Walter S

From a practical standpoint it seems like per use fees become very difficult to administer and we're better off averaging the cost and having everyone share in it and too bad if you come out the looser. That's part of living in a complex modern society.

I believe in per use to a point. And then it breaks down. How do you administer per use taxes for bicycles? If it's your notion to register them and equip them with electronics then no thanks. It's not worth all that.

Dave Cutter

No. I don't. You have accepted on faith the religion of your choice. I congratulate and applaud you for that. I support your belief. I have nothing against any religion. But you tout your religion as superior to my studies and career. Which I find silly. I've done the work!

People spend YEARS performing research and compiling a research paper. Then someone who has never even seen it.... publishes some stupid "story" in an Internet publication. And even though it is wrongly presented.... it can become popular enough to top a targeted google search. And some think.... this is fact checking. If you quote a book.... you should read it. If you quote an act or law.... you should read it.

NOT doing the work... and speaking like you do... is the actual definition of bloviating.

Dave Cutter

I disagree.

Apparently you've never used the Internet before (or at least forums). The way it works is a logical argument is affronted by a "link" to a story, graph, or report that may... or may not dispel all or most like a part of the augment in whole. The link is the result of a "targeted search". Of course.... since everyone knows targeted searches provide unlimited numbers of false positive results... their use is moot.

Then the presenter retorts with his/her own useless "flame link". The resulting "flame linking" is a meaningless, thoughtless, waste of time and electrons.

chewybrian 

The utility angle is perfect!

Say the cost to produce electricity at a fair profit is 20 cents per kwh. Would you advocate a system where my neighbor pays 10 cents a kwh, and our taxes pre-pay the other 10 cents? Would it make sense for his choices in high or low-efficiency appliances, solar power, etc. to be based on the real world costs of 20 cents, or the artificial 10 cents an hour rate?

Yes, the government has an interest in pushing big projects like the Hoover Dam or TVA. And, they have valid reasons for bending the rules of competition to allow for economies of scale. But, there is no logical reason to torque down the rates. There is a public good in building the dam, but not in artificially low rates and excess use of power.

chewybrian 

You are wrong.

Dave Cutter

Welcome to the Internet! I hope you enjoy the experience of linking targeted search results (It certainly is easier than reading and learning). Best of luck at the forums.

Mobile 155

Just as an aside I think the problem with some of these forum discussions, and this sub forum in particular, is as ILTB has often stated there is almost a cabal of people looking for agreement rather than discussion. Many of the topic in this sub forum clearly are A&S and some of them get bumped there. There are the people that speak from their heart and some from their head. By that I don't mean the ones speaking from their hearts aren't thinking, they are, but they are not experiencing where society is headed or why some simply can't see the merit of their argument. They are looking at philosophical solutions from sources they respect and believe the rest should respect as well. I have been guilty of the "your expert says" verses "my expert says" in long debates as well. But as you said it is hard to reason together against a belief system. Some my rile against sprawl while turning a blind eye to UHI because UHI isn't as important to them as sprawl. But that begs the question as to who is indeed the unselfish and who is the sustainable and when debating a "belief" or "Philosophy" no amount of experience seems to suffice. So it then turns political and quickly leaves the realm of the place of cycling and into why one groups pet peeves aren't resonating with another group that has different pet peeve.

In reality when 90+ percent of your fellow citizens have chosen one form of transportation over the minority's preferred method of transportation they minority had to try and rationalize why they aren't being listen to. The old argument that "our way" is better for society has to be backed up by society accepting that way. If it is not then just maybe the "our way" should be re-evaluated. Just saying.

Roody

The other issue is that millions of uneducated children become uneducated adults who have little choice but to become criminals and/or welfare junkies. Not to mention the ones who could have become useful and innovative leaders of society.

The issue is actually similar with roads. There is so much more benefit from them than just the direct practical benefits to individuals.It sounds funny, but Steve Jobs and Bill Gates couldn't have started their companies without roads. Jonas Salk couldn't have found the polio vaccine without roads. Your favorite movie couldn't have been filmed without roads. Almost nothing would happen in society without them. It's kinda scary to think about modern life without them!

This seems to be something that people (and their leaders) have trouble understanding these days. People understood it in 1776. The first things provided for, after defense, were education and public highways. Today, it seems like both the Left and the Right have forgotten that we need these things for a happy prosperous society. That means we have to figure out a way to pay for them. Even if the funding is not 100% fair (and what is?), we still have to pay for them.

