I think having the right legal framework helps a lot to get a good bicycle culture.
Here in Belgium, when a car hits a bicyclist, the car driver's insurance will always pay for bodily damage of the bicyclist, even if the bicyclist is at fault.
Most streets where I live (in the center of Antwerp) are one-way for cars, but two-way for bicycles. And cars are limited to 30 km/h.
My wife goes to work on her bicycle and gets paid for it (per km) by her employer, enough to buy a new bike every year.
At busy crossings with stop lights, bicycles get a designated space in front of the cars. That way when the light turns green the bicyclists can get going first, safely turn etc.
I just saw 2 policemen on bicycles pass in front of my window...
Measures like these help make bicycling something accepted by society, not something only crazy lycra-clad hipsters do.
Here in Belgium, when a car hits a bicyclist, the car driver's insurance will always pay for bodily damage of the bicyclist, even if the bicyclist is at fault.
Sorry, but doesn't anyone have an issue with this? Why is there an expectation that cyclists cannot possibly be held responsible for their actions?
By this logic, if my mini hits a bus, I shouldn't be responsible, even if I ran a red light.
I tend to agree with most of the other points, but this one is ridiculous.
Contrast that with cycling in the states where you're derided and people throw stuff at you from passing cars (beer cans seem to be a favourite projectile).
In the cities it's still somewhat doable but outside it's simply impossible. No separate lanes, cars passing you within inches, risking you being clipped by a mirror.
Luc, can you describe your wife's employers bicycle policy? I'm trying to set one up at my company as well, and haven't found the ideal plan yet. Suggestions welcome!
I lived in Münster, Germany for a few years. Münster is THE bike town in germany. Statistically every citizen has 1.8 bikes. And i begann to love biking there. A lot is done in that city to make biking the #1 way of transportation. Now I am living in Cologne, Germany and see the difference. I miss the good bike lanes but I kept biking in cologne.
Nothing is better for your head than biking a few miles home after a hard day of work.
I lived in Frankfurt for many years when I was young and just took for granted the fact that I could bike just about anywhere without tangling with cars. Paths through the forest, farm roads, bike paths through towns, one could just ride forever.
When I returned to the USA where I was born, I noticed that every American had a gaggle of dusty, low quality bikes in their garages that never got used. There were no bike paths anywhere and riding on the roads looked like suicide. I once asked someone why they even had the bikes; where do you ride them? He answered without hesitation that you could load the bikes in the car and drive across town to where there was a park with a bike trail. I though it was a quick witted joke (load the bikes in the car and drive to ride them).
Yes absolutely. I used to live in a suburb of Stuttgart, and that was around the first time I really tried biking. It was definitely worth it, the well maintained bike lanes, the free burning of the fat, lovely relaxing scenery and off course a few extra bucks saved per day.
Biking lanes, is in my book a top investment a city can make, wonder why not many keep it high on their priorities.
I now live in Munich, which also calls itself a bike town. Although there are a lot of people riding their bikes, the streets are not at all as bike friendly as the ones in Münster. Each trip is somewhere between a suicide mission and a pleasant journey depending on where you want to go.
21st Century, that anybody can argue against (in this thread or elsewhere) that going by bike to work is way better, healthier, more humanly fulfilling, than by car leaves me speechless. Vote for mayors pro bike roads or ask for showers at work, there is always a solution.
I'm not going to say that we should all be in cars, but I used to ride my bicycle everywhere-
I ride motorcycles now, and I still get a lot of the upsides- open to the environment, a physical activity (though more mild than biking at a hard pace), and my stress levels are lower.
But it has one more huge upside; back when I bicycled all the time, I'd always arrive everywhere hot and sweaty. Workplaces can install showers, but what about the supermarket? The library? Classrooms? Your girlfriend's house? (which of course has showers, but back then her parents would NOT have approved)
If you're going to build a city with all of those things a few blocks away, then it's an easy ride and no big deal, but that's a pretty major overhaul. I don't see it working in existing cities. Plus, besides problems with showers, the time commitment in existing cities is pretty big. I live rather close to my job, and it would still take me 1-2 hours to get there by bicycle.
Once again, not that I love cars everywhere all the time, but it's a pretty darn big feat to switch to bicycles in many American cities.
disclaimer: I do love my bikes, I'm kind of a petrol head.
Better is the word I'm going to hit on in your comment. I'd love to bike to work. I've even considered it actually, this in spite of the following:
- I live in Vancouver. It rains 5 months of the year.
