Can you make it to the market on a bike?

Ace wrote:
On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 10:08:26 +0100, Tony Raven
wrote:

Ace wrote:
Alternatively, you could just stop feeding the troll. It's fairly
clear that he's not listening, and I doubt that anyone will seriously
take any notice of him, as he's such an obvious monomaniac.

Its also fairly obvious he won't be around for long before he gets
killed by one of the many thousands of cyclicidal SUV drivers in his
neighbourhood ;-)

That'd be a shame.


Or an exaggeration.

Tony

On Aug 1, 8:04 pm, Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
wrote:

Does Bill Zaumem actually ride a bike in the real world and pay
attention to what happens, or does he just argue on Usenet?

So what's solution to bring the ridership to, say, 30%? If we banned
cars from city centers we could bring it up 100% I guess.

Holland is a really stupid and violent place. They have the cheek to
say, "Beware of bikes!"

Not so in America. To begin with we hardly any cyclists out there
doing real things with bikes. And then we got the SUVs that are real
dangerous, but we simply don't brag about it. Yeap, it's a violent
place out there...

Beware of bikes!
Besides freeways, bus lanes and sideways, The Netherlands have
numerous bicycle paths, approximately 20000 kilometres in total
length! Because the country is so tiny and flat, the bicycle provides
an easy way to transport yourself, your friend, your dog and your
groceries, and is also handy when you're moving to a different
apartment or house.

http://www.siw.nl/english/thenetherlands.php

On Aug 1, 9:58 pm, (Bill Z.) wrote:
William writes:
On Aug 1, 7:44 pm, (Bill Z.) wrote:
Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman writes:

Bill Zaumen wrote:

Nonesense. You simply have a road with multiple lanes and slower
traffic is required to use the rightmost lane. If it is a bike lane,
then the rightmost lane is one that motor vehicles cannot use unless
preparing for a turn across that lane.

Yeah, right. Put in a painted "bike lane" on the street (or even
worse, sidewalk), and the brain-dead cagers think that cyclists SHOULD
NOT be anywhere else.

Which is why most drivers don't yell at me for using a left turn lane,
whether or not there is a bike lane. And some actually smile if I
move out of a bike lane to stop at a red light so that right-turning
cars can get by.

They Smile? What a depressing life one must have if there highlight of
the day was a bike made it eaiser for you to make a right turn....

When you have a really nasty bug to track down as part of your 6-figure
job, any act of kindness is really appreciated. :-) People around here
are very busy, so anything that helps them get to where they are going
faster gets a positive reaction.

Also, it is a very liberal community by U.S. standards (although not
quite as liberal as San Francisco). Here's a picture of our local
movie theater http://www.stanfordtheatre.org/stf/. Click on "This
Week" to see what we get. You'll be truly amazed.

It must really be liberal because it got such a great theater, not a
conservative place with a mega church and all. They really hate the
arts and bike lanes. I see them driving SUVs...

On Aug 1, 9:40 pm, "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman"
wrote:

And what do you
expect to have when you go around electing members of a political
party (whose name starts with "R") whose official position is that
government can't work?

We have been making progress on that front in recent years.

[1] This, in many cases DOES not including exceeding the speed limit,
which is about the only thing that ever seems to be enforced.
[2] To a point. Obviously, in a country with a ridiculous level of
overpopulation such as China, cycling in urban areas is not enjoyable
unless one likes being part of a slow moving congested mass of people on
bicycles.

OK, I finally figured you out. We may disagree on the bike lane as
part of the solution, but we totally agree on the absolute need to
retire a bunch of bad drivers, and enforce some rules of the road.

Lane discipline should be a high priority so you don't drivers
overtaking on the right lane at supersonic speeds, right next to the
bicycles. This is addressed too in our Political Platform...

"Our roads, where the Law of the Jungle rules, should be made safer,
say by enforcing passing on the left only."

See http://webspawner.com/users/elections2008

On Aug 1, 9:55 pm, "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman"
wrote:
"donquijote1954" who? wrote:
...
Thank you for explaining so well what I have in mind. Actually that's
the idea behind...

http://www.cafepress.com/burncalories

I think a better solution would be two jerseys [1]. In the morning [2],
the jersey worn would say in large letters on the back "RIDING TO WORK".
The afternoon jersey would say "RIDING HOME FROM WORK".

[1] Or a reversible sign for recumbents.
[2] Reverse for night shift workers.

Yeah, but then you need more like, "RIDING TO THE MARKET," "RIDING TO
HAVE A DATE," etc.

