Bus racks

On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 4:20:45 PM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-09-03 19:32, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, September 3, 2018 at 5:01:48 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/3/2018 6:19 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 03 Sep 2018 14:26:27 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2018-09-03 13:49, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Monday, September 3, 2018 at 4:45:02 PM UTC-4, Joerg
wrote: Snipped

We already pay among the highest taxes in the country.
That's enough taxes.

-- Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

Nothing in life is free including bicycling infrastructure,
bicycle shuttle buses/trains ...


It's a matter of priorities. For example, our comuntiy decided
it was more important to built a half-million Dollar mural
display.

Well, that is democracy, isn't it... you know, where the majority
get to make the rules and the minority doesn't have a say in the
matter.


... or new oversize bicycle racks.


No, correctly sized racks. They do not cost extra. When I
design electronics it is expected of me that it fits the needs
of today, not those of 20 years ago.

Steel is sold by the pound so in fact your larger racks do cost
more than smaller lighter racks.

But to put it in a more democratic framework, do the majority of
the cyclists who ride the bus require or want larger racks or is
it just you (a minority)?


They use their own pickup trucks because the bikes won't fit, like what
we currently do.


More importantly, what did the other rack vendor ever do for that
one guy on the county Board who wrote the last purchase order? If
you ever read a government purchase order or bid on one you'll
notice they are written such that only one product or one vendor
can fit the description. This is not an accident.

It's not that sinister. All the transit districts buy standard racks
that fit most bikes and don't interfere with lights and signals on
the bus. Any manufacturer could read the RFP and build to spec.,
although racks may not be subject to the public contracting process
(and I'm not going to bother looking).


Some transit agencies have bought better racks. Those have rails which
are open to one side. That has two advantages:

1. Loading the bike is easier for elss muscular people. Instead of
having to lift the whole bike only one wheel needs to be lifted at a time..

2. The slot length is (within reason) not limited so it fits modern MTB.


Sportworks has a corner on the market in the PNW. They sell a fat
tire bike kit to go with their more recent racks.
https://www.sportworks.com/product/apex-fat-tire-kit Racks don't
wear out quickly, and they can be moved from bus to bus, and transit
districts aren't going to spend a bunch of dough upgrading bike racks
so Joerg and ten other guys can take their fat tire or long wheelbase
bikes on a bus. Joerg should start a non-profit to pay for new racks
-- but keep in mind, CA has some rigorous rules relating to bus
racks, at least it appears that way based on the FAQs on the
Sportwork site. His dream rack may not be allowed in CA.


The solution is so simple:

https://www.yrt.ca/en/riding-with-us...ike-n-ride.jpg

I think our local guys simply didn't test properly before buying.

That is probably a Sportworks rack: https://www.sportworks.com/product/dl2-np The dl2-np is still limited to a 42" wheelbase. Just because it has an open end does not mean that it is fit for super-long bikes. For that, you have to buy a different rack. See: https://www.sportworks.com/assets/fi...ck-Catalog.pdf

I'm sure your local guys are super-stupid and don't think of anything. They probably forget to put on their underwear and wear different colored socks. Or, alternatively, they made a choice you don't like -- and probably one dictated in part by statute or regulation -- or something so mundane as price. https://www.sportworks.com/about-spo...lifornia-buses

If you think you can make better decisions, get into local government. Everybody does it. One of our former associations was General Counsel for TriMet, the local transit agency, but she has since moved on, so I can't rag on her about bike racks on buses. I went to law school with the governor, but if I called her to complain about bike racks, she'd hit me up for money. Even my own sister is running for city council in Santa Rosa, and she's hitting me up for money -- and I'm not even a resident. Everybody wants money this time of year. If you have friends in public office, you have to learn to say no or go broke, or a little of both. I dread contested judicial elections when they want an endorsement.

-- Jay Beattie.

On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 5:15:51 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/4/2018 6:10 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-09-03 16:10, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 03 Sep 2018 13:45:01 -0700, Joerg

wrote:

On 2018-09-02 16:36, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 02 Sep 2018 08:02:04 -0700, Joerg

wrote:

On 2018-09-01 21:30, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 12:08:31 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
wrote:

On Friday, August 31, 2018 at 3:03:16 PM UTC-4, Joerg
wrote:
On 2018-08-31 11:06, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Friday, August 31, 2018 at 1:36:09 PM UTC-4,
Joerg wrote:
On 2018-08-31 08:51, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, August 31, 2018 at 7:13:51 AM UTC-7,
Joerg wrote:
snip


[...]


[...]


