Unpopular idea but cycling as the main vehicle to commute is backwards. Interesting how everyone here seems to think the same thing. Not everyone wants to or can bike. Making cars and bicycles rivalries can be an anti-progress idea actually.
> Making cars and bicycles rivalries can be an anti-progress idea actually.
More people using bicycles is better for everyone, even car users, since congestion is the biggest problem for car users and bicycles make much more efficient use of road space.
I think it’s not the point that everybody cycles. It would be a great improvement if a lot of people would cycle.
There probably will always be valid reasons that someone wants or has to use a car, but these few valid reasons shoukd not distract from the large number of people who can and in fact want to cycle in many circumstances.
For that though the infrastructure needs to e aimed at the large number of cyclists and not at the small number of valid motor vehicle drivers.
I feel in the moment the priorities are upside down and somehow in a convoluted city where everything has to fight for priority in available space it is somehow acceptable that everyone can use the limited road space for every car travel they want however they want and on the back of that that it is the city planners obligation to provide infrastructure so that car driver can drive in big cities however they want.
I feel that’s not the best use of the available space and not in the best interest of people living in a city centre.
We're getting way too fat and put a lot of stress on our environment. Cycling helps with both, through exercise and by lowering overall impact (way less impact making the vehicle, no emissions using it, very little parking space needed, pretty much noise free, way safer in collisions when no cars are involved, etc). Seems to me it's actually a very forwards thinking idea.
Oh and I live in Amsterdam and still own a car. It's even more common for Dutch families outside cities to own a car or two (74% of Dutch households owns at least one). The two are not mutually exclusive, but both serve their purpose. I take my bike for any trips of max ~30 minutes, anything over and I'll usually opt for public transport or car, as that's faster and more convenient.
The vast majority of car owners are cyclists and the vast majority of cyclists are car owners.
There's no rivalry except those who don't understand. They are the same people in different situations. I drive today as I'm going somewhere after work that has no cycling lanes. I'll ride tomorrow as I prefer it.
I think that pushing for as many people to switch to cycling for their daily under 10 miles commute, would benefit everyone, including those who aren't able to cycle because they would have a less congested traffic and a faster trip in a car. If you believe that people who advocate for cycling infrastructure want to remove car infrastructure completely I think you're a little deluded, or they are.
At least they have tried something. In some other areas, like Sydney or Melbourne (Australia), everyone who matters (landlords + politicians) owns homes. So nobody is doing anything about it.
Economic benefits are probably the biggest reason for being stuck in those unlivable cities. However the downside might outweigh the upside: higher cost, long commute and lots of worries.