On Aug 1, 10:01 pm, "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman"
wrote:
"donquijote1954" who? wrote:
...
You still avoiding my question: BIKE LANES OR NO BIKE LANES, HOW DO WE
BRING BIKE RIDERSHIP FROM THE AMERICAN OR BRITISH LEVE[L]S TO THE DUTCH
OR DANISH LEVELS?...

The Danes have almost a 100% tax on new automobiles, high gas taxes, and
(in the cities) very limited and expensive parking. They also have a
beautiful cool spring to fall climate, and winters that can be mostly
handled with proper raingear.

Ride to work even a short distance at a slow pace in much of the U.S.
during summer and you will be soaked in sweat.

You know some bikes do have an electric motor? We can use some of
those. Where I live is real hot, but doable in the early morning and
late afternoon.

On Aug 1, 10:22 pm, "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman"
wrote:
aka Joshua Putnam wrote:

...
Even the limited-access freeway near me has its shoulder open to
bicycles -- bikes are allowed on many miles of Interstates, boring and
noisy, but safe and direct....

Do the drivers look for cyclists crossing their path when merging and
exiting?

They only talking on the phone. But then again, we need to retire them.

On Aug 2, 12:02 am, "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman"
wrote:
Pat who? wrote:
...If you don't like it, go talk to the lawmakers.

That is not a practical suggestion for those of us who can not afford to
attend $1000/plate fund-raising dinners.


That's only the price to get in. To get listened to you need at least
100 times that amount.

"Pat" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Aug 1, 1:25 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
wrote:
"Pat" wrote in message

oups.com...



On Aug 1, 12:39 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
wrote:
"Pat" wrote in message

groups.com...

On Aug 1, 11:54 am, William wrote:
On Aug 1, 10:25 am, Pat wrote:

On Aug 1, 10:43 am, donquijote1954
wrote:

On Aug 1, 4:00 am, Peter Clinch
wrote:

Yes, there are some idiots who'll sit behind you and honk at
you,
but
they won't run you down, because it might scratch the
paintwork.
If you
push people off into bike lanes as a rule they will be far
more
maligned
and looked down upon on the instances where they have no
choice
to
use
the roads, if they're typically in a bike lane instead.

They don't help. We know they don't help as we can see them
not
helping. *HAVE YOU GOT THAT YET?*

You still avoiding my question: BIKE LANES OR NO BIKE LANES,
HOW
DO
WE
BRING BIKE RIDERSHIP FROM THE AMERICAN OR BRITISH LEVES TO THE
DUTCH
OR DANISH LEVELS?

You see, you are thinking about the problem from the wrong
direction.
You are saying "biking is great, what is wrong with everyone
else".
Instead, you need to examine why other people don't bike and
address
that.

Predominantly, I would think it is the combination of "no time to
bike
& no place to bike to". Most people won't bike to work if they
get
sweaty or if they work the night shift, etc. Bike lanes might
partially address the "no place to bike to" issue, but not
really.

For example, I need to run out and get my kid some things for
football
practice. While we're at it we need to do some back-to-school
shopping. Okay, that's simple and the kid is in great shape. I
just
need to run to the nearest sporting goods store. Fortunately,
there's
a small mall across the street. This trip is a bit unusually
because
I do 90% of my shopping at the nest Walmart. So ideally, this is
bikeable. But the problem is, the nearest sporting goods store
is
about 45 miles away. That's about 15 miles past the Walmart. So
at
10 mph (because of the hills and the purchases), you're talking
at 9
hour bike ride.

I don't blame you, biking works best
when everything is
more central and dense like a metro area.

So I think your idea has merit, it just needs to be tweeked. The
community didn't allow a Walmart because of a DOT right-of-way
issue.
But maybe if we had more Walmarts, so that they were closer to
people,
the people could bike to them easier. Plus if they put in
SuperCenters with groceries, then more shopping could be done in
1
trip.

So I guess bike lanes are part of the problem, but having a place
to
go is the other part. Therefore, maybe you should lobby for more
Walmarts -- and have them tied into bikeways -- to encourage
shopping
by bike.

Have you no sense of quality Pat? I guess that is implied when your
from nowhere land.

I don't follow your logic. Of course I am from the middle of
nowhere. That's great. Clean air. Clean water. Mountains in the
background (okay, the Allegany's aren't exactly the Rockies). It is
a
nice, simple life. What else to I need. This is a great lifestyle.
What "quality" am I missing? The Kleenex from Walmart is somehow
worst than the Kleenex from the Kleenex Boutique? The $18 Harry
Potter book I bought last week has different words in it than $32
version in your corner bookstore? My backyard swimming pool is
somehow less wet than your municipal one? My fruit-of-the-loom
underwear are somehow less fruity than yours from the mall. Does a
Timex keep different time than a Rolex -- it doesn't really matter
to
me, because I don't wear a watch.