(BTW, in front of my office building. I have
to dodge those
things). We also have private buses up to the
mountains for
skiing and airport shuttle buses, etc.


Those are what could be construed as
cherry-picking. What I
meant was a full blown system that includes not
so lucrative
routes all the way to Outer Podunk. A sysme that
enables most
residents not to even have a car.

Not going to happen in a market economy. The
fares would be too
high for either local users who have to subsidize
rural users or
for rural users who have to pay actual cost plus
ROI. There might
be a way to do this by selling losses to
investors -- running the
system as a tax shelter, but I'll let the tax
accountants figure
that one out. The bottom line is that barriers
to entry are not
that high and certainly lower than in Germany,
and if mass
transit could be done profitably in a large US
urban area by
private business, it would be. People are always
looking for a
way to make a buck. It might work elsewhere in a
dense European
city, but it has been tried and failed here in PDX.


The German example I brought was from an area much
less densely
populated than Portland. AFAIK they even operate
ferries in the
system.


Germany is a comparatively small country with a
large population.
Distances are not so great there compared to many
areas of the USA.


As I wrote, I picked an example (on purpose) from an
area that is less
densely populated than where I live now.


Again, if Germany is so gosh darn great, then why
have so many
Germans emigrated?


Because it wasn't always great and still isn't in
many aspects. One
cannot generalize. For example, public
transportation is clearly better
there but bike paths and even more so MTB trails are
definitely not.
Before moving to the US I would have never dreamed
that bicycle
infrastructure could become better here than in
Germany but it has.
Agencies in the various contries could learn from
each other but there
is often a lack of willingness.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

I wonder what would happen if to create a new
bicycling infrastructure or bus/rail link that would
benefit mainly bicyclists, if bicyclists were told
they alone would have to pay for it?

Cheers

Many years ago Riverside, California attempted to
"register" bicycles.
The idea was to have a record of who owned what
bicycle which they
hoped might reduce bicycle theft.

If I remember correctly it cost the owner 50 cents and
he got a nice
little "number plate" to attach to his bicycle.

You never heard as much moaning and groaning, "You
mean I gotta pay 50
cents to ride a bicycle." The city gave up on the
scheme. Apparently
cyclists are cheap.


I doubt that, and they should not make it mandatory
anyhow. If they made
it mandatory then Californians can already smell it
that pretty soon the
authorities would start to tax bicycles per year and
they don't want
that. If there is any way to extract yet another tax
from the people CA
will eventually do that.

But if you don't pay your taxes who is going to support
the homeless,
and the illegal immigrants, and the bike paths and, and,
and.

If you are going to have socialism someone's got to pay
for it.


We already pay among the highest taxes in the country.
That's enough taxes.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


I see, you want bike paths, racks on buses, and all the
other free
goodies provided by the state, but you don't want to pay
for them.


See above. We already paid for them.

[...]


You California taxpayers paid for extravagant pensions, the
$80billion choo choo which doesn't run, homeless, welfare
and illegal services, fire fighting of forests which should
have been logged and so on. You want bike racks? User fee.
Not only my opinion, just the way it will be.

Well, everything could be done better, like in Kansas. And about logging, logging what? Oak and madrone . . . grass? My sister about got burned out in Santa Rosa last year -- no kidding, she was evacuated and could see flames, and she was no where near a forest with merchantable timber, unless you count houses. Feds control federal lands. California has small timber holdings compared to private interests. Harvesting on private lands is like harvesting any crop, except the crop takes 40-60 years, so you will have dense stands of immature trees that nobody is going to radically thin a cash crop.

-- Jay Beattie.

On 2018-09-04 17:51, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 at 4:20:45 PM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-09-03 19:32, jbeattie wrote:

[...]


Sportworks has a corner on the market in the PNW. They sell a
fat tire bike kit to go with their more recent racks.
https://www.sportworks.com/product/apex-fat-tire-kit Racks
don't wear out quickly, and they can be moved from bus to bus,
and transit districts aren't going to spend a bunch of dough
upgrading bike racks so Joerg and ten other guys can take their
fat tire or long wheelbase bikes on a bus. Joerg should start a
non-profit to pay for new racks -- but keep in mind, CA has some
rigorous rules relating to bus racks, at least it appears that
way based on the FAQs on the Sportwork site. His dream rack may
not be allowed in CA.


The solution is so simple:

https://www.yrt.ca/en/riding-with-us...ike-n-ride.jpg



I think our local guys simply didn't test properly before buying.

