|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#101
|
|||
|
|||
WHY are cyclists riding at night ?
On 10/7/2014 4:59 PM, Duane wrote:
snip The argument seems to be that with government legislating mandatory lights the cost would be less. I think this wouldn't be the case here and possibly the opposite would happen. The costs or at least the cost to the consumer would be inflated. Look at motor vehicles. Every time the government has mandated some new safety feature or emissions control feature the auto companies would bitch and moan about the cost and make up wild stories about how much it would increase the cost of the vehicle. But once they put it on every vehicle the cost was very small and since everyone had to comply there was no competitive disadvantage. Safety glass, seatbelts, shoulder belts, side impact protection, airbags, ABS, TCS, TPMS, RBUC. etc. Some of those were not even mandatory but they put them on anyway. |
Ads |
#102
|
|||
|
|||
How Frank Krygowski has ruined and is ruining RBT
On Tuesday, October 7, 2014 6:50:32 PM UTC-4, Andre Jute wrote:
On Tuesday, October 7, 2014 8:12:41 PM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski to Andre Jute: I simply decided you were not worth my time, so I skip reading almost all your posts. I think my judgment has been confirmed. -- - Frank Krygowski I'm quoted on bicycles in the Wall Street Journal, and you, Krygowski, can't even persuade anyone on your home newsgroup that the sun shines outside. The comparison is a perfect judgement on your futile dream of being a "bicycle spokesman". Andre Jute I let others brag about "perfect judgement". I just get the job done right. the 'religion of ergonomics' ? by art critic Jute ? beats me...You have no credentials as a scientist or artist nor art critic. WSJ mentioning you soils WSJ's image. eyehehahhahhah..... The groups discussions invariably deteriorate into...I think this...whithout entering a logical or humorous foundation. Or as...'skiing in Russia' I try a reference to Jute as Nalopleon. I was genuinely curious about the foundations of dynamo lighting but in the end nothing more than the usual small minded bickering. I asked yalw to think and....you refused. This is no big deal tho....Frank, SMS, Muzi are articulate on the subject and in general. Communication takes practice and education. You would believe this state is common but no itsnot. the religion of ergonomics...like the Lancia ? |
#103
|
|||
|
|||
WHY are cyclists riding at night ?
sms wrote:
On 10/7/2014 4:59 PM, Duane wrote: snip The argument seems to be that with government legislating mandatory lights the cost would be less. I think this wouldn't be the case here and possibly the opposite would happen. The costs or at least the cost to the consumer would be inflated. Look at motor vehicles. Every time the government has mandated some new safety feature or emissions control feature the auto companies would bitch and moan about the cost and make up wild stories about how much it would increase the cost of the vehicle. But once they put it on every vehicle the cost was very small and since everyone had to comply there was no competitive disadvantage. Safety glass, seatbelts, shoulder belts, side impact protection, airbags, ABS, TCS, TPMS, RBUC. etc. Some of those were not even mandatory but they put them on anyway. When I say here I don't mean the states. -- duane |
#104
|
|||
|
|||
How Frank Krygowski has ruined and is ruining RBT
On Tuesday, October 7, 2014 8:09:24 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tuesday, October 7, 2014 6:50:32 PM UTC-4, Andre Jute wrote: On Tuesday, October 7, 2014 8:12:41 PM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski to Andre Jute: I simply decided you were not worth my time, so I skip reading almost all your posts. I think my judgment has been confirmed. -- - Frank Krygowski I'm quoted on bicycles in the Wall Street Journal, and you, Krygowski, can't even persuade anyone on your home newsgroup that the sun shines outside. The comparison is a perfect judgement on your futile dream of being a "bicycle spokesman". Andre Jute I let others brag about "perfect judgement". I just get the job done right. the 'religion of ergonomics' ? by art critic Jute ? beats me...You have no credentials as a scientist or artist nor art critic. WSJ mentioning you soils WSJ's image. eyehehahhahhah..... The groups discussions invariably deteriorate into...I think this...whithout entering a logical or humorous foundation. Or as...'skiing in Russia' I try a reference to Jute as Nalopleon. I was genuinely curious about the foundations of dynamo lighting but in the end nothing more than the usual small minded bickering. I asked yalw to think and....you refused. This is no big deal tho....Frank, SMS, Muzi are articulate on the subject and in general. Communication takes practice and education. You would believe this state is common but no itsnot. the religion of ergonomics...like the Lancia ? 'The Rise of the Designer Bike: RBT expert quoted by Wall Street' the title is a RBT newsgroup subject title. If you search for background on the quote (?) 'religion of ergonomics', Google shows up with the title and Benoit, a Jute fellow traveler no doubt, Benoit-Jute-Rothschild- .... tricky no ? The phenomena is fascinating. Here we have another foreigner, no slur intended, in a USA discussion group, attacking us on not cycle grounds. Ugly. Why would a learned man of this projected background be here doing these things ? Why not engag on home ground ? When I have the opportunity, I'll try coaxing a ride on a dynamo express. I'm convinced yawl suffer from Benzomania, or the Religion of Euro Elitism...a move beyond the safety bicycle. Maybe get a Franz Josef T shirt for the occasion |
#105
|
|||
|
|||
WHY are cyclists riding at night ?
