Poll: Why don't Americans ride bikes?

On Sep 6, 4:15*pm, "Jack May" wrote:
"ComandanteBanana" wrote in message

...



(No don't go the easy way and assume they are stupid. There may be
other rational explanations for them not doing the obvious thing)

Some argue that people should be riding bikes on the road, period. Not
very clever. Well, since nearly 99% of people don't ride bikes to
work, there must be some good reason for it. Perhaps PEOPLE ARE AFRAID
to share the roads with our reckless, sometime criminal drivers,
perhaps they are plain stupid, or perhaps they are lazy couch potatoes
who won't even go the supermarket on bikes...

Thus we put this poll so that a solution is found once the revolution
is in place.

Of course, the revolution will not be motorized.

The Poll is being taken here...

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=462492

Hey retard it was explained to you that we know for an absolute fact that
people don't ride bikes because they highly value their time and the price
of their time to use a bike is far too expensive for them to afford.

You are way too retarded to remember, but I told you that a Nobel Prize was
won by an economist at UC Berkeley that determined why people make decision
such as driving vs bikes vs transit vs walking. * But Noooooooooooooooooooo
you want to ignore everything we know and pretend that it is a big unknown
since you have the comprehension of a two year old.

For people that did not read the post, the gut level cost people use to
decide which mode to use for a trip has been found to be:

Trip cost = trip dollar cost *+ pay rate time * waiting,etc *+ half pay rate
* travel time

People typically choose the transportation mode with the lowest cost.
Extremely rational except for the born losers in society like
ComandanteBanana

Remember, he's on Exxon or Mobil's payroll to encourage driving and
discourage biking through internet news groups and blogging. It's the
next, new thing. He's probably paid by a combination of # of posts, #
of workds, and # of responses. So if everyone just ignores him he
won't make as much money and he'll move on. That's why he keeps
arguments going and why he'll respond to himself if he has to. It's
also why he's been know to use different names to respond to himself.
It's all about the money.

On Sep 6, 4:36*pm, Will wrote:
On Sep 6, 3:15 pm, "Jack May" wrote:

People typically choose the transportation mode with the lowest cost.

Which perfectly explains why they buy cheap Audis and BMW's and get
Sat Nav options.

It's not really a "cost" factor as a "utility" factor. Although it's
similar, people don't seek the lowest cost, they seek the highest
utility (benefit).

Say you have a $50,000 a year job. You might scrape together enough
money to buy a $20,000 car. You might even set aside enough money to
put a little away in savings. For you, it works and you're happy with
the savings. But for someone else with the same salary, they might
find a higher benefit to having no savings and a $25,000 car. People
do what pleases them the most, but it isn't always the lowest cost.

If you make $1,000,000 a year, the difference between the cost of a
$25,000 car and a $75,000 car is negligible but the benefits are
substantial -- so you get the more expensive car. In this case, the
difference between 15 mpg and 40 mpg as also inconsequential so it
really isn't a factor unless your name is Ed Beagley.

Jack May wrote:

Hey retard it was explained to you that we know for an absolute fact that
people don't ride bikes because they highly value their time and the price
of their time to use a bike is far too expensive for them to afford.

Arf!

It takes only 10 minutes longer for me to ride my bike to work. And then I don't have to go to the gym or worry about my weight or my cardiovascular health. All in all it's a time and money saver and a win-win situation all round....

"reetard"

Pff! yanks. Cretins.

Jack May schrieb:
"ComandanteBanana" wrote in message
...
(No don't go the easy way and assume they are stupid. There may be
other rational explanations for them not doing the obvious thing)

Some argue that people should be riding bikes on the road, period. Not
very clever. Well, since nearly 99% of people don't ride bikes to
work, there must be some good reason for it. Perhaps PEOPLE ARE AFRAID
to share the roads with our reckless, sometime criminal drivers,
perhaps they are plain stupid, or perhaps they are lazy couch potatoes
who won't even go the supermarket on bikes...

Thus we put this poll so that a solution is found once the revolution
is in place.

Of course, the revolution will not be motorized.

The Poll is being taken here...

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=462492

Hey retard it was explained to you that we know for an absolute fact

Haha, what are absolute facts in science anyway?
Just a theory that hasn't been proven wrong yet.

There have been hundreds of theories, that have been claimed to be "an
absolute fact", e.g. "the geocentric system", in their time until better
explanations came along.
Should be know to you Jack, eh?
Relax!

Tadej
--
"Frauen sind als Gesprächspartner nun einmal interessanter,
weil das Gespräch nicht beendet ist, wenn nichts sinnvolles mehr zu
sagen ist."
David Kastrup in d.t.r

On Sep 6, 2:40 pm, "Jack May" wrote:
"Tom Sherman" wrote in message

...