That is probably a Sportworks rack:
https://www.sportworks.com/product/dl2-np The dl2-np is still
limited to a 42" wheelbase. Just because it has an open end does not
mean that it is fit for super-long bikes. For that, you have to buy
a different rack. See:
https://www.sportworks.com/assets/fi...ck-Catalog.pdf

I'm sure your local guys are super-stupid and don't think of
anything. They probably forget to put on their underwear and wear
different colored socks. Or, alternatively, they made a choice you
don't like -- and probably one dictated in part by statute or
regulation -- or something so mundane as price.
https://www.sportworks.com/about-spo...lifornia-buses

If you think you can make better decisions, get into local
government. Everybody does it.


No. I still have to work some and we have chosen to do plenty of other
volunteer work such as working with the elderly and lay caregiving. Plus
I want to have to to ... ride. I expect elected leaders or hired one to
do their job properly. Not vetting bus racks before signing a major
purchase order is not a proper procurement process.


... One of our former associations was
General Counsel for TriMet, the local transit agency, but she has
since moved on, so I can't rag on her about bike racks on buses. I
went to law school with the governor, but if I called her to complain
about bike racks, she'd hit me up for money. Even my own sister is
running for city council in Santa Rosa, and she's hitting me up for
money -- and I'm not even a resident. Everybody wants money this time
of year. If you have friends in public office, you have to learn to
say no or go broke, or a little of both. I dread contested judicial
elections when they want an endorsement.


In this case it's employees making such decisions. They need to make
better decisions and I have outlined one way how to do that. The way we
do it in med-tech. It works.

BTW, I haven't tried yet but it is likely that even my 1982 road bike
won't fit properly because it's less than 3" shorter than my MTB which
was sticking out more than that.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On 2018-09-04 16:55, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Tue, 04 Sep 2018 16:10:13 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2018-09-03 16:10, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 03 Sep 2018 13:45:01 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2018-09-02 16:36, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 02 Sep 2018 08:02:04 -0700, Joerg
wrote:

On 2018-09-01 21:30, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 12:08:31 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
wrote:

On Friday, August 31, 2018 at 3:03:16 PM UTC-4, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-08-31 11:06, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Friday, August 31, 2018 at 1:36:09 PM UTC-4, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-08-31 08:51, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, August 31, 2018 at 7:13:51 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
snip


[...]


[...]


(BTW, in front of my office building. I have to dodge those
things). We also have private buses up to the mountains for
skiing and airport shuttle buses, etc.


Those are what could be construed as cherry-picking. What I
meant was a full blown system that includes not so lucrative
routes all the way to Outer Podunk. A sysme that enables most
residents not to even have a car.

Not going to happen in a market economy. The fares would be too
high for either local users who have to subsidize rural users or
for rural users who have to pay actual cost plus ROI. There might
be a way to do this by selling losses to investors -- running the
system as a tax shelter, but I'll let the tax accountants figure
that one out. The bottom line is that barriers to entry are not
that high and certainly lower than in Germany, and if mass
transit could be done profitably in a large US urban area by
private business, it would be. People are always looking for a
way to make a buck. It might work elsewhere in a dense European
city, but it has been tried and failed here in PDX.


The German example I brought was from an area much less densely
populated than Portland. AFAIK they even operate ferries in the
system.


Germany is a comparatively small country with a large population.
Distances are not so great there compared to many areas of the USA.


As I wrote, I picked an example (on purpose) from an area that is less
densely populated than where I live now.


Again, if Germany is so gosh darn great, then why have so many
Germans emigrated?


Because it wasn't always great and still isn't in many aspects. One
cannot generalize. For example, public transportation is clearly better
there but bike paths and even more so MTB trails are definitely not.
Before moving to the US I would have never dreamed that bicycle
infrastructure could become better here than in Germany but it has.
Agencies in the various contries could learn from each other but there
is often a lack of willingness.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

I wonder what would happen if to create a new bicycling infrastructure or bus/rail link that would benefit mainly bicyclists, if bicyclists were told they alone would have to pay for it?

Cheers

Many years ago Riverside, California attempted to "register" bicycles.
The idea was to have a record of who owned what bicycle which they
hoped might reduce bicycle theft.

If I remember correctly it cost the owner 50 cents and he got a nice
little "number plate" to attach to his bicycle.

You never heard as much moaning and groaning, "You mean I gotta pay 50
cents to ride a bicycle." The city gave up on the scheme. Apparently
cyclists are cheap.


I doubt that, and they should not make it mandatory anyhow. If they made
it mandatory then Californians can already smell it that pretty soon the
authorities would start to tax bicycles per year and they don't want
that. If there is any way to extract yet another tax from the people CA
will eventually do that.