- I have a 30km commute, my car is faster (By a longshot, not by a few minutes).
- My car does not require I have a shower after getting to work.
- My car is more adaptable: I can carry extra work home, I can stop for a coffee, I can schedule a meeting in the morning or afternoon and then hit the office.
There are many ways in which my car is "better". Healthier? No. More humanly fulfilling? Well, that depends. Is it more humanly fulfilling to spend the time commuting on my bike or with my kids?
-
well, here is one argument that you may not have heard :)
as per http://www.denverpost.com/election2010/ci_15673894 Republican gubernatorial candidate Dan Maes is warning voters that Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper's policies, particularly his efforts to boost bike riding "could threaten our personal freedoms"
Especially the handicapped and elderly like bikes (or not). A good train system (such in Japan) is much better). That way even children and elderly can travel long distances.
Does it reach 95 degress F with almost 100% humidity in the summer and -50 degrees F in the winter? Does it ever snow 12 inches+ at a time? Is there every freezing rain followed by inches of snow covering it?
My point is, what works in California doesn't work in Fargo or Minneapolis. Even driving a diesel automobile. They gel up bad. Same with electric cars, the temperature (hot and cold) kills batteries.
If I lived in Santa Barbara, yeah, biking to work would be awesome.
I get the point - and I support the development of car-free suburbs for people who want them. Streets safe for children, people saying hello instead of staring from behind closed windows, etc. Less local pollution, more friendly streets, less accidents : all pluses.
I just don't want to see some zealot telling me I can't have a car, and that I am some sort of evil person for having one.
Further, not everywhere is suitable. Someone riding around cities near me have got high humidity and steep hills to deal with : you don't ride a bike without some serious fitness. Those cruisy bikes you see in Amsterdam, Copenhagen and Cambridge are of no use.
What I'm saying : there should be no laws against this type of thing, and no laws saying you should do it. Entirely personal choice all round.
For my part I have a large car but work from home, so it gets driven maybe once per fortnight. There's no way I would part with it : it's my ticket to freedom when I do choose to get out and about. And I enjoy it thoroughly when I do.
"I just don't want to see some zealot telling me I can't have a car, and that I am some sort of evil person for having one."
In the US, it's basically illegal to build any kind of development that doesn't require a car or two. Some exceptions, like Kentlands in MD, or Stapleton in Denver, require developers to prepare plans in advance, lobby for variances to zoning and parking requirements. It's also harder to get financing for non-standard projects. All this means that unless you're building a standard subdivision, an office park, or a strip mall, you're at a competitive disadvantage and incur higher costs and risks.
Let there be no illusion that the "market" provided the built environment we have.
> I just don't want to see some zealot telling me I can't have a car, and that I am some sort of evil person for having one.
Not everybody thinks about you when choosing the people they want to live with. You argue like a conservative asshole berating a bunch of hippies for choosing their own way of life.
> What I'm saying : there should be no laws against this type of thing, and no laws saying you should do it. Entirely personal choice all round.
That is entirely upto the people living in those subuebs. If they decide that you should drive your car around rather than through their suburb, then I don't see how it violates your personal freedom. Next you will be bitching about congestion charges.
I find lots of strange laws (or just rules / contracts) much more acceptable locally, where you can choose to live in this community or not --- than would be acceptable on a larger scale like a nation.
In other words, I should come into work completely drenched in sweat? In many parts of the USA, it is very humid and temperatures can easily reach 90 and above. How do you expect people to bike in such conditions? In addition, many people commute long distances to work, which may take up to an hour just by car.
I often bike to work, which for me is about 26 miles each direction. I take a shower right before I leave, and when I get there I just have to rinse down and change out of my cycling jersey. The theory behind the pre-ride shower is that body odor is caused by bacteria on your skin, and showering temporarily knocks out enough of your bacteria that it won't cause significant odor during your ride. (I'm not aware of actual science on this topic, but I've asked a trusted coworker whether I smell after riding into work, and he says I don't. So there's your anecdotal data point...) So for me the bike is extremely practical even living in an area that wasn't designed with bicycles in mind.
As for humidity, this is in south Florida—if we can manage it here, then we can handle the humidity pretty much anywhere in the US.
