What American Cities are Missing: Bikes by the Thousands

"Amy Blankenship" wrote in message
.. .

"Joe the Aroma" wrote in message
...

"Amy Blankenship" wrote in message
...

Not to mention pollution...

They've exported plenty to us as well. See the "Asian brown cloud".

You don't think any of that is because we've outsourced the production of
some of our dirtier industrial processes? They produce a lot of coke
(coal product, not beverage or drug) used in our electric plants, for
instance...

I absolutely *DO* think and know that. Apparently our polluting industries
are "burdened" by environmental regulations. Free trade necessitates an
international regulatory body which would add another layer of bureaucracy
and is the first step on the road to world government. No thanks.

On May 23, 8:33 am, Krzysztof Zietara tarhim
wrote:
On 21 May 2007 16:06:10 -0700, John Kane wrote:

I take it you're quite young ? I seem to remember Solidarity.

You may also remember how it ended up first time around, then.

But the second time? Remember that trade unions in the UK , USA &
IIRC Canada were considered a wild threat to the establishment in the
1800's.

However you have a good point. OTOH free or not Wal-Mart has a union
in China.

The question is, are those unions are just for show or do they really
protect rights of fhe worker.

I don't know but my bet would be mainly just for show. However once
you've got a union foot in the door..

Tarhimdugurth
--
[S1 - za sygnaturkê]

On May 23, 11:28 pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:
In article ,
Nobody writes:

A pleasant urban environment that doesn't get its citizens
anxiously grinding their teeth in their sleep or coming down
with athsma is also good.

Your personal intentions and aspirations are admirable.. but to expect
two million plus other citizens in Greater Vancouver to follow those
weather-related flagellations is, well, quirky at best.

I don't expect them all to follow those "weather-related
flagellations." I'm just saying: those who wanna ... can.
And it's not that bad. It could be better. It can be
/made/ better. But practical bicycle transportation is
quite do-able right now.

Let's all abandon Mister Ford's automobile, and ride the current
street car ("SkyTrain") and autobus! Hurrah!

Alternative transportation is not regressive.

Fine, but don't expect the Great Majority to hitch their pinnies and
hoops, and clasp a hand on baseball cap while peddling a two-wheeler
across 25km of up hill and down dale in rain and shine amd sleet and
snow and wind and gust.. well, you get the message.

What about the folks who only need to go 10 km or 5 km?

It simply is not practicable (note the use of adjective), either by
wish or function.

It is for me, and for many others.

--
Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

I'm glad you enjoy bicycling, but it's not for everyone. Nor is
public transportation. I live in the middle of nowhere, is it's not a
practical alternative for most people. We have a few dedicated
bicyclists around here who bike in all weather, but they are mostly
alcoholics who have lost their licenses.

I don't know if they make rain gear for commuting or not, but if they
don't; go look at some of the motorcyle stuff. It's light, can
withstand buckets of water at high speed, and doesn't look too bad.

Stay well.

I'm glad you enjoy bicycling, but it's not for everyone. Nor is
public transportation. I live in the middle of nowhere, is it's not a
practical alternative for most people. We have a few dedicated
bicyclists around here who bike in all weather, but they are mostly
alcoholics who have lost their licenses.


Oh, say yee. What proof do you have foul mouth.
I have only ridden a bike since 8 years old, 44 years. Cept had a
motorcycle for 2 years till somebody trashed it. Anything below 5 miles is
said to be more practical by bike and I agree.
Plus you get fit and do not spend lota time at the doctors.
For some it may not be practical but to say every one else is a drunk
without a license is a troll stamp.

cheers
I bought another motorcycle this May. street legal dirt bike and you get
even worse treatment than a cyclist. Must be the label thingy. I did it
for another hobby and thought the gas would be excellent but the insurance
is murder on these things.

On May 24, 12:27 am, (Tom Keats) wrote:
In article ,
"Joe the Aroma" writes:

I have no problem with exported labor. Better to have them working
than wanting to fight us. But I also have no problem with leveling
the playing field. If the US, for example, said that all labor on
goods imported into the US had to pay the equivelent of US minimum
wage, I would have a problem with that. It wouldn't bring too many
jobs back here because few people will work for minimum wage, but it
would level the playing field quite a bit. But until that happens,
the world is what the world is.

Welp, you better hope they don't want to fight us after we've exported all
our technology and wealth to them.

They won't have to fight you. They'll just buy you.

Yes, that will be the case if we stagnate. But if we continue to
innovate and stay the world leaders in the things that we want to be
the world leaders in, then it's NBD. As it is, we don't have enough
labor for everything that we need, so why not export low paying, low
skill jobs -- especially ones using low tech.

