Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bike lanes have sped up car traffic in New York City

vox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 303 posts

Re: Bike lanes have sped up car traffic in New York City

#171

Post by megablast »

bane wrote: post #67
soperj wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm one of those bikers who hates sharing roadways with cars. It's not that I have to share, but between taking up so much of the road, pure safety concerns for bikers(since automobile drivers win every single colition) and generally shitty entitled attitude lots of car drivers seem to have (most likely because there are more of them so they think they own the road) I get my hackles raised every time I see one on the…

Well, you are aware that the roads were built for cars right? Would you walk in the middle of the road? No, because that's idiotic and stupid. But sit on a few pounds of rubber and tubed aluminum, travel only slightly faster than the same moronic pedestrian and now it's a smart commuting idea? You've chosen to go out and share the roads that were built for cars and decided for every driver (who are actually entitled…

It is not just your awful attitude, but the fact that you are completely wrong in your assertions that is a problem.

And most drivers agree with you.

Re: Bike lanes have sped up car traffic in New York City

#172

Post by bane »

recursive wrote: post #167
bane wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't live in a city, and very little development where I live is older than 20 years old. While cycles are legal on the roads, keeping with traffic is also a legal requirement in every state in the U.S. for any person on the road. But because bikes, they don't get ticketed and prosecuted for impeding the flow of traffic.

> keeping with traffic is also a legal requirement in every state in the U.S. Keeping up with traffic? Do you have a source for that?

Look it up yourself. Your local state law should be online. Every single state in the U.S. requires road users to not impede the flow of traffic. That's why you can get a ticket for driving to slow.

Re: Bike lanes have sped up car traffic in New York City

#173

Post by iak8god »

reitanqild wrote: post #156
iak8god wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish I thought you were kidding, but many people seem to actually believe that these things are enough to pay for the construction and maintenance of roads. Not so. Much of the cost comes out of general taxes, which everyone pays. When you consider that cyclists contribute basically zero wear and tear to the roads, it starts to look like they're subsidizing your lifestyle. That's ignoring externalities like reduced…

Around here car taxes, road taxes, "environmental taxes" on fuel etc adds up to a whole lot more than the combined price of road maintenance and so on. Also none of it is earmarked for environmental purposes. Point is: While I'm mostly happy with the tax levels a little honesty would be appreciated. Edit: Why the downvotes? (BTW: I live in Norway ATM, go read up on Norwegian taxes if you don't trust me.)

> Around here car taxes, road taxes, "environmental taxes" on fuel etc adds up to a whole lot more than the combined price of road maintenance and so on.

That's really different from the situation in the States and the UK which is where I've seen the actual numbers.

I'm not a heavy user of fuel, so may be a bit biased on this, but it seems really sensible to me to use taxes to compensate for externalities. For instance, I'd guess based on my general impressions of Scandanavia and other civilized places that Norway has publicly-funded universal healthcare. Good on you for that. Now, doesn't it make sense for some of the taxes on owning and using an automobile to go toward public health? In my country, collisions involving cars are a leading source of injury and death. Elsewhere in this thread are estimates of the health impacts of auto emissions -- they are significant.

Re: Bike lanes have sped up car traffic in New York City

#174

Post by bane »

nknighthb wrote: post #144
bane wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You've deliberately designed this hobby to be a jerk. Some bicyclists that are jerks also, but mostly they seem to be as jerky as the population at large. Don't make fun of my hobby! Tack fields were made for tack throwing, bikes should get off the trail if they don't want flat tires. So long as I'm left in piece to throw my tacks on the tack field I won't be a jerk. It's all these bike riders running over my tacks…

I cannot fathom the thought process that leads you to conclude that being inconvenienced by someone having equal rights to yourself is the same as committing an act of violence. I don't think you should be permitted in public unsupervised, much less permitted to drive a car.

Why am I committing an act of violence? I'm just engaging in my hobby. If people don't want tacks in their tires they shouldn't ride on my tack field. I'm not forcing them to get on my field with me. They need to learn to share.

Re: Bike lanes have sped up car traffic in New York City

#175

Post by lotsofmangos »

bane wrote: post #85
DanBC wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Well, you are aware that the roads were built for cars right? No, they were not. They were built for horses - with and without carriages - and bicycles and motorbikes and cars and vans and trucks and buses. > You've chosen to go out and share the roads that were built for cars Criminal offence for cyclists to use the pavement.

I can absolutely guarantee you that not a single road within 10 miles of my home was built for a horse or carriage and maybe 3% have history back to pre-auto time periods. They were built specifically for automobiles travelling at speed.

So, there are 3% of roads within 10 miles of you that predate automobiles and which you can absolutely guarantee were never built for horse and carriage.

What were they for exactly?