Now I'm not saying everyone can or should bike a 52-mile round trip to work. But the point of this article is that this little experimental suburb has 5,500 people within a single square mile; biking or walking is a perfectly reasonable way to traverse such a small area at nearly any level of fitness, especially when you don't have to worry about automotive traffic, and for the few people who can't manage that there's the public transport option. Even on our hottest days here in south Florida, one can easily bike a mile, fully dressed, without breaking a sweat.
> In other words, I should come into work completely drenched in sweat?
With enough training (build up the habit) and if you don't exert yourself too much (it's not like you have to go 20mph all the way), you shouldn't sweat too much. Add in a pair of showers on work site and you're golden.
> In addition, many people commute long distances to work, which may take up to an hour just by car.
That's an issue of brain-dead urban planning and stupid personal housing considerations, not of bikes.
> Bikes are great, but not very practical.
The article, and all of Amsterdam or Münster, already prove you wrong. Why do you make declamations which are already disproven before they even get out your mouth?
I live in Hamburg, Germany. I always tried to use the bicycle for any regular work route under 20km.
I use to use my bicycle for a job where I lived outside and the company was in some inner part in Hamburg. 18km.
I also used it when I lived in some inner part and was working in some part of the harbour. 16km. There was a Fitness center near the office, I was a member of that chain of fitness centers. I was using the bicycle to get to that fitness center and have a shower there. Then I walked to the office.
I would expect that it is important to take a shower before walking into office. It's just a matter of planning. Really good companies have showers for their employees. For example many of the larger companies have some kind of sports facilities.
Additional to taking a shower, one also needs some fresh clothes. Also you need a save place for the bicycle.
It takes some planning and organization, but once you use your bicycle three or more times per week to get to work and back it pays back.
The excellent fitness is what you get in return.
Currently I live in a suburb. The whole area is reduced to 30km/h for cars. I use my bicycle a lot. Bus station is 50 meters away. The bus comes every 20 minutes. The bus takes me in 5 or 10 minutes to two local city centers. The next local train is 15 minutes walking or 5 minutes by bus. That local train gets you in 18 minutes into Hamburg City. So, public transport is sufficient for me. Though there is also a Autobahn nearby. Generally connectivity is great.
In the inner city of Hamburg one can now rent bicycles and a lot of planning is now done to improve the whole bicycle co system. Even the port authority of the Hamburg port, one of the largest in the world, thinks about using bicycles - they are working on a 'master plan' for using bicycles in the harbour region:
http://www.hamburg-port-authority.de/presse-und-aktuelles/ne...
I knew a guy who biked 50 Miles to work and showered at work. Everything is doable :) .
A few friends of me bike in spain during the summer. You see, it can be done. All that's needed is a small shower at work and you are even fresher than by driving with your car. And sweating in the rush hour.
If you drive more than 20 Miles you can't go by bike, yes, but you can drive shopping or to your friend by bike. Try to use it to go to the nearest pub on weekends.
If this argument was in favor of cars, for me it would be the same: Where am I supposed to park? You expect me to pay $400 a month just to park a car at home and another $400 to park it at the office? Cars are fun, but not very practical.
It all depends on the environment you are in, which is not a static unchangeable monolith. You have choices. Maybe living somewhere where biking is practical would involve making choices that go against your priorities, but those are your priorities.
Bikes are great, but not very practical … if the infrastructure isn’t there. You know, city planning and stuff. I think the goal is not to get people to drive 50 miles to work, the goal is to make it possible for them to live so close to work (or appropriate public transport infrastructure) that they can bike there (or use public transport).
You are right, bikes wouldn’t work in every case but sometimes they can replace cars just fine.
As well as what others have suggested (shower at work, don't try hard, etc) there are electric bicycles available that would address this issue. I've not tried one myself, but they seem to have a following.
As for the long distances, I've known people to drive some of the way, stop where it's easy to park and ride the last bit (generally the bit with the most traffic congestion, so it can work quite well).
Just wear lycra. People don't wear it because of how it looks. It's fast wicking. Even in mid 30s celsius I get to work far less sweaty than taking public transport.
Most people who complain about sweat are trying to cycle in cotton. Just change when you get to work.
All problems can be overcome, @bobbyflanders, if you just let the light of Jesus flood into your life! :)
(sorry, I meant 'bikes', not Jesus).
EDIT: I knew this would get down-voted. No sense of humour these bicyclists ;)
I my case, I have a short commute, but mostly drive it, because cycling is much more effort, and much less comfortable than driving. Sorry to have an incorrect opinion.