As for them buying us, that's another issue altogether. The biggest
thing we could do for our future is to get gov't spending under
control and to eliminate our debt.


--
Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

In article .com,
Pat writes:

I'm glad you enjoy bicycling, but it's not for everyone.

I realize that; that's why I'm not suggesting "everyone"
should take up the avocation.

My apologism for transportational cycling is not a
call to "everyone" to convert their cars into potato
planters, and to ride bikes exclusively to get around.
My immediate concern is to rebut erroneous statements
about transportational cycling necessarily being an
impractical hassle. If some folks decide it might be
nice to ride instead of drive for the occasional
milk-&-bread run to the grocery store, or to get to
the library, coffee shop or workplace, that'd be a
pretty good fringe benefit, too. Save yer gas and
money for the longer/heavier hauls. Use the vehicle
that's proportionally appropriate for the task.

Nor is
public transportation. I live in the middle of nowhere, is it's not a
practical alternative for most people.

Actually, most people in the US (and quite possibly in
the whole North American continent) live in urban areas
where transportational bicycling /is/ practical.

We have a few dedicated
bicyclists around here who bike in all weather, but they are mostly
alcoholics who have lost their licenses.

I don't even have a license. I don't even know how
to drive. Never needed to. But I realize I'm not
"everyone." So while I do enjoy the conveniences of
urban life and am well adapted to a carless lifestyle,
I'm certainly not advocating that everyone should be
like me. But if anyone wants to be less car-dependent,
there are folks like me around who can offer some
insight as to how to achieve that.

I don't know if they make rain gear for commuting or not, but if they
don't; go look at some of the motorcyle stuff. It's light, can
withstand buckets of water at high speed, and doesn't look too bad.

Rain gear is in fact available. I generally use a
traditional cycling rain cape over my street clothes.
It's dry and cool at the same time.

Stay well.

You too.


--
Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

On May 23, 11:28 pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:
In article ,
Nobody writes:

A pleasant urban environment that doesn't get its citizens
anxiously grinding their teeth in their sleep or coming down
with athsma is also good.

Your personal intentions and aspirations are admirable.. but to expect
two million plus other citizens in Greater Vancouver to follow those
weather-related flagellations is, well, quirky at best.

I don't expect them all to follow those "weather-related
flagellations." I'm just saying: those who wanna ... can.
And it's not that bad. It could be better. It can be
/made/ better. But practical bicycle transportation is
quite do-able right now.

Let's all abandon Mister Ford's automobile, and ride the current
street car ("SkyTrain") and autobus! Hurrah!

Alternative transportation is not regressive.

Fine, but don't expect the Great Majority to hitch their pinnies and
hoops, and clasp a hand on baseball cap while peddling a two-wheeler
across 25km of up hill and down dale in rain and shine amd sleet and
snow and wind and gust.. well, you get the message.

What about the folks who only need to go 10 km or 5 km?

It simply is not practicable (note the use of adjective), either by
wish or function.

It is for me, and for many others.

And for many more who are hold back by the unnecessary danger present
on our roads...


Are SUV drivers more reckless?

This is subjective, in other words what I see around with my own eyes,
but it seems that size and recklessness go hand in hand, all the way
up to the Supersized Unnecessary Vehicles...

So are they the new terrorists of the road, or just innocent suckers
who fell for advertising?

Just wondering...


--Whatever keeps you from driving an older econo car or a newer
microcar like a honda fit?--

I rather keep fit in my SUB (smart utility bike). Well, rethinking my
strategy in light of the Darwinian roads where I'm forced to drive.
Even smaller cars put me at the wrong end of the food chain. I guess
only buses protect me from the big predators out there.

On May 24, 1:53 pm, donquijote1954
wrote:
On May 23, 11:28 pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:



In article ,
Nobody writes:

A pleasant urban environment that doesn't get its citizens
anxiously grinding their teeth in their sleep or coming down
with athsma is also good.

Your personal intentions and aspirations are admirable.. but to expect
two million plus other citizens in Greater Vancouver to follow those
weather-related flagellations is, well, quirky at best.

I don't expect them all to follow those "weather-related
flagellations." I'm just saying: those who wanna ... can.
And it's not that bad. It could be better. It can be
/made/ better. But practical bicycle transportation is
quite do-able right now.

Let's all abandon Mister Ford's automobile, and ride the current
street car ("SkyTrain") and autobus! Hurrah!

Alternative transportation is not regressive.