But if you don't pay your taxes who is going to support the homeless,
and the illegal immigrants, and the bike paths and, and, and.

If you are going to have socialism someone's got to pay for it.


We already pay among the highest taxes in the country. That's enough taxes.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


I see, you want bike paths, racks on buses, and all the other free
goodies provided by the state, but you don't want to pay for them.


See above. We already paid for them.

[...]

Highest taxes in the country?

In reality California is rated as 10th, out of the list of the 15
highest taxed states in the U.S. at 9.57%. The lowest of the 15 was
Mississippi with 9.32%, California is 9.57% and New York, the highest,
is 13.04%.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/10/us-s...x-burdens.html


Note that I wrote "among the highest". Like I wrote several times
before, try to read more carefully.


But more important the state has between $713 billion and $1.02
trillion in unfunded pension obligation, the tax base is decreasing,
since 2000, more people have left California than have arrived from
other states every year, the gasoline tax is not large enough to pay
for road building and repairs. In short, taxes will have to increase
or the state will go bankrupt.
https://californiapolicycenter.org/c...-remains-grim/


The pension boondoggle has to be curbed. That is the only solution.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On 2018-09-04 17:15, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/4/2018 6:10 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-09-03 16:10, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 03 Sep 2018 13:45:01 -0700, Joerg

wrote:

On 2018-09-02 16:36, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 02 Sep 2018 08:02:04 -0700, Joerg

wrote:

On 2018-09-01 21:30, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 12:08:31 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
wrote:

On Friday, August 31, 2018 at 3:03:16 PM UTC-4, Joerg
wrote:
On 2018-08-31 11:06, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Friday, August 31, 2018 at 1:36:09 PM UTC-4,
Joerg wrote:
On 2018-08-31 08:51, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, August 31, 2018 at 7:13:51 AM UTC-7,
Joerg wrote:
snip


[...]


[...]


(BTW, in front of my office building. I have
to dodge those
things). We also have private buses up to the
mountains for
skiing and airport shuttle buses, etc.


Those are what could be construed as
cherry-picking. What I
meant was a full blown system that includes not
so lucrative
routes all the way to Outer Podunk. A sysme that
enables most
residents not to even have a car.

Not going to happen in a market economy. The
fares would be too
high for either local users who have to subsidize
rural users or
for rural users who have to pay actual cost plus
ROI. There might
be a way to do this by selling losses to
investors -- running the
system as a tax shelter, but I'll let the tax
accountants figure
that one out. The bottom line is that barriers
to entry are not
that high and certainly lower than in Germany,
and if mass
transit could be done profitably in a large US
urban area by
private business, it would be. People are always
looking for a
way to make a buck. It might work elsewhere in a
dense European
city, but it has been tried and failed here in PDX.


The German example I brought was from an area much
less densely
populated than Portland. AFAIK they even operate
ferries in the
system.


Germany is a comparatively small country with a
large population.
Distances are not so great there compared to many
areas of the USA.


As I wrote, I picked an example (on purpose) from an
area that is less
densely populated than where I live now.


Again, if Germany is so gosh darn great, then why
have so many
Germans emigrated?


Because it wasn't always great and still isn't in
many aspects. One
cannot generalize. For example, public
transportation is clearly better
there but bike paths and even more so MTB trails are
definitely not.
Before moving to the US I would have never dreamed
that bicycle
infrastructure could become better here than in
Germany but it has.
Agencies in the various contries could learn from
each other but there
is often a lack of willingness.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

I wonder what would happen if to create a new
bicycling infrastructure or bus/rail link that would
benefit mainly bicyclists, if bicyclists were told
they alone would have to pay for it?

Cheers

Many years ago Riverside, California attempted to
"register" bicycles.
The idea was to have a record of who owned what
bicycle which they
hoped might reduce bicycle theft.

If I remember correctly it cost the owner 50 cents and
he got a nice
little "number plate" to attach to his bicycle.

You never heard as much moaning and groaning, "You
mean I gotta pay 50
cents to ride a bicycle." The city gave up on the
scheme. Apparently
cyclists are cheap.


I doubt that, and they should not make it mandatory
anyhow. If they made
it mandatory then Californians can already smell it
that pretty soon the
authorities would start to tax bicycles per year and
they don't want
that. If there is any way to extract yet another tax
from the people CA
will eventually do that.

But if you don't pay your taxes who is going to support
the homeless,
and the illegal immigrants, and the bike paths and, and,
and.

If you are going to have socialism someone's got to pay
for it.


We already pay among the highest taxes in the country.
That's enough taxes.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


I see, you want bike paths, racks on buses, and all the
other free
goodies provided by the state, but you don't want to pay
for them.


