On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 23:00:58 -0700, TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser
On Mar 18, 10:54 am, "TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher"
Post by His Highness the TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser PhilosopherI think that's a valuable thought to have in mind even though I
sometimes drive. Same idea for smoking, which is why I quit many
moons ago. Actually driving and smoking have a lot in common, both
are addictions, both are expensive and both pollute.
One more reason to ride a bike and have strong legs and lungs. But
that's only my humble opinion.
----------------------------------------------------------------
http://webspawner.com/users/BANANAREVOLUTION
Coming from the intellect of a twelve year old!
C'mon guys, even a monkey can deal with your arguments. You don't even
know how to ride a bike anymore.
I think it's great if people can ride bikes... Often helps them, and
therebye helps society. Healthier people, who contribute more, etc.
Plus, less pollution in the air... Save money over driving, wear/tear/
gas, trouble.. Even if one has a car..
Good if people can buy and use cars too.. Isn't directly going to help
with health of course.... (through exercise, but going to the doctor?
market?) But, might help with environmental stuff, if people go to work,
the library, wherever and advance society, do research, development, make
money, pay taxes/etc. that leads to better technology that's cheaper than
say, oil burning engines... Oil burning engines lead to things that can
be better... Or, cures for cancer or better computers... (although nice
people don't have to move around as much too, today...)
It's like in some ways, starting a business.. You don't have income, but
need to put money into it.. Which works against making money, directly.
Burning gasoline can lead to not having to burn gasoline, because maybe
you end up learning to use - whatever, dilithium crystals, algae,
hydrogen... But even then good to ride a bike....
I've thought it'd be smart to have whole streets that are designated as
bike (and maybe small-engine, slow vehicle, low-impact-risk, moped/etc.)
roads... Going through cities some distance in various ways.... Big
motorized vehicles would only go on them to get to properties, but not go
through...
Vs. having bike paths alongside cars going along at 50mph often... If
it's just mopeds, bikes, maybe small 3-4 wheelers that whack you, not
such a big deal.. all going the same speeds approx..
Save money for lots of people while they also got exercise... Maybe
Breitbart wouldn't have died if he could have used better bike paths,
etc... and lots of other people..
Probably politically complex though, depending on the streets..... for
interests of people living along them, or having businesses... Some
might even prefer cars zipping by, vs. crazy bicyclists who might stop
and poop or barf on your lawn, who knows.... Or, might like interesting
bicyclists who'd stop and talk... Hard to do with a multi-ton car..
A bike can go a lot of places pretty fast (well, unless too hilly.)
Often, considerable distance..
Fat people would get thin, congested arteries get rootered..
--
Bobby
just intimidated to ride a bicycle.
Your proposal sounds just reasonable and balanced. Nobody wants to
road and then still harass you. THEY DO NOT OWN THE ROAD. My proposal
by speed cameras). NEVs are Neighborhood Electric Vehicles and they
person, or older people...
windows optional. Great freedom there and very inexpensive compared to
a car. I'd imagine that you don't need insurance, so that's more
savings. No noise pollution either. No need to run around intimidating
people.