One of the great things about riding your bike into downtown (or into town) is that parking for bikes is easier to find and closer to your destination than that for cars. For years, the only way I'd go to the Alamo Drafthouse in downtown Austin was by bike.
I like this article, because it's really about noncomformity. Hackers aren't afraid of social and cultural norms. To be truly excellent, you can't follow the crowd.
98% of zoning laws in the US are about maintaining the status quo. The status quo is sort of meh.
Hackers, bikers, entrepreneurs, and other daring souls mix it up. And the world is a better place for it.
The US doesn't have the population density of Japan or Europe because of our zoning laws. The barriers to even try these kinds of developments in the US are massive. The barriers to build yet-another cul-de-sac subdivision of mcmansions that are proven to increase congestion, travel-time, stress, infrastructure cost, individual waste and municipal waste are non-existent.
Zoning laws dictate density. We have sprawl because our laws engineered it and we were lucky enough to have the wealth and space to allow such frivolous waste to continue for so long.
I don't think this argument works. For starters, parts of the US are very high density: density in NYC or Boston or SFO exceeds that of many European cities. And yet we don't have super fast broadband for super low prices in those places in general, even though though the density is high enough to support it. It seems a little ridiculous that people in extremely high density environments in the US have much worse broadband options that people living in rural Sweden.
Most American cities and streetcar suburbs are built at a density where it is very practical to bike. Even many new suburbs are built at a bikable density, though the non-grid/non-connecting infrastructure is often such that trips are twice as long as they should be, and in high-speed traffic.
check out my tangentially related project: http://abogo.cnt.org/ tells you how much the average household in your neighborhood spends on transportation. Let me know what you think!
[+] [-] Luc|15 years ago|reply
Here in Belgium, when a car hits a bicyclist, the car driver's insurance will always pay for bodily damage of the bicyclist, even if the bicyclist is at fault.
Most streets where I live (in the center of Antwerp) are one-way for cars, but two-way for bicycles. And cars are limited to 30 km/h.
My wife goes to work on her bicycle and gets paid for it (per km) by her employer, enough to buy a new bike every year.
At busy crossings with stop lights, bicycles get a designated space in front of the cars. That way when the light turns green the bicyclists can get going first, safely turn etc.
I just saw 2 policemen on bicycles pass in front of my window...
Measures like these help make bicycling something accepted by society, not something only crazy lycra-clad hipsters do.
[+] [-] run4yourlives|15 years ago|reply
Sorry, but doesn't anyone have an issue with this? Why is there an expectation that cyclists cannot possibly be held responsible for their actions?
By this logic, if my mini hits a bus, I shouldn't be responsible, even if I ran a red light.
I tend to agree with most of the other points, but this one is ridiculous.
[+] [-] jacquesm|15 years ago|reply
In the cities it's still somewhat doable but outside it's simply impossible. No separate lanes, cars passing you within inches, risking you being clipped by a mirror.
[+] [-] dylanz|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bitboxer|15 years ago|reply
Nothing is better for your head than biking a few miles home after a hard day of work.
[+] [-] noonespecial|15 years ago|reply
When I returned to the USA where I was born, I noticed that every American had a gaggle of dusty, low quality bikes in their garages that never got used. There were no bike paths anywhere and riding on the roads looked like suicide. I once asked someone why they even had the bikes; where do you ride them? He answered without hesitation that you could load the bikes in the car and drive across town to where there was a park with a bike trail. I though it was a quick witted joke (load the bikes in the car and drive to ride them).
It was not.
[+] [-] train_robber|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] coffeejunk|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Kliment|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] harscoat|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sliverstorm|15 years ago|reply
I ride motorcycles now, and I still get a lot of the upsides- open to the environment, a physical activity (though more mild than biking at a hard pace), and my stress levels are lower.
But it has one more huge upside; back when I bicycled all the time, I'd always arrive everywhere hot and sweaty. Workplaces can install showers, but what about the supermarket? The library? Classrooms? Your girlfriend's house? (which of course has showers, but back then her parents would NOT have approved)
If you're going to build a city with all of those things a few blocks away, then it's an easy ride and no big deal, but that's a pretty major overhaul. I don't see it working in existing cities. Plus, besides problems with showers, the time commitment in existing cities is pretty big. I live rather close to my job, and it would still take me 1-2 hours to get there by bicycle.
Once again, not that I love cars everywhere all the time, but it's a pretty darn big feat to switch to bicycles in many American cities.
disclaimer: I do love my bikes, I'm kind of a petrol head.