Roody

First, what is UHI?

Second, this is a carfree forum. I think it's kind of annoying when you and a couple others are constantly calling for us to defend cars on this forum. Do they defend mountain bikes on the road bike forum? Do they defend new bikes on the Vintage forum? So why must they defend cars on the carfree forum?

So what if society doesn't accept this. Society doesn't accept anything new until they have a chance to read or hear about it. So this is their chance to read about carfree living.

Third, can we get back to the topic of this thread? I would encourage Dave Cutter, yourself, or anybody who wishes to discuss these other topics to open a new thread.

Dave Cutter

You've seen the light... or nearly. Paradigms are mental devices... constructs if you wish... that people use to view the world. One would think that all people in a common culture would share the same paradigms. Interestingly... that isn't true. Add to that... that people aren't the two dimensional creatures that many people think we are and at least your heading down the road of defining the problem.

I've noticed that on cycling forums at least... many people can't even get to defining the problems. They jump over definitions, hop over logical conclusions.... and skip right into links in an attempt to win an argument of right and wrong. All without ever looking at the subjective assignment of what right or wrong may mean.

Yet thread after thread assault conventional paradigms. So... we see post after post of link flames. Almost all with deeply religious convictions. And NEVER any effort to find solutions.

Dave Cutter

I suggest you re-read the topic! As posted.... THIS is the discussion topic the poster started. How are people's "thinking" towards transportation altered. The topic you made up in YOUR mind... may be different.

Mobile 155

Is that anything like love it or leave it? Wasn't the topic about why so many said they wouldn't give up their vehicle? And haven't you proved my point? When one is invested in a solution to a problem, in other words have already made a decision for themselves, they have created a belief system that they will defend. If someone then suggested the majority of people are perfectly happy with the decision they have made then there might be a perception that the belief system that same someone has chosen might not be the answer. Reasoning together requires that both sides take a look at the presented form of transportation and make the decision themselves. I can't believe someone that relies on Al Gore's Global warming as truth doesn't know about UHI as a problem in urban environments. I will refrain from posting the many sites that reference it because I believe it is not as important to some in this group as sprawl.

Still If you are asking me to leave the Forum I suppose I should take it under consideration though I thought you were looking for more conversations?

chewybrian 

The "Welcome to the internet!" nonsense diminishes you more than anyone at whom you fling it. Do you have so little respect for anyone on this forum to think they can not judge the value of a link for themselves? I think we can judge the value of information linked based on the source.

Your argument that no link has value because some are flawed is not logical. By the same reasoning, my dog is a cat because cats have four legs.

You stated something that was incorrect. It was not a poor opinion, but factually incorrect and easily disproved. People asked you to back it up, and you ignored them. I showed you a simple fact that showed you were incorrect, and you began flinging silliness.

Argue against any opinion I gave and I will try to listen. But the sale of bicycles is surely positively related to their use. Sales are up, therefore use is up. The link is the most credible source I could find, and this point is a dispute of fact, not opinion. Some issues are complex and require 'deep thought'. Some are simple, and in those cases, a link is often all it takes to settle reasonable debate.

Pleas note: I am not trying to 'settle' any larger point of dispute. I am only trying to say that cycle use is not at 'new lows'.

I-Like-To-Bike

Approved conversations/opinions only, doncha know?

Dave Cutter

Yes.... I am surprised you didn't post a "link".... that by your reasoning..... "proves" your cat is a dog.

You may live in an Internet fantasy world.

1. I did NOT state anything... I posted information I received from LBS (real HUMANS, that actually talk).

2. No one asked me anything... however I did read requests for "links" (sort of the opposite of facts).

3. You showed me nothing! You posted a targeted link in attempt to have a winning reply (that also supports your pre-exiting belief system).

Get a grasp on what your posting here. Do you really know those people who's posts you share as FACTS?!?!?

Do you actually research the writers? Or aren't you really expecting people to accept on faith that some Internet God helped you select the absolute correct link.... from the two million suggestions google offered you. Or did you read them ALL... then made a logical choice? It has to be one.. or the other.

