• Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    7 months ago

    Won’t anybody think of the poor cars? But seriously, resources are better utilised by bicycles to the benefit of all. There are no losers here other than the oil companies and car manufacturers.

    • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      7 months ago

      ironically, they win.

      whenever the road diet where i live, traffic improves. because it slows down to one lane and it prevents accidents.

      • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        7 months ago

        And what exactly are those people going to lose if they get on a bike sometimes? Their diabetes?

        • stufkes@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          7 months ago

          I’m going to lose my lifetime, literally, by biking a total of 80+ km to work and back. And public transportation takes 2+ hrs one way.

          • frezik
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            14
            ·
            7 months ago

            Then when you get into the city, you’ll benefit immensely from 80% of the people being on separated bike paths rather than cars on the road.

            There’s no realistic plan where cities become carless, but can they not be the default?

            • stufkes@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              7 months ago

              I don’t disagree with the plans to make the city careless. I answered the question what would be so bad about cycling. I think the time factor is often forgotten when talking about cycling and public transport

              • frezik
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                7 months ago

                The costs don’t have to go up at all. Merely uncover the costs that are already there but hidden. Everything from noise, space usage, wars in far off countries, lack of exercise, or just the surprise $1200 repair expense.

          • zecg@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            No, lose it making money to maintain and feed the car ( how many working hours a year that is?) and sitting in a car for an hour in one direction. Correct time of commuting is time spent in traffic + time spent to earn the money for fuel. If you bikemute, you can actually consider a part of that time as free gym.

          • SwingingTheLamp
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            I think that the problem here is that your definition of “losing” equates to “slight reduction in the massive subsidy that society provides to drivers, and forcing them to drive slower in cities because the lanes are narrower so that other people don’t have to die.” Yeah, technically “losing,” but it still sounds pretty childish to complain about.

        • Drusas@kbin.run
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          7 months ago

          You have no idea how ableist you’re being right now.

          Even ignoring the jab at diabetics, what about other disabled people? Not everyone can just get on a bike.

          • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            22
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            7 months ago

            It’s always so funny when car brains suddenly discover their heart for disabled people when they desperately reach for arguments against non car centric traffic planning. If you’re genuinely concerned about disabled people and those who can’t drive for other reasons (poverty springs to mind) you should advocate for transport options besides cars.

            • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              14
              ·
              7 months ago

              A variety of transport options for a variety of preferences and disabilities. Some people have a disability that prevents them from cycling, others from walking, others from driving. Only building car centric is still unfair to those who cannot drive due to disability, age, or skill. Only building bike lanes and no transit or car lanes can also be unfair. Multiple options is the most fair in most scenarios.

              • Drusas@kbin.run
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                7 months ago

                Exactly. We need multiple options and realistic options for people with limitations. It’s way too common on this community for people to call everybody a car brain just because they have trouble riding a bike.

            • Drusas@kbin.run
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              7 months ago

              I am a disabled person and I vote for transportation levies and taxes every time they come up, but nice trying to pretend that I’m a car brain just because I happen to need one.

              Once again, ableism. Don’t assume everybody is not disabled just because you don’t see them in a wheelchair.

            • Drusas@kbin.run
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              That will dramatically depend on the disability in question. For some, yes.

      • zecg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Yes there are losers. They include all the people whose lifestyles involve driving.

        However, they’d on average be healthier and happier, that’s not losing.

      • Prandom_returns@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago
        1. There are more car-only roads than bike-only roads
        2. Virtually no roads are ever completely closed off from car traffic and allocated strictly towards bicycles
        3. More lanes = more traffic jams (induced demand)
        4. More bike lanes = more people on bikes = fewer people in cars = fewer jams for “your lifestyle”
        5. Narrower roads = Fewer cars = fewer pedestrian deaths = fewer car-crashes
        6. More people biking/walking, healthier lifestyle, less stress on the healthcare system.

        I don’t see how this isn’t a win for car-people and bike-people.