On Tuesday, October 7, 2014 8:18:33 PM UTC-4, Duane wrote:
sms wrote: On 10/7/2014 4:59 PM, Duane wrote: snip The argument seems to be that with government legislating mandatory lights the cost would be less. I think this wouldn't be the case here and possibly the opposite would happen. The costs or at least the cost to the consumer would be inflated. Look at motor vehicles. Every time the government has mandated some new safety feature or emissions control feature the auto companies would bitch and moan about the cost and make up wild stories about how much it would increase the cost of the vehicle. But once they put it on every vehicle the cost was very small and since everyone had to comply there was no competitive disadvantage. Safety glass, seatbelts, shoulder belts, side impact protection, airbags, ABS, TCS, TPMS, RBUC. etc. Some of those were not even mandatory but they put them on anyway. When I say here I don't mean the states. -- duane thanks for the explanation, |
#106
|
|||
|
|||
WHY are cyclists riding at night ?
On Tuesday, October 7, 2014 8:07:41 PM UTC-4, sms wrote:
On 10/7/2014 4:59 PM, Duane wrote: snip The argument seems to be that with government legislating mandatory lights the cost would be less. I think this wouldn't be the case here and possibly the opposite would happen. The costs or at least the cost to the consumer would be inflated. Look at motor vehicles. Every time the government has mandated some new safety feature or emissions control feature the auto companies would bitch and moan about the cost and make up wild stories about how much it would increase the cost of the vehicle. But once they put it on every vehicle the cost was very small and since everyone had to comply there was no competitive disadvantage. Safety glass, seatbelts, shoulder belts, side impact protection, airbags, ABS, TCS, TPMS, RBUC. etc. Some of those were not even mandatory but they put them on anyway. SMALL ? Fed regs for interstate transportation supports public interests in health and security with statutory administrative law. But low cost ? I'll look but uh Suzui for example. Recent example but earlier English automakers like J.A.P. suffered ...Suzuki had a nice wagon early '90's but failed the low cost standards caws of the low costs involved were unpassable. |
#107
|
|||
|
|||
WHY are cyclists riding at night ?
wrote:
On Tuesday, October 7, 2014 8:18:33 PM UTC-4, Duane wrote: sms wrote: On 10/7/2014 4:59 PM, Duane wrote: snip The argument seems to be that with government legislating mandatory lights the cost would be less. I think this wouldn't be the case here and possibly the opposite would happen. The costs or at least the cost to the consumer would be inflated. Look at motor vehicles. Every time the government has mandated some new safety feature or emissions control feature the auto companies would bitch and moan about the cost and make up wild stories about how much it would increase the cost of the vehicle. But once they put it on every vehicle the cost was very small and since everyone had to comply there was no competitive disadvantage. Safety glass, seatbelts, shoulder belts, side impact protection, airbags, ABS, TCS, TPMS, RBUC. etc. Some of those were not even mandatory but they put them on anyway. When I say here I don't mean the states. -- duane thanks for the explanation, NP -- duane |
#108
|
|||
|
|||
WHY are cyclists riding at night ?
On 10/7/2014 5:18 PM, Duane wrote:
snip When I say here I don't mean the states. Wait, isn't Canada part of the U.S. yet? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_TfBbR6L0M |
#109
|
|||
|
|||
WHY are cyclists riding at night ?
On Tuesday, October 7, 2014 9:03:16 PM UTC-4, Duane wrote:
wrote: On Tuesday, October 7, 2014 8:18:33 PM UTC-4, Duane wrote: sms wrote: On 10/7/2014 4:59 PM, Duane wrote: snip The argument seems to be that with government legislating mandatory lights the cost would be less. I think this wouldn't be the case here and possibly the opposite would happen. The costs or at least the cost to the consumer would be inflated. Look at motor vehicles. Every time the government has mandated some new safety feature or emissions control feature the auto companies would bitch and moan about the cost and make up wild stories about how much it would increase the cost of the vehicle. But once they put it on every vehicle the cost was very small and since everyone had to comply there was no competitive disadvantage. Safety glass, seatbelts, shoulder belts, side impact protection, airbags, ABS, TCS, TPMS, RBUC. etc. Some of those were not even mandatory but they put them on anyway. When I say here I don't mean the states. -- duane thanks for the explanation, NP -- duane Nasal Polyp ? |
#110
|
|||
|
|||
WHY are cyclists riding at night ?
wrote:
On Tuesday, October 7, 2014 9:03:16 PM UTC-4, Duane wrote: wrote: On Tuesday, October 7, 2014 8:18:33 PM UTC-4, Duane wrote: sms wrote: On 10/7/2014 4:59 PM, Duane wrote: snip The argument seems to be that with government legislating mandatory lights the cost would be less. I think this wouldn't be the case here and possibly the opposite would happen. The costs or at least the cost to the consumer would be inflated. Look at motor vehicles. Every time the government has mandated some new safety feature or emissions control feature the auto companies would bitch and moan about the cost and make up wild stories about how much it would increase the cost of the vehicle. But once they put it on every vehicle the cost was very small and since everyone had to comply there was no competitive disadvantage. Safety glass, seatbelts, shoulder belts, side impact protection, airbags, ABS, TCS, TPMS, RBUC. etc. Some of those were not even mandatory but they put them on anyway. When I say here I don't mean the states. -- duane thanks for the explanation, NP -- duane Nasal Polyp ? Neutered poodle. -- duane |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Night riding | The Bruiser | Unicycling | 20 | November 4th 06 08:22 AM |
Night riding | tedward | Unicycling | 2 | May 14th 06 11:43 AM |
Riding at Night | Tim Nunes | General | 14 | January 21st 06 02:16 AM |
Night riding. | Callistus Valerius | Racing | 26 | February 22nd 05 12:13 AM |
Night riding... | Absent Husband | Australia | 67 | January 16th 05 07:44 PM |