime soon.

I think that the general population consensus is that people who cycle for transportation needs are either poor, DUI convicted or ex-60's nutcase hippies. The current trend of racing specific bikes does not help either. The cross-bikes are a good thing as they expand the reasons for people to jump on their bikes, and allow some racks and bags to be used to carry some groceries and small purchases.

All that said, it sure would be nice if when roads were constructed cycling adequate shoulder were a required part of the construction. I would agree that MUPs are not viable as transportation solutions as I think the mixture of walkers, joggers (who seem to love being on the left side instead of the right hand side), Rollerbladers, dog walkers and family noodling cyclists do not make a safe riding environment for cyclists who are serious about using bikes as transportation alternatives. I did, when I lived in Southern California, use MUPs to ride on because the drivers were so inattentive because they were just too darn busy eating, drinking and talking on the phone, reading papers and the like.

I have no thoughts on this news item.

Which should not be interpreted as meaning I'm thoughtless.

I have no thoughts on this news item.

+ another. Only thought is that the Politician that made the comment is a Sad old B* that ought to get to the root of the problem- i.e. Not enough money going on useless maintenace. And stop looking for a scapegoat for their Failings.

So I suppose I have a view on this but not one worth posting

RANT ON

Seems like the things we thought we were paying taxes for just get diverting into paying for something else, then the politicos come back saying they need more money to pay for what we thought we were paying for.

RANT OFF

Maybe this trend will help:

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_38/b4050078.htm

Silly bicyclists!
Cycling would be more popular with this administration if it resulted in more profit to big oil!!

The stage is being set or the "NEED" (excuse) is being created to tax/license bicycles. "Bicycles that traverse public roads/streets don't pay taxes/license fees."

The stage is being set or the "NEED" (excuse) is being created to tax/license bicycles. "Bicycles that traverse public roads/streets don't pay taxes/license fees."

Bicycles on public roads/streets pay more in taxes for the damage they do to the roads than the motorized vehicles. Apparently the Transportation Secretary has a math problem, since she didn't put forth the number of dollars collected in gas tax versus the amount doled out by Congress. But then, maybe she didn't want people to know that driving their automobile is just as subsidized as the bicycles are.

As soon as I saw "lefty hysteria" I knew this was a post I'd have no comment on.

Am I the only one who thought it very odd indeed that she decided to pick on bikes as not being real transportation when the president who appointed her very likely has more time on a bike than all of his predecessors combined?

I thought her comments were very ill advised and reflective of poor public policy speech that the Bush Administration sadly seems to frequently commit.

I had similar thoughts on her actions. She certainly caused a lot of letter writing to local representatives around here. There was a lot of discussion on local forums.

As soon as I saw "lefty hysteria" I knew this was a post I'd have no comment on.

The phrase I used was "Salon lefty hysteria." Which is a commentary on their approach to jouranalism, not left-leaning politics in general.

The stage is being set or the "NEED" (excuse) is being created to tax/license bicycles. "Bicycles that traverse public roads/streets don't pay taxes/license fees."

That is a toothless argument. The bicycles may not pay taxes/license fees, but their riders sure do.

Personally, I find it impossible to ride any of our local bike paths given the baby stroller pushers, skateboarding pinballs, leashed dogs, etc. Besides, in my car-driven state, the paths are short, essentially go nowhere, and are for recreation-- being mostly in parks, etc. There is no bike path to get downtown or anywhere else significant.

As for bike lanes.....mostly they're lined with litter, glass, and other tire eating shrapnel from car use. Not to mention that drivers don't seem to honor them.

I do some suburban riding occasionally to Starbucks, the library, etc. With a mix of aggression, anxiety, and caution.

Suburban riding around here is still the domain of kids, the (brave) elderly, bmx kamikaziers, the impoverished carless, etc. Not many workaday types.

First needs come a cultural revolution before we can expect any pols to get serious.

But "Salon lefty hysteria" is a GOOD thing.

But "Salon lefty hysteria" is a GOOD thing.

Hysteria.....nothing that a good slap in the face and a "Be a man, you sniveler" won't cure.

Today we rode through a new bike lane on a freshly paved street. There was even a lane to the right of it for parking. There are a handful of bike lanes around here, or very wide right-hand lanes, and some that are marked as bike lanes but I would ride only with great caution as there really isn't a separate lane for a bike. I would like to see more money devoted to providing safe bike lanes everywhere, not just here and there.

But "Salon lefty hysteria" is a GOOD thing.

The issue I have with Salon is that they don't even try to reason with the political opposition, they simply churn out grist for the "true believers." As much as I agree with their perspective, I can't imagine anyone, even in the middle-of-the-road, being persuaded by their approach. :(

I don't agree that lefty (OR righty) hysteria is a good thing. I'm one of the growing majority of "middle-of-the-roaders" and get weary of groups that spend more time pointing the finger than figuring out how to work together toward common goals. Last week I joined a local bike organization to see what I can do to influence change in our county. Haven't done anything more than attend a bicycle "Street Smarts" class and write a membership check at this point, but it's one avenue available to those who want more focus on cyclist's needs.

OK. Off the soap box. This forum is a wonderful distraction when I am wide awake at this hour of the morning! :)

[QUOTE=Big Paulie;5273659]The issue I have with Salon is that they don't even try to reason with politcal opposites, they simply churn out grist for the "true believers." QUOTE]


Hence their need for a manful slap in the kisser. Arrogance/adolescence/self-righteousness in defense of anything diminishes that anything as well as those who indulge themselves in such narcissism. Sincere zeal doesn't excuse making an ass of yourself.

As with Truf above....I'm thoroughly sick of political ranting, four letter words applied to anyone other than serial killers and flat tires, and that overblown "baby-killer," junior high school rhetoric that coarsens, distracts, and irrationalizes communication.

Tantrums are, you know, like so unbecoming.

Am I the only one who thought it very odd indeed that she decided to pick on bikes as not being real transportation when the president who appointed her very likely has more time on a bike than all of his predecessors combined?

I thought her comments were very ill advised and reflective of poor public policy speech that the Bush Administration sadly seems to frequently commit.

Yeah but he rides on his own ranch that was paid for by the hard work of his father, grandfather and the taxpayers of Arlington Texas. It wasn't paid for with gas tax.