See above. We already paid for them.

[...]


You California taxpayers paid for extravagant pensions, the $80billion
choo choo which doesn't run, homeless, welfare and illegal services,
fire fighting of forests which should have been logged and so on.


That's the price for a leftist government. Like it always end up.


You want bike racks? User fee. Not only my opinion, just the way it will be.


Nope. The solution is simple: Use the pickup truck like we did
yesterday. The bus would have gone to almost the same starting piont for
a long valley ride but the pickup truck has two major advantages. You
can't be denied a ride because there aren't enough free bike slots and
the bikes always fit.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On Friday, September 7, 2018 at 7:52:38 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-09-04 17:15, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/4/2018 6:10 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-09-03 16:10, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 03 Sep 2018 13:45:01 -0700, Joerg

wrote:

On 2018-09-02 16:36, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 02 Sep 2018 08:02:04 -0700, Joerg

wrote:

On 2018-09-01 21:30, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 12:08:31 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
wrote:

On Friday, August 31, 2018 at 3:03:16 PM UTC-4, Joerg
wrote:
On 2018-08-31 11:06, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Friday, August 31, 2018 at 1:36:09 PM UTC-4,
Joerg wrote:
On 2018-08-31 08:51, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, August 31, 2018 at 7:13:51 AM UTC-7,
Joerg wrote:
snip


[...]


[...]


(BTW, in front of my office building. I have
to dodge those
things). We also have private buses up to the
mountains for
skiing and airport shuttle buses, etc.


Those are what could be construed as
cherry-picking. What I
meant was a full blown system that includes not
so lucrative
routes all the way to Outer Podunk. A sysme that
enables most
residents not to even have a car.

Not going to happen in a market economy. The
fares would be too
high for either local users who have to subsidize
rural users or
for rural users who have to pay actual cost plus
ROI. There might
be a way to do this by selling losses to
investors -- running the
system as a tax shelter, but I'll let the tax
accountants figure
that one out. The bottom line is that barriers
to entry are not
that high and certainly lower than in Germany,
and if mass
transit could be done profitably in a large US
urban area by
private business, it would be. People are always
looking for a
way to make a buck. It might work elsewhere in a
dense European
city, but it has been tried and failed here in PDX.


The German example I brought was from an area much
less densely
populated than Portland. AFAIK they even operate
ferries in the
system.


Germany is a comparatively small country with a
large population.
Distances are not so great there compared to many
areas of the USA.


As I wrote, I picked an example (on purpose) from an
area that is less
densely populated than where I live now.


Again, if Germany is so gosh darn great, then why
have so many
Germans emigrated?


Because it wasn't always great and still isn't in
many aspects. One
cannot generalize. For example, public
transportation is clearly better
there but bike paths and even more so MTB trails are
definitely not.
Before moving to the US I would have never dreamed
that bicycle
infrastructure could become better here than in
Germany but it has.
Agencies in the various contries could learn from
each other but there
is often a lack of willingness.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

I wonder what would happen if to create a new
bicycling infrastructure or bus/rail link that would
benefit mainly bicyclists, if bicyclists were told
they alone would have to pay for it?

Cheers

Many years ago Riverside, California attempted to
"register" bicycles.
The idea was to have a record of who owned what
bicycle which they
hoped might reduce bicycle theft.

If I remember correctly it cost the owner 50 cents and
he got a nice
little "number plate" to attach to his bicycle.

You never heard as much moaning and groaning, "You
mean I gotta pay 50
cents to ride a bicycle." The city gave up on the
scheme. Apparently
cyclists are cheap.


I doubt that, and they should not make it mandatory
anyhow. If they made
it mandatory then Californians can already smell it
that pretty soon the
authorities would start to tax bicycles per year and
they don't want
that. If there is any way to extract yet another tax
from the people CA
will eventually do that.

But if you don't pay your taxes who is going to support
the homeless,
and the illegal immigrants, and the bike paths and, and,
and.

If you are going to have socialism someone's got to pay
for it.


We already pay among the highest taxes in the country.
That's enough taxes.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


I see, you want bike paths, racks on buses, and all the
other free
goodies provided by the state, but you don't want to pay
for them.


See above. We already paid for them.

[...]


You California taxpayers paid for extravagant pensions, the $80billion
choo choo which doesn't run, homeless, welfare and illegal services,
fire fighting of forests which should have been logged and so on.


That's the price for a leftist government. Like it always end up.

