Old 09-07-02, 11:45 AM
  #2  
khuon
DEADBEEF
 
khuon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Catching his breath alongside a road near Seattle, WA USA
Posts: 12,234

Bikes: 1999 K2 OzM, 2001 Aegis Aro Svelte

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
While a stronger economy can boost automobile sales and thus production, this can also be said for bicycles. Most people only think about buying a bike when they have some disposable income. Likewise, a strong economy means there's more money circulating. Some of that money goes to keeping the cycling industry alive... some of it goes into the repairs for our roads and the construction of our trails... the maintenance and oversight of our forests. And if the auto industry receives an influx of revenue, that can be used to research new avenues of technology such as cleaner running vehicles. All in all, given the choice between a strong and weak economy, I'd prefer a strong one. I think it's not a question of strong vs. weak economy. It's a question of smart vs. dumb direction. If society can be made to see the value of cycling, the environment and safety of the individual over the "rights" of the automobile then a stronger economy can only be a benefit. The problem is that people are too much in love with their cars. They believe it is the only path to "freedom". I don't think this attitude will change during a bad economy. The more we tie our social and economic indicators to our ability to drive a car the deeper we lock ourselves into this catch-22. Once we start thinking about an improved economical benefit in terms of other things, we will have begun to eliminate our dependency and the result will be a greater focus on the things that truly benefit our lives.
khuon is offline