What Right-Wing Governance Does For Cycling

On 3/2/2011 12:01 PM, Edward Dolan wrote:
"T�m Sherm�nT " wrote in
message ...
On 3/1/2011 8:04 PM, Edward Dolan wrote:
"T?m Sherm?n? " wrote in
message ...
Seehttp://www.bikeiowa.com/asp/hotnews/newsdisplay.asp?NewsID=4894.

Remember to thank the budget priorities of upper class tax cuts and
subsidies, when your favorite rural riding routes change from pavement
to
road bike unfriendly aggregate surfacing.

I think Minnesota has more miles of roads to maintain than almost any
other
state. If and when we return some asphalt roads to gravel roads, it just
means that vehicles will have to go slower which will not to be such a
bad
thing. As far a cycling is concerned, I NEVER see cyclists doing any
riding
on rural roads. Cycling is best restricted to urban areas anyway.

As for raising taxes to pay for ever more and better roads, forget about
it.
The states and counties are all going broke just like the federal
government. Everyone is already paying more than enough taxes.

Nonsense. The upper classes and corporations are only paying a fraction
of what they did under the REPUBLICAN Eisenhower Administration (when the
middle classes were much better off).

But everything is constantly changing. We now live in a global economy and
the upper classes and corporations can take whatever they have to foreign
lands. It is what makes it possible for me to shop at Wal-Mart and not be
robbed. Jeez, try to get up to date if that is possible.

The solution
to all our problems is to stop the spending and to learn to get along on
less. What we spend on education is especially a boondoggle. Yea, tighten
the belt and welcome deprivation. It is good for the soul!

The biggest boondoggle is what is spent on subsidizing Wall Street
incomes.

Frankly, I do not understand how Wall Street works at all. I would never
give those *******s a single penny.

Wall Street produces no added value, leading to the obvious conclusion
that the investment bankers are merely parasites sucking the economic
blood out of the working classes.

The original purpose of the stock market allowing corporations to raise
capital has been perverted into the world's largest de facto gambling
operation and Ponzi scheme.

--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

On 3/2/2011 12:09 PM, Edward Dolan wrote:
"T�m Sherm�n� " wrote in
message ...
[...]
The secret "they" do not want you to know is that lower and middle class
wages are set by the market [1], and go up and down at about the same rate
as tax increases and cuts. Therefore, lower and middle class worker end
up with about the same after-tax income with tax cuts, but reductions in
government services. However, the upper class wage earners greatly
increase their incomes with tax cuts.

The second secret "they" do not want you to know is that the hypothesis of
upper class tax cuts stimulating the economy has been proven false in
practice. The extra upper class income is not used for capital
investments, since the shifting of the overall share of income to the rich
depresses demand for goods and services. Instead, the rich mostly use the
extra income in de-facto gambling on Wall Street, and similar unproductive
activities.

[1] Upper class wages are typically set by the "You scratch my back and
I'll scratch yours" system.

I think Tom Sherman is not far from wrong in the above analysis (I was once
far to the Left of him). But even so, what other system of economy works any
better? I do not mind a few rich if it lets the rest of us get by. That is
something that all socialisms fail most abysmally at. North Korea anyone?

The USian economy of 40 to 60 years ago worked better for 99% of the
people than the current version does.

--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

"Tºm ShermªnT °_°" " wrote in
message ...
On 3/2/2011 12:01 PM, Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
Frankly, I do not understand how Wall Street works at all. I would never
give those *******s a single penny.

Wall Street produces no added value, leading to the obvious conclusion
that the investment bankers are merely parasites sucking the economic
blood out of the working classes.

The original purpose of the stock market allowing corporations to raise
capital has been perverted into the world's largest de facto gambling
operation and Ponzi scheme.

Hells Bells, I think the entire federal government is one giant Ponzi
scheme.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

"Tºm ShermªnT °_°" " wrote in
message ...
On 3/2/2011 12:09 PM, Edward Dolan wrote:
"T?m Sherm?n? " wrote in
message ...
[...]
The secret "they" do not want you to know is that lower and middle class
wages are set by the market [1], and go up and down at about the same
rate
as tax increases and cuts. Therefore, lower and middle class worker end
up with about the same after-tax income with tax cuts, but reductions in
government services. However, the upper class wage earners greatly
increase their incomes with tax cuts.

The second secret "they" do not want you to know is that the hypothesis
of
upper class tax cuts stimulating the economy has been proven false in
practice. The extra upper class income is not used for capital
investments, since the shifting of the overall share of income to the
rich
depresses demand for goods and services. Instead, the rich mostly use
the
extra income in de-facto gambling on Wall Street, and similar
unproductive
activities.

[1] Upper class wages are typically set by the "You scratch my back and
I'll scratch yours" system.

I think Tom Sherman is not far from wrong in the above analysis (I was
once
far to the Left of him). But even so, what other system of economy works
any
better? I do not mind a few rich if it lets the rest of us get by. That
is
something that all socialisms fail most abysmally at. North Korea anyone?