Re: Bike lanes have sped up car traffic in New York City

#176

Post by [deleted] »

bane wrote: post #169
xiaoma wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've been hit by numerous bike riders while out jogging or walking on local trails? This is mind-blowing. As a former distance runner, I've put in 10,000+ miles of running on trails, on sidewalks and on small roads and done so in several countries. In over a decade of that, I was never hit by any cyclist. Even in terms of close calls I can only remember a couple. What kind of trails do you frequent and what the hec…

I had a full on collision last year that sprained my elbow so bad I may have to get surgery. I'm waiting to see if it heals up. The bicyclist gave me an earful about blocking the shared-use trail with my walking until I called pulled out my phone to call the cops and then he high tailed it out there. It was literally a vehicular hit and run. And if I need surgery will cost me thousands of dollars and months of physic…

[deleted]

Re: Bike lanes have sped up car traffic in New York City

#177

Post by bane »

Pxtl wrote: post #41
bane wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The road is not a perfectly good place for bikes to travel. It's like saying the conveyor belt in an automated slaughter house is a good place to dance because it's flat and doesn't move too fast or that pedestrians should just walk down the middle of the road because it's not a bad walking surface. The biggest possible problem is that as the auto driver you become responsible for any bike rider you come into contact…

> The biggest possible problem is that as the auto driver you become responsible for any bike rider you come into contact with because they are unprotected regardless of the circumstances of the contact. I didn't ask them to get on the road with me, but I'll sure as hell be held responsible for their decision if something happens. If there were only cyclists on the road, the worst accident would be a few broken bones…

> If I juggle chainsaws in a crowded plaza

That's a terrible analogy. The correct one is if I choose to juggle chainsaws in the chainsaw juggling room. And some people think it would be a good idea to come in there with me and start doing cartwheels. Then when one of them gets hit with a saw complains about all the chain saw jugglers.

All the chainsaw jugglers have accepted the risk of their activities and are even doing it in a purpose built room just for them. While the cart wheelers just want to coopt and use somebody else's space without accepting the dangers of it and despite it being purpose built for somebody else.

Re: Bike lanes have sped up car traffic in New York City

#178

Post by DanBC »

bane wrote: post #177
Pxtl wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The biggest possible problem is that as the auto driver you become responsible for any bike rider you come into contact with because they are unprotected regardless of the circumstances of the contact. I didn't ask them to get on the road with me, but I'll sure as hell be held responsible for their decision if something happens. If there were only cyclists on the road, the worst accident would be a few broken bones…

> If I juggle chainsaws in a crowded plaza That's a terrible analogy. The correct one is if I choose to juggle chainsaws in the chainsaw juggling room. And some people think it would be a good idea to come in there with me and start doing cartwheels. Then when one of them gets hit with a saw complains about all the chain saw jugglers. All the chainsaw jugglers have accepted the risk of their activities and are even d…

You keep making the same mistake - you keep saying that roads are only for motorised vehicles.

You repeat this mistake despite being shown an example US law that explicitly states that roads are not just for motorised vehicles.

Re: Bike lanes have sped up car traffic in New York City

#179

Post by bane »

mindslight wrote: post #80
heydenberk wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> However it's important to keep in mind that injustices occur both ways, and forming blanket statements is a great way to end up just talking past one another. That's not true. Did you look at the New York Times article? The prosecution rate of motorists who kill cyclists in non-hit-and-run crashes is close to 0. In several major cities, it is actually 0. So no, the injustices do not go both ways.

Your point does not refute what I said. It shows that no drivers have been criminally blamed, ruling out one kind of injustice against drivers. Other injustices, such as undeserved wrongful death/bodily injury compensation may have occurred. Regardless, OP isn't normally this obtuse. He's clearly reacting to a perceived injustice, even if it does not exist. Please read my above comment again and try to understand why…

Actually if you want to take that article literally it means that in almost every case a cyclist is killed it's their fault. Demonstrating once again that cyclists presume everybody else's area, even to the point of danger to themselves.

Re: Bike lanes have sped up car traffic in New York City

#180

Post by reitanqild »

iak8god wrote: post #173
reitanqild wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Around here car taxes, road taxes, "environmental taxes" on fuel etc adds up to a whole lot more than the combined price of road maintenance and so on. Also none of it is earmarked for environmental purposes. Point is: While I'm mostly happy with the tax levels a little honesty would be appreciated. Edit: Why the downvotes? (BTW: I live in Norway ATM, go read up on Norwegian taxes if you don't trust me.)

> Around here car taxes, road taxes, "environmental taxes" on fuel etc adds up to a whole lot more than the combined price of road maintenance and so on. That's really different from the situation in the States and the UK which is where I've seen the actual numbers. I'm not a heavy user of fuel, so may be a bit biased on this, but it seems really sensible to me to use taxes to compensate for externalities. For instan…

> For instance, I'd guess based on my general impressions of Scandanavia and other civilized places that Norway has publicly-funded universal healthcare. Good on you for that.

Thanks! The first time I really understood the North American model where people have to pay to send their kids to college or go to the doctor, that was an eye opener for me. I now happily pay my taxes.

> Now, doesn't it make sense for some of the taxes on owning and using an automobile to go toward public health?

Absolutely. I think I mentioned it in the post. The part I don't like is where they call it road tax or environmental tax only to go ahead and use it for something completely different.

Post reply on HN