And yet you expect the government to provide you with special bike racks on buses. Well, I want a PONY! Why aren't my much-larger-than-yours taxes providing me with a PONY! If government spent less money on PERS and more on PONIES, we would all be better off. I would also like bicycle-only facilities from my driveway to work that are swept twice a day. Other demands are forthcoming.

-- Jay Beattie.

On 9/7/2018 10:52 AM, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-09-04 17:15, AMuzi wrote:

Â*You want bike racks? User fee. Not only my opinion, just the way it
will be.


Nope. The solution is simple: Use the pickup truck like we did
yesterday. The bus would have gone to almost the same starting piont for
a long valley ride but the pickup truck has two major advantages. You
can't be denied a ride because there aren't enough free bike slots and
the bikes always fit.

So you chose to pollute the environment just like you complain about.
That's a bit hypocritical, ISTM.


--
- Frank Krygowski

On 2018-09-07 08:04, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, September 7, 2018 at 7:52:38 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-09-04 17:15, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/4/2018 6:10 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-09-03 16:10, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 03 Sep 2018 13:45:01 -0700, Joerg

wrote:

On 2018-09-02 16:36, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 02 Sep 2018 08:02:04 -0700, Joerg

wrote:

On 2018-09-01 21:30, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 12:08:31 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
wrote:

On Friday, August 31, 2018 at 3:03:16 PM UTC-4, Joerg
wrote:
On 2018-08-31 11:06, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Friday, August 31, 2018 at 1:36:09 PM UTC-4,
Joerg wrote:
On 2018-08-31 08:51, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, August 31, 2018 at 7:13:51 AM UTC-7,
Joerg wrote:
snip


[...]


[...]


(BTW, in front of my office building. I have
to dodge those
things). We also have private buses up to the
mountains for
skiing and airport shuttle buses, etc.


Those are what could be construed as
cherry-picking. What I
meant was a full blown system that includes not
so lucrative
routes all the way to Outer Podunk. A sysme that
enables most
residents not to even have a car.

Not going to happen in a market economy. The
fares would be too
high for either local users who have to subsidize
rural users or
for rural users who have to pay actual cost plus
ROI. There might
be a way to do this by selling losses to
investors -- running the
system as a tax shelter, but I'll let the tax
accountants figure
that one out. The bottom line is that barriers
to entry are not
that high and certainly lower than in Germany,
and if mass
transit could be done profitably in a large US
urban area by
private business, it would be. People are always
looking for a
way to make a buck. It might work elsewhere in a
dense European
city, but it has been tried and failed here in PDX.


The German example I brought was from an area much
less densely
populated than Portland. AFAIK they even operate
ferries in the
system.


Germany is a comparatively small country with a
large population.
Distances are not so great there compared to many
areas of the USA.


As I wrote, I picked an example (on purpose) from an
area that is less
densely populated than where I live now.


Again, if Germany is so gosh darn great, then why
have so many
Germans emigrated?


Because it wasn't always great and still isn't in
many aspects. One
cannot generalize. For example, public
transportation is clearly better
there but bike paths and even more so MTB trails are
definitely not.
Before moving to the US I would have never dreamed
that bicycle
infrastructure could become better here than in
Germany but it has.
Agencies in the various contries could learn from
each other but there
is often a lack of willingness.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

I wonder what would happen if to create a new
bicycling infrastructure or bus/rail link that would
benefit mainly bicyclists, if bicyclists were told
they alone would have to pay for it?

Cheers

Many years ago Riverside, California attempted to
"register" bicycles.
The idea was to have a record of who owned what
bicycle which they
hoped might reduce bicycle theft.

If I remember correctly it cost the owner 50 cents and
he got a nice
little "number plate" to attach to his bicycle.

You never heard as much moaning and groaning, "You
mean I gotta pay 50
cents to ride a bicycle." The city gave up on the
scheme. Apparently
cyclists are cheap.


I doubt that, and they should not make it mandatory
anyhow. If they made
it mandatory then Californians can already smell it
that pretty soon the
authorities would start to tax bicycles per year and
they don't want
that. If there is any way to extract yet another tax
from the people CA
will eventually do that.

But if you don't pay your taxes who is going to support
the homeless,
and the illegal immigrants, and the bike paths and, and,
and.

If you are going to have socialism someone's got to pay
for it.


We already pay among the highest taxes in the country.
That's enough taxes.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


I see, you want bike paths, racks on buses, and all the
other free
goodies provided by the state, but you don't want to pay
for them.


See above. We already paid for them.

[...]


You California taxpayers paid for extravagant pensions, the $80billion
choo choo which doesn't run, homeless, welfare and illegal services,
fire fighting of forests which should have been logged and so on.