You might crave some imported, organic, fresh pasta only made by
virgins on the hillsides of Italy. But regular pasta is fine by me.
You don't need that stuff to live well. You only need it to fill
the
hollow spots in your sole. There's nothing wrong with simplicity.
I'm not exactly a monk, but this definitely isn't Madison Ave. But
that's what makes it nice.

On Friday, a friend and I are thinking of throwing a canoe on the
Allegany River and going a few miles, just for the heck of it.
That's
excitement around here.

Besides, the Walmarts around here are pretty generous when it comes
to
youth sports. We'll hit up each of them during fundraising for each
of the sports. It's not a lot, but they'll throw in $25 to $50
(each)
any time they are asked -- and we ask them quite often. That buys
stuff for the concession stand or for a raffle.

So what about this "quality" thing?

If you had a Wal-Mart right there they would immediately start
four-laning
the road in front of it and put in access roads. That would make it
far
less bike friendly. Most ordinary sized grocery stores, however, do
not
insist on four lane highways. Cluster a number of smaller shops
around
it
and you have most of the selection of Wal-Mart, probably better
quality,
and
a more bike-friendly environment.

-Amy

Man, I am dating myself, but remember the days when a few bigger
grocery stores out build next to a department store and share a common
entrance. It was like a Jamesway next to a Shop Rite. Jamesway,
Barkers and others all did that, here and there. You could go between
the stores, up at the front.

Now, all of those departments stores are closed. Must not have been
such a good idea.

The thing is, people LIKE Walmart. Maybe you don't and William
doesn't, but there are sure a whole lot of people out there who do.

We'd like one here. The sales tax revenue would help the city coffers
and people wouldn't have to drive so far to buy skivies.

About that sales tax revenue...

http://www.newrules.org/retail/polic...MARTREPORT.pdf

3 interesting -- and useless -- studies.

The first one suggests that somehow, the sales tax from Walmart will
be less than the sales taxes from stores that close because of WM.
Well, that would only be true if the total volume of taxable sales
fell because of WM. Granted, it will redistribute sales taxes because
they will spike in the area near WM as WM has it sales and the store
in that area see increased sales. Sales tax will fall 20 to 30 miles
away where WM has a negative impact on stores.

That study is also interesting in that it blames WM for increased
crime. I don't know about you, but I think the CRIMINAL is
responsible for the crime, not the victim. If a sexy woman wears a
tiny bit of clothing down the street and gets rapes, is SHE to blame
or is it the rapist?

The second study is typical government-trash. The government hires a
consultant who then interviews the government officials and develops a
study that legitimizes their views. That's what the methodology says
they did. The most interesting part of the study is that is discusses
assessment based on cost, not replacement value. That is easy data
collection but bad assessment practice. The other interesting thing
is that the study was significantly biases away from hotels.

There is another problem with this type of study, which I call "The
Salt Situation". It involves a great deal of research I did on the
cost of road salt. The conclusion can only be summarized as the cost/
benefit of de-icing salt is whatever you want it to be and it changes
depending on how you want to measure cost & benefit. This study uses
a snapshot approach, which is the most limited view but I will stay
with The Salt Situation to explain things. If you look at the cost of
buying salt v. the cost of sand, salt is more expensive. But, if you
you factor in the fact that you need fewer applications, it appears to
move into the lead. But if you then factor in the added storage costs
and trucking, it falls behind. But if you then factor in the fact
that you don't have to clean it up in the spring, if goes back to the
front. Then if you factor in environmental damage, it again is more
expensive. But if you figure in the societal savings due to fewer
accidents, rustouts, and paint chips, if is gains cheaper. Whether
salt is more expensive or cheaper is not really determinable because
the outcome came be made to be whatever you want it to be.

This study is the same way. Okay, some town hires an additional cop
at the cost of $75,000 per year. So WM costs the town money, right.
Well, maybe or maybe not. What about the savings that the town
residents get on their shopping. If that totals over $75,000 per
year, then the residents are still better off. Then answer is
determined by how you ask the question and what you choose to include
in a your cost/benefit analysis.

http://www.epinet.org/workingpapers/wp276.pdf

The third study was just plain ridicules. The government cannot fault
someone for following the law. If the government, esp. Congress,
doesn't like the current minimum wage or labor laws, they should
change them -- not fault someone else for following them. Are their
lapses, sure. But their always are in any organization of that size,
just as their are lapse in the government following the law. As long
as they comply with the law, they are okay. If you don't like it, go
talk to the lawmakers.

So "encouraging" workers to work off the clock is following the law?