The USian economy of 40 to 60 years ago worked better for 99% of the
people than the current version does.

The years following WWII were a golden age for America. It has been all down
hill ever since, mainly because our politicians just keep getting stupider
and stupider. Hey, I like Ike!

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

On Mar 2, 4:34*pm, Peter Cole wrote:

I wish we had Portland's safety stats.

Is Boston unusually dangerous?

- Frank Krygowski

On Mar 2, 5:28*pm, Peter Cole wrote:
On 3/2/2011 12:24 AM, Jay Beattie wrote:
*I don't need no
stink'n lanes. *I need smooth asphalt. -- Jay Beattie.

You probably don't in Portland, most of it anyway, but people seem to
like them.

People tend to like what people are told they should like. Ask any
advertising professional.

As further proof: People used to like bell bottom pants and afros on
white dudes.

- Frank Krygowski

On Mar 1, 9:57 pm, Tºm Shermªn™ °_° ""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI
$southslope.net" wrote:

Bicycle farcilities (sic) were originated as a way to confine cyclists
to an area inferior to the motor vehicles, which is hardly a left-wing
position.

False, bicycle facilities were originated by bicyclists before motor
vehicles existed. But don't let that stop ya.

On 3/2/2011 6:18 PM, Jay Beattie wrote:
On Mar 2, 2:13 pm, Peter wrote:
On 3/2/2011 12:24 AM, Jay Beattie wrote:





On Mar 1, 8:57 pm, T m Sherm n _""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI
$southslope.net" wrote:
On 3/1/2011 10:42 PM, Jay Beattie wrote:

On Mar 1, 5:14 pm, T m Sherm n _""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI
$southslope.net" wrote:
Seehttp://www.bikeiowa.com/asp/hotnews/newsdisplay.asp?NewsID=4894.

Remember to thank the budget priorities of upper class tax cuts and
subsidies, when your favorite rural riding routes change from pavement
to road bike unfriendly aggregate surfacing.

Lefties did this:http://www.flickr.com/photos/vancespics/3912223571/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/loewenherz/3331886473/Can you say "slip
and slide"?http://www.flickr.com/photos/luton/879398610/

Sometimes I prefer it when people do not do me a favor. I wish that
the Lefties would agree with the Righties to just fix the f****** pot
holes. -- Jay Beattie.

Bicycle farcilities (sic) were originated as a way to confine cyclists
to an area inferior to the motor vehicles, which is hardly a left-wing
position.

Remember, bicycle lanes were built in the Netherlands by order of the
Nazi [1] occupation, to keep bicycles out of the way of motor traffic.

[1] And only revisionist liars consider the Nazi's left-wing.

The obligation to spend public funds on bicycle facilities -- no
matter how bad -- is a lefty invention.

Obligation? How about decision?

Obligation in Oregon.ORS 366.514 -- the so-called
Bicycle Bill. Actually proposed by a Republican state representative,
but he was an avid bicyclist and therefore a Lefty, kind of like
Lincoln. http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/BIKEPED/bike_bill.shtml

Yes, so it was a decision, made by Oregon, not imposed on Oregon.


Note:

The Oregon Court of Appeals upheld the intent of this statute in
Bicycle Transportation Alliance v. City of Portland (9309-05777; CA
A82770). The judge's summary was: "Read as a whole, ORS 366.514
requires that when an agency receives state highway funds and
constructs, reconstructs or relocates highways, roads or streets, it
must expend a reasonable amount of those funds, as necessary, on
bicycle and pedestrian facilities. The statue also requires the agency
to spend no less than one percent per fiscal year on such facilities,
unless relieved of that obligation by one of the exceptions in
subsection (2)."

Sounds good, as far as it went. One percent is pretty low when modal
share is six.


I wrote and argued that appeal . . . and won. I'm a lefty, but even I
have gotten to the point where I think a lot of the infrastructure is
stupid -- not just wasteful, but affirmatively bad for me as a
cyclist.

But apparently wildly popular among other cyclists. I'm afraid that
remodeling the world according to your tastes will have to wait for your
coronation.


The right would do nothing.

That's a pretty broad claim.

It is . . . I'm talking far right.

These day, the "far right" seems capable of anything.


The true small government states like Idaho have some dreadful roads.
I believe in spending money to make road surfaces rideable. I swear
that if I get killed on my bike, it is going to be while riding home
at night in the rain over crappy road surface. I don't need no
stink'n lanes. I need smooth asphalt. -- Jay Beattie.

I don't see the zero-sum argument. A reasonable, pragmatic approach
would seem to be to fund facilities by modal share, adjusted to promote
majority wishes for specific goals. I don't know of any cyclists who are
indifferent to potholes, while the majority seem to favor facilities. If
people want bike facilities and good pavement, they just have to pay for
both. It has been done. Portland isn't poor, just cheap. That's hard to
find sympathy for.- Hide quoted text -

We're cheap? You're f****** nuts! My water bill (which is used to
pay for some bicycle infrastructure), property taxes and state income
taxes and now increased gas taxes say otherwise.