That's the price for a leftist government. Like it always end up.

And yet you expect the government to provide you with special bike racks on buses.


No, bike racks that actually work with contemporary bikes that are
commonly used in this area. Just like we now have roads that accommodate
vehicles wider than a Ford Model T. It's that simple.

[...]

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On 9/7/2018 12:03 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-09-07 08:04, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, September 7, 2018 at 7:52:38 AM UTC-7, Joerg
wrote:
On 2018-09-04 17:15, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/4/2018 6:10 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-09-03 16:10, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 03 Sep 2018 13:45:01 -0700, Joerg

wrote:

On 2018-09-02 16:36, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 02 Sep 2018 08:02:04 -0700, Joerg

wrote:

On 2018-09-01 21:30, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 12:08:31 -0700 (PDT), Sir
Ridesalot
wrote:

On Friday, August 31, 2018 at 3:03:16 PM UTC-4,
Joerg
wrote:
On 2018-08-31 11:06, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Friday, August 31, 2018 at 1:36:09 PM UTC-4,
Joerg wrote:
On 2018-08-31 08:51, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, August 31, 2018 at 7:13:51 AM UTC-7,
Joerg wrote:
snip


[...]


[...]


(BTW, in front of my office building. I have
to dodge those
things). We also have private buses up to the
mountains for
skiing and airport shuttle buses, etc.


Those are what could be construed as
cherry-picking. What I
meant was a full blown system that includes not
so lucrative
routes all the way to Outer Podunk. A sysme
that
enables most
residents not to even have a car.

Not going to happen in a market economy. The
fares would be too
high for either local users who have to
subsidize
rural users or
for rural users who have to pay actual cost plus
ROI. There might
be a way to do this by selling losses to
investors -- running the
system as a tax shelter, but I'll let the tax
accountants figure
that one out. The bottom line is that barriers
to entry are not
that high and certainly lower than in Germany,
and if mass
transit could be done profitably in a large US
urban area by
private business, it would be. People are always
looking for a
way to make a buck. It might work elsewhere
in a
dense European
city, but it has been tried and failed here
in PDX.


The German example I brought was from an area
much
less densely
populated than Portland. AFAIK they even operate
ferries in the
system.


Germany is a comparatively small country with a
large population.
Distances are not so great there compared to many
areas of the USA.


As I wrote, I picked an example (on purpose)
from an
area that is less
densely populated than where I live now.


Again, if Germany is so gosh darn great, then why
have so many
Germans emigrated?


Because it wasn't always great and still isn't in
many aspects. One
cannot generalize. For example, public
transportation is clearly better
there but bike paths and even more so MTB trails
are
definitely not.
Before moving to the US I would have never dreamed
that bicycle
infrastructure could become better here than in
Germany but it has.
Agencies in the various contries could learn from
each other but there
is often a lack of willingness.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

I wonder what would happen if to create a new
bicycling infrastructure or bus/rail link that would
benefit mainly bicyclists, if bicyclists were told
they alone would have to pay for it?

Cheers

Many years ago Riverside, California attempted to
"register" bicycles.
The idea was to have a record of who owned what
bicycle which they
hoped might reduce bicycle theft.

If I remember correctly it cost the owner 50 cents
and
he got a nice
little "number plate" to attach to his bicycle.

You never heard as much moaning and groaning, "You
mean I gotta pay 50
cents to ride a bicycle." The city gave up on the
scheme. Apparently
cyclists are cheap.


I doubt that, and they should not make it mandatory
anyhow. If they made
it mandatory then Californians can already smell it
that pretty soon the
authorities would start to tax bicycles per year and
they don't want
that. If there is any way to extract yet another tax
from the people CA
will eventually do that.

But if you don't pay your taxes who is going to support
the homeless,
and the illegal immigrants, and the bike paths and,
and,
and.

If you are going to have socialism someone's got to pay
for it.


We already pay among the highest taxes in the country.
That's enough taxes.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


I see, you want bike paths, racks on buses, and all the
other free
goodies provided by the state, but you don't want to pay
for them.


See above. We already paid for them.

[...]


You California taxpayers paid for extravagant pensions,
the $80billion
choo choo which doesn't run, homeless, welfare and
illegal services,
fire fighting of forests which should have been logged
and so on.


That's the price for a leftist government. Like it always
end up.

And yet you expect the government to provide you with
special bike racks on buses.


No, bike racks that actually work with contemporary bikes
that are commonly used in this area. Just like we now have
roads that accommodate vehicles wider than a Ford Model T.
It's that simple.

[...]