Fine, but don't expect the Great Majority to hitch their pinnies and
hoops, and clasp a hand on baseball cap while peddling a two-wheeler
across 25km of up hill and down dale in rain and shine amd sleet and
snow and wind and gust.. well, you get the message.

What about the folks who only need to go 10 km or 5 km?

It simply is not practicable (note the use of adjective), either by
wish or function.

It is for me, and for many others.

And for many more who are hold back by the unnecessary danger present
on our roads...

Are SUV drivers more reckless?

This is subjective, in other words what I see around with my own eyes,
but it seems that size and recklessness go hand in hand, all the way
up to the Supersized Unnecessary Vehicles...

So are they the new terrorists of the road, or just innocent suckers
who fell for advertising?

Just wondering...

--Whatever keeps you from driving an older econo car or a newer
microcar like a honda fit?--

I rather keep fit in my SUB (smart utility bike). Well, rethinking my
strategy in light of the Darwinian roads where I'm forced to drive.
Even smaller cars put me at the wrong end of the food chain. I guess
only buses protect me from the big predators out there.

I am in a small town in the middle of nowhere. In the last two weeks,
we have had two bus incidents. One was a lacrosse bus (that my son
was on) that his a mogal in the road so hard that it ripped the kid-
gate off the front of the bus. A couple of kids hit the ceiling.
Then last week, a bus (with the lights flashing) was slowing down to
drop off kids and it was rear-ended by a tractor trailer. 3 kids and
the driver hurt. Nothing too serious. 4 kids okay. Busses are safe,
but maybe not as safe as I had thought.

On May 24, 1:53 pm, donquijote1954
wrote:
On May 23, 11:28 pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:





In article ,
Nobody writes:

A pleasant urban environment that doesn't get its citizens
anxiously grinding their teeth in their sleep or coming down
with athsma is also good.

Your personal intentions and aspirations are admirable.. but to expect
two million plus other citizens in Greater Vancouver to follow those
weather-related flagellations is, well, quirky at best.

I don't expect them all to follow those "weather-related
flagellations." I'm just saying: those who wanna ... can.
And it's not that bad. It could be better. It can be
/made/ better. But practical bicycle transportation is
quite do-able right now.

Let's all abandon Mister Ford's automobile, and ride the current
street car ("SkyTrain") and autobus! Hurrah!

Alternative transportation is not regressive.

Fine, but don't expect the Great Majority to hitch their pinnies and
hoops, and clasp a hand on baseball cap while peddling a two-wheeler
across 25km of up hill and down dale in rain and shine amd sleet and
snow and wind and gust.. well, you get the message.

What about the folks who only need to go 10 km or 5 km?

It simply is not practicable (note the use of adjective), either by
wish or function.

It is for me, and for many others.

And for many more who are hold back by the unnecessary danger present
on our roads...

Are SUV drivers more reckless?

This is subjective, in other words what I see around with my own eyes,
but it seems that size and recklessness go hand in hand, all the way
up to the Supersized Unnecessary Vehicles...

So are they the new terrorists of the road, or just innocent suckers
who fell for advertising?

Just wondering...

--Whatever keeps you from driving an older econo car or a newer
microcar like a honda fit?--

I rather keep fit in my SUB (smart utility bike). Well, rethinking my
strategy in light of the Darwinian roads where I'm forced to drive.
Even smaller cars put me at the wrong end of the food chain. I guess
only buses protect me from the big predators out there.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Under that logic, you should start by banning 53-foot trailers and
tandems.

wrote in message
oups.com...
On May 24, 1:53 pm, donquijote1954
wrote:
I rather keep fit in my SUB (smart utility bike). Well, rethinking
my strategy in light of the Darwinian roads where I'm forced to
drive. Even smaller cars put me at the wrong end of the food
chain. I guess only buses protect me from the big predators
out there.- Hide quoted text -

Under that logic, you should start by banning 53-foot trailers and
tandems.

Many/most drivers of _any_ type of vehicle would be happy to see that, but
the teamsters will make sure it never happens. Instead, we're going the
other way, allowing doubles and now even triples.

Bicyclists would be better served by bike trails that kept them off the
streets for the majority of their trip anyways. More linear parks would be
a nice side benefit that any resident would support, and it's easy to
include bike trains in them at nearly no cost. Even sidewalk maintenance
(where they exist) is widely supported by local voters.

The key for "quality of life" stuff like this is getting local politicians
to change spending priorities and zoning rules, rather than trying to
influence corrupt state or national politicians who care only about getting
campaign contributions from unions and other lobbies.

S

--
Stephen Sprunk "Those people who think they know everything
CCIE #3723 are a great annoyance to those of us who do."
K5SSS --Isaac Asimov


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com