[+] [-] run4yourlives|15 years ago|reply
- I live in Vancouver. It rains 5 months of the year.
- I have a 30km commute, my car is faster (By a longshot, not by a few minutes).
- My car does not require I have a shower after getting to work.
- My car is more adaptable: I can carry extra work home, I can stop for a coffee, I can schedule a meeting in the morning or afternoon and then hit the office.
There are many ways in which my car is "better". Healthier? No. More humanly fulfilling? Well, that depends. Is it more humanly fulfilling to spend the time commuting on my bike or with my kids? -
[+] [-] whatusername|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] credo|15 years ago|reply
as per http://www.denverpost.com/election2010/ci_15673894 Republican gubernatorial candidate Dan Maes is warning voters that Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper's policies, particularly his efforts to boost bike riding "could threaten our personal freedoms"
[+] [-] w00pla|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pragmatic|15 years ago|reply
Does it reach 95 degress F with almost 100% humidity in the summer and -50 degrees F in the winter? Does it ever snow 12 inches+ at a time? Is there every freezing rain followed by inches of snow covering it?
My point is, what works in California doesn't work in Fargo or Minneapolis. Even driving a diesel automobile. They gel up bad. Same with electric cars, the temperature (hot and cold) kills batteries.
If I lived in Santa Barbara, yeah, biking to work would be awesome.
[+] [-] brc|15 years ago|reply
I just don't want to see some zealot telling me I can't have a car, and that I am some sort of evil person for having one.
Further, not everywhere is suitable. Someone riding around cities near me have got high humidity and steep hills to deal with : you don't ride a bike without some serious fitness. Those cruisy bikes you see in Amsterdam, Copenhagen and Cambridge are of no use.
What I'm saying : there should be no laws against this type of thing, and no laws saying you should do it. Entirely personal choice all round.
For my part I have a large car but work from home, so it gets driven maybe once per fortnight. There's no way I would part with it : it's my ticket to freedom when I do choose to get out and about. And I enjoy it thoroughly when I do.
[+] [-] pchristensen|15 years ago|reply
In the US, it's basically illegal to build any kind of development that doesn't require a car or two. Some exceptions, like Kentlands in MD, or Stapleton in Denver, require developers to prepare plans in advance, lobby for variances to zoning and parking requirements. It's also harder to get financing for non-standard projects. All this means that unless you're building a standard subdivision, an office park, or a strip mall, you're at a competitive disadvantage and incur higher costs and risks.
Let there be no illusion that the "market" provided the built environment we have.
[+] [-] whatajoke|15 years ago|reply
Not everybody thinks about you when choosing the people they want to live with. You argue like a conservative asshole berating a bunch of hippies for choosing their own way of life.
> What I'm saying : there should be no laws against this type of thing, and no laws saying you should do it. Entirely personal choice all round.
That is entirely upto the people living in those subuebs. If they decide that you should drive your car around rather than through their suburb, then I don't see how it violates your personal freedom. Next you will be bitching about congestion charges.
[+] [-] monos|15 years ago|reply
I'm hoping for legislation that will ban private persons from buying cars. No one (...) needs half a ton of metal and 70PS to move his 70kg ass.
[+] [-] eru|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] organicgrant|15 years ago|reply
In EU: postman, grocery getting/delivery, common commute vehicle, etc etc
In USA: NYC bike couriers.
[+] [-] bobbyflanders|15 years ago|reply
Bikes are great, but not very practical.
[+] [-] Niten|15 years ago|reply
As for humidity, this is in south Florida—if we can manage it here, then we can handle the humidity pretty much anywhere in the US.
Now I'm not saying everyone can or should bike a 52-mile round trip to work. But the point of this article is that this little experimental suburb has 5,500 people within a single square mile; biking or walking is a perfectly reasonable way to traverse such a small area at nearly any level of fitness, especially when you don't have to worry about automotive traffic, and for the few people who can't manage that there's the public transport option. Even on our hottest days here in south Florida, one can easily bike a mile, fully dressed, without breaking a sweat.
[+] [-] masklinn|15 years ago|reply
With enough training (build up the habit) and if you don't exert yourself too much (it's not like you have to go 20mph all the way), you shouldn't sweat too much. Add in a pair of showers on work site and you're golden.
> In addition, many people commute long distances to work, which may take up to an hour just by car.