-Amy

"William" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Aug 1, 2:28 pm, William wrote:
On Aug 1, 11:12 am, Pat wrote:



On Aug 1, 11:54 am, William wrote:

On Aug 1, 10:25 am, Pat wrote:

On Aug 1, 10:43 am, donquijote1954
wrote:

On Aug 1, 4:00 am, Peter Clinch wrote:

Yes, there are some idiots who'll sit behind you and honk at
you, but
they won't run you down, because it might scratch the
paintwork. If you
push people off into bike lanes as a rule they will be far more
maligned
and looked down upon on the instances where they have no choice
to use
the roads, if they're typically in a bike lane instead.

They don't help. We know they don't help as we can see them
not
helping. *HAVE YOU GOT THAT YET?*

You still avoiding my question: BIKE LANES OR NO BIKE LANES, HOW
DO WE
BRING BIKE RIDERSHIP FROM THE AMERICAN OR BRITISH LEVES TO THE
DUTCH
OR DANISH LEVELS?

You see, you are thinking about the problem from the wrong
direction.
You are saying "biking is great, what is wrong with everyone else".
Instead, you need to examine why other people don't bike and
address
that.

Predominantly, I would think it is the combination of "no time to
bike
& no place to bike to". Most people won't bike to work if they get
sweaty or if they work the night shift, etc. Bike lanes might
partially address the "no place to bike to" issue, but not really.

For example, I need to run out and get my kid some things for
football
practice. While we're at it we need to do some back-to-school
shopping. Okay, that's simple and the kid is in great shape. I
just
need to run to the nearest sporting goods store. Fortunately,
there's
a small mall across the street. This trip is a bit unusually
because
I do 90% of my shopping at the nest Walmart. So ideally, this is
bikeable. But the problem is, the nearest sporting goods store is
about 45 miles away. That's about 15 miles past the Walmart. So
at
10 mph (because of the hills and the purchases), you're talking at
9
hour bike ride.

I don't blame you, biking works best
when everything is
more central and dense like a metro area.

So I think your idea has merit, it just needs to be tweeked. The
community didn't allow a Walmart because of a DOT right-of-way
issue.
But maybe if we had more Walmarts, so that they were closer to
people,
the people could bike to them easier. Plus if they put in
SuperCenters with groceries, then more shopping could be done in 1
trip.

So I guess bike lanes are part of the problem, but having a place
to
go is the other part. Therefore, maybe you should lobby for more
Walmarts -- and have them tied into bikeways -- to encourage
shopping
by bike.

Have you no sense of quality Pat? I guess that is implied when your
from nowhere land.

I don't follow your logic. Of course I am from the middle of
nowhere. That's great. Clean air. Clean water. Mountains in the
background (okay, the Allegany's aren't exactly the Rockies). It is a
nice, simple life. What else to I need. This is a great lifestyle.
What "quality" am I missing? The Kleenex from Walmart is somehow
worst than the Kleenex from the Kleenex Boutique? The $18 Harry
Potter book I bought last week has different words in it than $32
version in your corner bookstore? My backyard swimming pool is
somehow less wet than your municipal one? My fruit-of-the-loom
underwear are somehow less fruity than yours from the mall. Does a
Timex keep different time than a Rolex -- it doesn't really matter to
me, because I don't wear a watch.

You might crave some imported, organic, fresh pasta only made by
virgins on the hillsides of Italy. But regular pasta is fine by me.
You don't need that stuff to live well. You only need it to fill the
hollow spots in your sole. There's nothing wrong with simplicity.
I'm not exactly a monk, but this definitely isn't Madison Ave. But
that's what makes it nice.

On Friday, a friend and I are thinking of throwing a canoe on the
Allegany River and going a few miles, just for the heck of it. That's
excitement around here.

Besides, the Walmarts around here are pretty generous when it comes to
youth sports. We'll hit up each of them during fundraising for each
of the sports. It's not a lot, but they'll throw in $25 to $50 (each)
any time they are asked -- and we ask them quite often. That buys
stuff for the concession stand or for a raffle.

So what about this "quality" thing?

Pat, Walmart is McDonalds department stores. In every way. If you wanna
call that quality go right ahead. Just keep that bull **** out of the
city.

To be more specific, ever notice how a lot of things, not
ALL things but a lot, are a heck of a lot crappier at walmart as
apposed to the other extreme like William-sanoma or crate and barrel?
I'm not saying that every place should be as expensive and *high tech*
for a lack of a better word as those places are. But ever notice how
theres a lot of poor people at Walmart? I guess you would'nt since
thats all you have in nowhere land but here in the cities when people
have more options then the lowest and crappiest, we tend to shoot for
the happy medium between excessive and contemptible.

I'm not sure that it's the best argument against Wal-Mart that it gives the
poor a place that they can afford. BTW, hope you're ok.