According to my sources (real humans that sell bicycles) sales are better than they were. But still much lower than what they were back-in-the-day. Mountain bikes sale have increased.... according to my LBS. Some people (even here at this forum) have mentioned reduced production in China. And world-wide..... people are turning from bicycles.... to new found wealth desires... like petro powered cycles and CARS.

Meanwhile the once ubiquitous child's bicycle.... is viewed by more and more people I know... as too dangerous for children. And many of todays children seem less than interested in pedaling themselves around. They seem to desire... being driven.

Things have changed.

Dave Cutter

+1 Sounds like the kingdom of car fee that I know.

Mobile 155

Dave, not sure if I should post this but here goes. Before I retired I worked for the sixth largest School District in California, Maybe it was just Southern California. The school principles got together with the school board and decided not to allow bicycles on campus. They used safety and security as their reasoning. What ever the reasoning it eliminated more 80,000 students from the potential cycling pool during the school year.

They then tacked a $300.00 bus fee per student for my son's high school and that led to more kids driving and lines of cars in front of all the schools dropping off and picking up their children.

I have moved but even now if you go into town about 2:30 pm you know to avoid any street with a school on it.

cooker

I have no idea what your studies and career are, nor do I need to know, to demonstrate that you were in error when you told Roody there was no world-wide cooperation and cost-sharing to facilitate the elimination of fluorocarbons. I do enjoy your dancing around that simple question, however. Mind you, I'm starting to feel a little mean for harping on it. Feel free to show me the error of my ways, with superior research.

cooker

There's a very long list of services and subsidies provided by government, or more correctly, by all of us, through our taxes. I imagine if we went down the list, we would find some we both agree on keeping or even expanding, some we would agree should be dispensed with or reduced, and some where would we disagree. But presumably we would be arguing based on an appraisal of the costs, benefits, and disadvantages of each one.

I happen to think the various programs or subsidies that facilitate urban sprawl should be reigned in, because have a big downside - they promote land wastage, higher infrastructure costs (and with that higher taxes - for everybody), increased pollution, increased motor vehicle morbidity and mortality, lower overall population health, economic inefficiency and a raft of other negatives too numerous to list here. But hey, that's just me being selfish, right?

Dave Cutter

I have heard of such things. No bicycles allowed on school grounds. And it is RARE to find school sponsored cycling sport as well. I think the best advocacy for bicycles today is youth cycling sports.

Dave Cutter

Once again... your "google search peek at history" is far too skimpy to even begin a discussion. To explain what happen... and in what chronological... would require the typing of a small book. And understand... even though I was there and do remember the events... I am not "the expert". But crediting some dreamy "world-wide cooperation" is a joke.

And to explain the political ramifications of what administration says they did (or didn't do)..... belongs in another forum altogether. Politicians are quick to claim their actions created jobs and saved the world from pollution. Yet... none ever take the blame for even one lost job... or even a scrap of litter (let alone pollution).

Successful Politicians (all nations, all party's) learn the trends... and then insert themselves when it will make themselves look best.... and profit their interests the most.

cooker

I certainly don't see that. There are shared opinions, but no "group think" For example, I happen to agree with Roody much of the time, but we had some polite differences in this thread. We've debated urban heat islands quite a bit, and I'm not keen to reopen that, but since you bring it up, It's not that it's not important. It's that it misses the bigger picture. Dense urban areas produce more localized heat, but the same population in a distributed area, produces (much) more total heat. So the solution is to reduce urban heat output, not increase it while masking it by spreading it out.The fact that a majority prefer something does not make it better, and the responsible thing to do when you see a problem is not to acquiesce to "the way things are", or majority opinion, but to work to change things, including changing public opinion

cooker

I'm all in favour of that although I don't know if it is the "best" advocacy. I'd probably work towards getting bike commuting back in the schools. Fortunately, it's not such a problem here. I live across from a school and a number of kids bike. Maybe not as many as I would like, but it's certainly not banned. Also a lot live within walking distance and some take public transit.

cooker

No, nobody told you to leave.

Dave Cutter

The Internet is replacing the old conventional "buildings" that were traditionally called schools for a couple centuries. I don't think kids will be "bicycling" to their laptops and/or tablets. But school/community sports should be around for some time. Maybe like the community little league for baseball.... we can form youth mountain biking.

Of course... that is a lot more effort than adding a "link" to a post.... so I don't expect to see may others from here volunteering.