Every other government program is profligate and
counterproductive so why should bike racks on buses be any
different?

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 2018-09-07 10:20, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/7/2018 12:03 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-09-07 08:04, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, September 7, 2018 at 7:52:38 AM UTC-7, Joerg
wrote:
On 2018-09-04 17:15, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/4/2018 6:10 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-09-03 16:10, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 03 Sep 2018 13:45:01 -0700, Joerg

wrote:

On 2018-09-02 16:36, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 02 Sep 2018 08:02:04 -0700, Joerg

wrote:

On 2018-09-01 21:30, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 12:08:31 -0700 (PDT), Sir
Ridesalot
wrote:

On Friday, August 31, 2018 at 3:03:16 PM UTC-4,
Joerg
wrote:
On 2018-08-31 11:06, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Friday, August 31, 2018 at 1:36:09 PM UTC-4,
Joerg wrote:
On 2018-08-31 08:51, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, August 31, 2018 at 7:13:51 AM UTC-7,
Joerg wrote:
snip


[...]


[...]


(BTW, in front of my office building. I have
to dodge those
things). We also have private buses up to the
mountains for
skiing and airport shuttle buses, etc.


Those are what could be construed as
cherry-picking. What I
meant was a full blown system that includes not
so lucrative
routes all the way to Outer Podunk. A sysme
that
enables most
residents not to even have a car.

Not going to happen in a market economy. The
fares would be too
high for either local users who have to
subsidize
rural users or
for rural users who have to pay actual cost plus
ROI. There might
be a way to do this by selling losses to
investors -- running the
system as a tax shelter, but I'll let the tax
accountants figure
that one out. The bottom line is that barriers
to entry are not
that high and certainly lower than in Germany,
and if mass
transit could be done profitably in a large US
urban area by
private business, it would be. People are always
looking for a
way to make a buck. It might work elsewhere
in a
dense European
city, but it has been tried and failed here
in PDX.


The German example I brought was from an area
much
less densely
populated than Portland. AFAIK they even operate
ferries in the
system.


Germany is a comparatively small country with a
large population.
Distances are not so great there compared to many
areas of the USA.


As I wrote, I picked an example (on purpose)
from an
area that is less
densely populated than where I live now.


Again, if Germany is so gosh darn great, then why
have so many
Germans emigrated?


Because it wasn't always great and still isn't in
many aspects. One
cannot generalize. For example, public
transportation is clearly better
there but bike paths and even more so MTB trails
are
definitely not.
Before moving to the US I would have never dreamed
that bicycle
infrastructure could become better here than in
Germany but it has.
Agencies in the various contries could learn from
each other but there
is often a lack of willingness.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

I wonder what would happen if to create a new
bicycling infrastructure or bus/rail link that would
benefit mainly bicyclists, if bicyclists were told
they alone would have to pay for it?

Cheers

Many years ago Riverside, California attempted to
"register" bicycles.
The idea was to have a record of who owned what
bicycle which they
hoped might reduce bicycle theft.

If I remember correctly it cost the owner 50 cents
and
he got a nice
little "number plate" to attach to his bicycle.

You never heard as much moaning and groaning, "You
mean I gotta pay 50
cents to ride a bicycle." The city gave up on the
scheme. Apparently
cyclists are cheap.


I doubt that, and they should not make it mandatory
anyhow. If they made
it mandatory then Californians can already smell it
that pretty soon the
authorities would start to tax bicycles per year and
they don't want
that. If there is any way to extract yet another tax
from the people CA
will eventually do that.

But if you don't pay your taxes who is going to support
the homeless,
and the illegal immigrants, and the bike paths and,
and,
and.

If you are going to have socialism someone's got to pay
for it.


We already pay among the highest taxes in the country.
That's enough taxes.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


I see, you want bike paths, racks on buses, and all the
other free
goodies provided by the state, but you don't want to pay
for them.


See above. We already paid for them.

[...]


You California taxpayers paid for extravagant pensions,
the $80billion
choo choo which doesn't run, homeless, welfare and
illegal services,
fire fighting of forests which should have been logged
and so on.


That's the price for a leftist government. Like it always
end up.

And yet you expect the government to provide you with
special bike racks on buses.


No, bike racks that actually work with contemporary bikes
that are commonly used in this area. Just like we now have
roads that accommodate vehicles wider than a Ford Model T.
It's that simple.

[...]


Every other government program is profligate and counterproductive so
why should bike racks on buses be any different?


Maybe so but that does require us to speak up. As taxpayers we have a
stake in this, our money is in this and, therefore, we have a say in
this. I can't understand people who think otherwise.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/