That's an issue of brain-dead urban planning and stupid personal housing considerations, not of bikes.
> Bikes are great, but not very practical.
The article, and all of Amsterdam or Münster, already prove you wrong. Why do you make declamations which are already disproven before they even get out your mouth?
[+] [-] lispm|15 years ago|reply
I use to use my bicycle for a job where I lived outside and the company was in some inner part in Hamburg. 18km.
I also used it when I lived in some inner part and was working in some part of the harbour. 16km. There was a Fitness center near the office, I was a member of that chain of fitness centers. I was using the bicycle to get to that fitness center and have a shower there. Then I walked to the office.
I would expect that it is important to take a shower before walking into office. It's just a matter of planning. Really good companies have showers for their employees. For example many of the larger companies have some kind of sports facilities.
Additional to taking a shower, one also needs some fresh clothes. Also you need a save place for the bicycle.
It takes some planning and organization, but once you use your bicycle three or more times per week to get to work and back it pays back.
The excellent fitness is what you get in return.
Currently I live in a suburb. The whole area is reduced to 30km/h for cars. I use my bicycle a lot. Bus station is 50 meters away. The bus comes every 20 minutes. The bus takes me in 5 or 10 minutes to two local city centers. The next local train is 15 minutes walking or 5 minutes by bus. That local train gets you in 18 minutes into Hamburg City. So, public transport is sufficient for me. Though there is also a Autobahn nearby. Generally connectivity is great.
In the inner city of Hamburg one can now rent bicycles and a lot of planning is now done to improve the whole bicycle co system. Even the port authority of the Hamburg port, one of the largest in the world, thinks about using bicycles - they are working on a 'master plan' for using bicycles in the harbour region: http://www.hamburg-port-authority.de/presse-und-aktuelles/ne...
[+] [-] bitboxer|15 years ago|reply
A few friends of me bike in spain during the summer. You see, it can be done. All that's needed is a small shower at work and you are even fresher than by driving with your car. And sweating in the rush hour.
If you drive more than 20 Miles you can't go by bike, yes, but you can drive shopping or to your friend by bike. Try to use it to go to the nearest pub on weekends.
Just try it :) .
[+] [-] delackner|15 years ago|reply
It all depends on the environment you are in, which is not a static unchangeable monolith. You have choices. Maybe living somewhere where biking is practical would involve making choices that go against your priorities, but those are your priorities.
[+] [-] ugh|15 years ago|reply
You are right, bikes wouldn’t work in every case but sometimes they can replace cars just fine.
[+] [-] derefr|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] davidu|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dejv|15 years ago|reply
I use to commute 35 miles each way without owning car, it was taking quite a lot of time, so I moved closer to work, but I still don't own car.
[+] [-] pmccool|15 years ago|reply
As for the long distances, I've known people to drive some of the way, stop where it's easy to park and ride the last bit (generally the bit with the most traffic congestion, so it can work quite well).
[+] [-] benJIman|15 years ago|reply
Most people who complain about sweat are trying to cycle in cotton. Just change when you get to work.
[+] [-] guelo|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|15 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] confuzatron|15 years ago|reply
(sorry, I meant 'bikes', not Jesus).
EDIT: I knew this would get down-voted. No sense of humour these bicyclists ;)
I my case, I have a short commute, but mostly drive it, because cycling is much more effort, and much less comfortable than driving. Sorry to have an incorrect opinion.
[+] [-] khandelwal|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] SpacemanSpiff|15 years ago|reply
Makes me miss living in Berlin!
[+] [-] forinti|15 years ago|reply
Here in Brazil people are currently enamoured by their new wealth and I see cars getting bigger and bigger.
[+] [-] organicgrant|15 years ago|reply
98% of zoning laws in the US are about maintaining the status quo. The status quo is sort of meh.
Hackers, bikers, entrepreneurs, and other daring souls mix it up. And the world is a better place for it.
Mix it up.
[+] [-] pragmatic|15 years ago|reply
If the US had the population density of Japan or parts of Europe, yes we could all bike and have super fast broadband. That's not the case.
[+] [-] roc|15 years ago|reply
Zoning laws dictate density. We have sprawl because our laws engineered it and we were lucky enough to have the wealth and space to allow such frivolous waste to continue for so long.
[+] [-] MichaelSalib|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] akgerber|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nradov|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ritarius|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] organicgrant|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Marticus|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] organicgrant|15 years ago|reply