Jack May wrote:
"ComandanteBanana" wrote in message
...
(No don't go the easy way and assume they are stupid. There may be
other rational explanations for them not doing the obvious thing)

Some argue that people should be riding bikes on the road, period. Not
very clever. Well, since nearly 99% of people don't ride bikes to
work, there must be some good reason for it. Perhaps PEOPLE ARE AFRAID
to share the roads with our reckless, sometime criminal drivers,
perhaps they are plain stupid, or perhaps they are lazy couch potatoes
who won't even go the supermarket on bikes...

[...]
Hey retard it was explained to you that we know for an absolute fact that
people don't ride bikes because they highly value their time and the
price of their time to use a bike is far too expensive for them to
afford.

But superior people prefer to spend the time riding a bicycle.

Dream on. Absolutely no evidence that is true.

Certainly a bike is one form of exercise that works well for some. For
transportation, its usage is very limited because of it very high cost of
travel for most people to most of their destinations.

Jack May adds to the growing amount of evidence that it's true with
his every post.

On Sep 7, 7:12 am, Pat wrote:
On Sep 6, 4:36 pm, Will wrote:

On Sep 6, 3:15 pm, "Jack May" wrote:

People typically choose the transportation mode with the lowest cost.

Which perfectly explains why they buy cheap Audis and BMW's and get
Sat Nav options.

It's not really a "cost" factor as a "utility" factor. Although it's
similar, people don't seek the lowest cost, they seek the highest
utility (benefit).

Say you have a $50,000 a year job. You might scrape together enough
money to buy a $20,000 car. You might even set aside enough money to
put a little away in savings. For you, it works and you're happy with
the savings. But for someone else with the same salary, they might
find a higher benefit to having no savings and a $25,000 car. People
do what pleases them the most, but it isn't always the lowest cost.

If you make $1,000,000 a year, the difference between the cost of a
$25,000 car and a $75,000 car is negligible but the benefits are
substantial -- so you get the more expensive car. In this case, the
difference between 15 mpg and 40 mpg as also inconsequential so it
really isn't a factor unless your name is Ed Beagley.

What are you smoking? The difference between a $75k auto and a $25k
auto is $50k no mater what your annual income. The difference in
performance that the additional $50k would buy is pretty
insignificant. There must be some other perceived value in the more
expensive auto, I wonder what that could be?

DennisTheBald writes:

On Sep 7, 7:12 am, Pat wrote:
On Sep 6, 4:36 pm, Will wrote:

What are you smoking? The difference between a $75k auto and a $25k
auto is $50k no mater what your annual income. The difference in
performance that the additional $50k would buy is pretty
insignificant. There must be some other perceived value in the more
expensive auto, I wonder what that could be?

Status (and, in a particular age group, an aid for attracting trophy
wives).




--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB

On Sep 7, 7:07*pm, DennisTheBald wrote:
On Sep 7, 7:12 am, Pat wrote:



On Sep 6, 4:36 pm, Will wrote:

On Sep 6, 3:15 pm, "Jack May" wrote:

People typically choose the transportation mode with the lowest cost.

Tom Keats wrote:
In article ,
ComandanteBanana writes:

Some argue that people should be riding bikes on the road, period. Not
very clever. Well, since nearly 99% of people don't ride bikes to
work, there must be some good reason for it.

You're still trying to scare would-be riders off the
streets & roads, eh? Your FUDmongering disinformation
campaign is destined to fail. The Truth shall out,
as it inevitably does.

I don't think he's concern really is to scare existing roadway cyclers
off the and onto the sidewalk.
In some/many/most(?) US cities it may genuinely be a problem to ride a
bike in vehicular traffic, meaning, that there might be agressiv e
drivers honking horns and the likes. Especially for those, not used to
move with the stream.
But proposing sidewalk-cycling ist not at all a solution, that's
d'accord! So he may be a little "confused" about the best way to survive
in the jungle for real.
Tadej
--
"Vergleich es mit einer Pflanze - die wächst auch nur dann gut, wenn du
sie nicht jeden zweiten Tag aus der Erde reißt, um nachzusehen, ob sie
schon Wurzeln geschlagen hat."
Martina Diel in d.t.r

On Sep 6, 9:21*pm, (Tom Keats) wrote:
In article ,
* * * * ComandanteBanana writes:

Some argue that people should be riding bikes on the road, period. Not
very clever. Well, since nearly 99% of people don't ride bikes to
work, there must be some good reason for it.

You're still trying to scare would-be riders off the
streets & roads, eh? *Your FUDmongering disinformation
campaign is destined to fail. *The Truth shall out,
as it inevitably does.

Not even bike-hating propagandists such as yourself
are safe from The Truth.

Go climb a banana tree. *And stay up there.

The monkeys should stay on the treetops for fear of the lion (SUVs)
feeding on them.

And the stupid sheep should keep grazing and feeding the beast (Big
Oil).