Compared to what? Idaho? You really want Idaho-class infrastructure?
Good luck with that.


Personally, I see no
need to waste money on goofy signs, boxes, arrows, lines, etc., unless
you are laying out a basketball court or square dancing class.

Make it your first post-coronation decree then.

We
have finite resources and should put them to work filling pot holes
rather than putting sharrows on streets so narrow that you couldn't
share them with a skateboard. -- Jay Beattie.

All resources are finite, but it doesn't follow that sharrows mean
unfilled pot holes. If you want to play, you've got to pay. Cycling
budgets are a pittance, motor vehicle infrastructure and "externalized"
costs are enormous in comparison and hardly fairly shared. You sound
awfully right-eous for a self-described lefty.

On 3/2/2011 11:33 PM, Tºm Shermªn™ °_° wrote:
On 3/2/2011 12:01 PM, Edward Dolan wrote:
"T�m Sherm�nT " wrote in
message ...
On 3/1/2011 8:04 PM, Edward Dolan wrote:
"T?m Sherm?n? " wrote in
message ...
Seehttp://www.bikeiowa.com/asp/hotnews/newsdisplay.asp?NewsID=4894.

Remember to thank the budget priorities of upper class tax cuts and
subsidies, when your favorite rural riding routes change from pavement
to
road bike unfriendly aggregate surfacing.

I think Minnesota has more miles of roads to maintain than almost any
other
state. If and when we return some asphalt roads to gravel roads, it
just
means that vehicles will have to go slower which will not to be such a
bad
thing. As far a cycling is concerned, I NEVER see cyclists doing any
riding
on rural roads. Cycling is best restricted to urban areas anyway.

As for raising taxes to pay for ever more and better roads, forget
about
it.
The states and counties are all going broke just like the federal
government. Everyone is already paying more than enough taxes.

Nonsense. The upper classes and corporations are only paying a fraction
of what they did under the REPUBLICAN Eisenhower Administration (when
the
middle classes were much better off).

But everything is constantly changing. We now live in a global economy
and
the upper classes and corporations can take whatever they have to foreign
lands. It is what makes it possible for me to shop at Wal-Mart and not be
robbed. Jeez, try to get up to date if that is possible.

The solution
to all our problems is to stop the spending and to learn to get
along on
less. What we spend on education is especially a boondoggle. Yea,
tighten
the belt and welcome deprivation. It is good for the soul!

The biggest boondoggle is what is spent on subsidizing Wall Street
incomes.

Frankly, I do not understand how Wall Street works at all. I would never
give those *******s a single penny.

Wall Street produces no added value, leading to the obvious conclusion
that the investment bankers are merely parasites sucking the economic
blood out of the working classes.

The original purpose of the stock market allowing corporations to raise
capital has been perverted into the world's largest de facto gambling
operation and Ponzi scheme.


Capitalism inherently involves gambling, so does life.

On 3/2/2011 11:35 PM, Tºm Shermªn™ °_° wrote:
On 3/2/2011 12:09 PM, Edward Dolan wrote:
"T�m Sherm�n� " wrote in
message ...
[...]
The secret "they" do not want you to know is that lower and middle class
wages are set by the market [1], and go up and down at about the same
rate
as tax increases and cuts. Therefore, lower and middle class worker end
up with about the same after-tax income with tax cuts, but reductions in
government services. However, the upper class wage earners greatly
increase their incomes with tax cuts.

The second secret "they" do not want you to know is that the
hypothesis of
upper class tax cuts stimulating the economy has been proven false in
practice. The extra upper class income is not used for capital
investments, since the shifting of the overall share of income to the
rich
depresses demand for goods and services. Instead, the rich mostly use
the
extra income in de-facto gambling on Wall Street, and similar
unproductive
activities.

[1] Upper class wages are typically set by the "You scratch my back and
I'll scratch yours" system.

I think Tom Sherman is not far from wrong in the above analysis (I was
once
far to the Left of him). But even so, what other system of economy
works any
better? I do not mind a few rich if it lets the rest of us get by.
That is
something that all socialisms fail most abysmally at. North Korea anyone?

The USian economy of 40 to 60 years ago worked better for 99% of the
people than the current version does.


I think that's more than a bit of an overstatement. It's true that
income and wealth inequality is a broad economic problem, not only
ethical, but also structural in consequence. Much of the increasing
concentration of wealth in the hands of the few has to do with the game
having been loaded in recent decades by the wealthy and their ability to
engender support from the non-wealthy for that through propaganda. See
the Koch bros. for a current example.

Capitalism is natural, but so are droughts and floods. Water is neither
inherently good or bad, but the scarcity or surpluses can be. We're
clever monkeys, we can tame the beast if we just use that thing between
our ears.