Of course, because bicycles are convivial technology that empowers people.
Automobiles are often falsely advertised as "freedom" but actually trap you in a web of dependencies and regulations with global economic and environmental cost, under an authoritarian power structure. You can build your own bicycle, but will never build your own automobile - you can, but you are not free to ride it anywhere.
Personal computers were supposed to be the "bicycle of the mind", an empowering technology to augment the human intellect. Now, proponents of corporate AI are abusing that term to call their own technology, which in fact trap you in cognitive dependency, destruction of our shared ecology, and enforces a power structure - just like the automobile. An industrial infrastructure owned by a few powerful players who profit immensely while socializing the costs.
Spot on. There is by the way a very interesting historic connection between suffragettes/early emancipation movements and the bicycle. Bicycles allowed women to move around more freely and was thus greatly empowering. Additionally women chose to wear pants on bicycle thus it became also a symbol of that freedom.
>"A DOT spokesperson told NPR in an emailed statement on Wednesday that the department "continuously reviews its policies to ensure each promotes safety, efficiency, and common sense."
>"Since nearly 80% of the population uses cars to get to work and their important medical appointments, we are taking a closer look at federal guidance to ensure American families have the infrastructure they need," the spokesperson said. "This is a common sense approach despite the Left's belief that everyone should ride a bike to their shoebox-sized apartment to eat crickets to achieve a phony climate agenda."
Not even so much the stupidity, but apparently we’ve normalized unprofessional responses to media questions. Ignore the message, as a DOT representative I would personally be embarrassed to response like such a partisan assclown.
Just more of the "anything the libs like is bad" thinking. These people have invented some kind of new crossover between stupid and evil. They can't be gone soon enough.
The vast majority of federal bike lane funds are misappropriated. For instance, in my local city, speaking directly with a planner, they wanted to install parking meters as a tax raising effort. They couldn't afford it, so on the random streets they wanted parking meters on, they got federal grants to "add bike lanes" and so now there's this random set of block-long bike lanes that helped pay for the changes needed to install parking meters.
In other cases, the city wanted to direct traffic somewhere else, so they installed block-long bike lanes as a traffic calming measure. No actual plan to make these useful or studies done on effective placement, just purely to reduce car volume.
What you're left with is a patchwork of non-sensical bike lines that don't really get you anywhere, subsidized for by federal funds, used against the spirit of what they should be doing: making bike commutes practical.
From my layperson perspective that sounds relatively easy to address. For example they could require some minimum distance of continuous bike lanes to get approved for funding.
Decades of this sorts of "aha I know what rule change will fix this" are exactly how we got here though. They all look reasonable in isolation but at the systemic level we get garbage.
This has been going on forever. Bike lanes are just the current vehicle (heh) for financial waste.
We've got a giant 8-lane intersection on a 2-lane road in the middle of nowhere because 50% off that monstrosity because of fedgrant bucks was cheaper than just DIYing it 100% out of pocket.
Yeah, I consider the bike lanes around here basically completely useless. You can't actually get much of anywhere. And there are too many drivers who harass bikes. We just saw that recently with the boxer who got killed that way.
There's no thought of anything but cars, last spring at least there was a construction spot where they set up some barriers that force a pedestrian into a 35 mph traffic lane (decelerating from 55, so a lot of drivers are going faster than 35.) And while pedestrians at that spot would be extremely rare (there's nothing beyond it--the only pedestrians would be those who were actually seeking nothing. Namely, hikers) there is a decent amount of bike traffic there.
Of course, because bicycles are convivial technology that empowers people.
Automobiles are often falsely advertised as "freedom" but actually trap you in a web of dependencies and regulations with global economic and environmental cost, under an authoritarian power structure. You can build your own bicycle, but will never build your own automobile - you can, but you are not free to ride it anywhere.
Personal computers were supposed to be the "bicycle of the mind", an empowering technology to augment the human intellect. Now, proponents of corporate AI are abusing that term to call their own technology, which in fact trap you in cognitive dependency, destruction of our shared ecology, and enforces a power structure - just like the automobile. An industrial infrastructure owned by a few powerful players who profit immensely while socializing the costs.
Spot on. There is by the way a very interesting historic connection between suffragettes/early emancipation movements and the bicycle. Bicycles allowed women to move around more freely and was thus greatly empowering. Additionally women chose to wear pants on bicycle thus it became also a symbol of that freedom.
>"A DOT spokesperson told NPR in an emailed statement on Wednesday that the department "continuously reviews its policies to ensure each promotes safety, efficiency, and common sense."
>"Since nearly 80% of the population uses cars to get to work and their important medical appointments, we are taking a closer look at federal guidance to ensure American families have the infrastructure they need," the spokesperson said. "This is a common sense approach despite the Left's belief that everyone should ride a bike to their shoebox-sized apartment to eat crickets to achieve a phony climate agenda."
The stupidity, it burns.
Not even so much the stupidity, but apparently we’ve normalized unprofessional responses to media questions. Ignore the message, as a DOT representative I would personally be embarrassed to response like such a partisan assclown.
They only have rhetoric, no actual policies.
Destroying things is very much a policy
> to eat crickets
… Wait, is this what they think vegans do, or something?
Just more of the "anything the libs like is bad" thinking. These people have invented some kind of new crossover between stupid and evil. They can't be gone soon enough.
This has been the standard for a long time.
What surprises me is that they're not even putting in the effort to hide it anymore.
Time for some uncomfortable truths.
The vast majority of federal bike lane funds are misappropriated. For instance, in my local city, speaking directly with a planner, they wanted to install parking meters as a tax raising effort. They couldn't afford it, so on the random streets they wanted parking meters on, they got federal grants to "add bike lanes" and so now there's this random set of block-long bike lanes that helped pay for the changes needed to install parking meters.
In other cases, the city wanted to direct traffic somewhere else, so they installed block-long bike lanes as a traffic calming measure. No actual plan to make these useful or studies done on effective placement, just purely to reduce car volume.
What you're left with is a patchwork of non-sensical bike lines that don't really get you anywhere, subsidized for by federal funds, used against the spirit of what they should be doing: making bike commutes practical.
However that isn't the real priority of the city.
From my layperson perspective that sounds relatively easy to address. For example they could require some minimum distance of continuous bike lanes to get approved for funding.
I sure wish it would be. I'd love to be able to have bike paths as sensical as interstates.
Decades of this sorts of "aha I know what rule change will fix this" are exactly how we got here though. They all look reasonable in isolation but at the systemic level we get garbage.
This has been going on forever. Bike lanes are just the current vehicle (heh) for financial waste.
We've got a giant 8-lane intersection on a 2-lane road in the middle of nowhere because 50% off that monstrosity because of fedgrant bucks was cheaper than just DIYing it 100% out of pocket.
Yeah, I consider the bike lanes around here basically completely useless. You can't actually get much of anywhere. And there are too many drivers who harass bikes. We just saw that recently with the boxer who got killed that way.
There's no thought of anything but cars, last spring at least there was a construction spot where they set up some barriers that force a pedestrian into a 35 mph traffic lane (decelerating from 55, so a lot of drivers are going faster than 35.) And while pedestrians at that spot would be extremely rare (there's nothing beyond it--the only pedestrians would be those who were actually seeking nothing. Namely, hikers) there is a decent amount of bike traffic there.
The American far right is so bloody weird. Like, even weirder than other peoples’ far right. DEI bike lanes! What the hell.