• Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    5 months ago

    And what exactly are those people going to lose if they get on a bike sometimes? Their diabetes?

    • stufkes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      5 months ago

      I’m going to lose my lifetime, literally, by biking a total of 80+ km to work and back. And public transportation takes 2+ hrs one way.

      • frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        5 months ago

        Then when you get into the city, you’ll benefit immensely from 80% of the people being on separated bike paths rather than cars on the road.

        There’s no realistic plan where cities become carless, but can they not be the default?

        • stufkes@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          I don’t disagree with the plans to make the city careless. I answered the question what would be so bad about cycling. I think the time factor is often forgotten when talking about cycling and public transport

          • intensely_human@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            The time factor is always forgotten when discussing ways to make society more efficient. As if the primary thing that the working poor are poor in isn’t time itself.

            Time, as a resource to be paid for these various solutions, is treated like a throwaway resource. IMO it’s positively dehumanizing to wantonly allocate other people’s time like that.

        • intensely_human@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          How is a driving person going to benefit from there being more people biking exactly?

          Think that through. Why are there more people biking? Because the cost of driving went up.

          If those who drive benefit from this system, it will mean more people choosing to drive as a result of driving being more valuable.

          Don’t think you’re making the utility of cars better by this. If it made cars more useful it would result in more car trips. If it makes cars more useful and doesn’t result in more car trips, it must have forced some subset of people to stop using cars for the other drivers’ benefit.

          • frezik@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            The costs don’t have to go up at all. Merely uncover the costs that are already there but hidden. Everything from noise, space usage, wars in far off countries, lack of exercise, or just the surprise $1200 repair expense.

      • zecg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        No, lose it making money to maintain and feed the car ( how many working hours a year that is?) and sitting in a car for an hour in one direction. Correct time of commuting is time spent in traffic + time spent to earn the money for fuel. If you bikemute, you can actually consider a part of that time as free gym.

    • intensely_human@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      They’re losing the ability to use their car with the same level of utility as before.

      You’re squirming to not recognize this basic fact. It takes a lot of energy expenditure to not acknowledge this fact.

      Just be okay with what you’re doing. Own it.

      • SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        I think that the problem here is that your definition of “losing” equates to “slight reduction in the massive subsidy that society provides to drivers, and forcing them to drive slower in cities because the lanes are narrower so that other people don’t have to die.” Yeah, technically “losing,” but it still sounds pretty childish to complain about.

    • Drusas@kbin.run
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      5 months ago

      You have no idea how ableist you’re being right now.

      Even ignoring the jab at diabetics, what about other disabled people? Not everyone can just get on a bike.

      • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        It’s always so funny when car brains suddenly discover their heart for disabled people when they desperately reach for arguments against non car centric traffic planning. If you’re genuinely concerned about disabled people and those who can’t drive for other reasons (poverty springs to mind) you should advocate for transport options besides cars.

        • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          5 months ago

          A variety of transport options for a variety of preferences and disabilities. Some people have a disability that prevents them from cycling, others from walking, others from driving. Only building car centric is still unfair to those who cannot drive due to disability, age, or skill. Only building bike lanes and no transit or car lanes can also be unfair. Multiple options is the most fair in most scenarios.

          • Drusas@kbin.run
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            5 months ago

            Exactly. We need multiple options and realistic options for people with limitations. It’s way too common on this community for people to call everybody a car brain just because they have trouble riding a bike.

        • intensely_human@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          It’s always so funny when car brains suddenly discover their heart for disabled people

          This is viciously insulting. What the hell are you talking about “suddenly discover their heart”. What do you know about my heart?

          You really think the only people to disagree with you are ice cold monsters? That’s a crazy way to see this scenario: you versus the cold blooded shade demons who don’t like being forced to change their lives.

        • Drusas@kbin.run
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          5 months ago

          I am a disabled person and I vote for transportation levies and taxes every time they come up, but nice trying to pretend that I’m a car brain just because I happen to need one.

          Once again, ableism. Don’t assume everybody is not disabled just because you don’t see them in a wheelchair.

          • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            You’re a car brain because you jump from “we should build more bike lanes” to “they want to ban cars”. Nobody is saying that.

        • Drusas@kbin.run
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          That will dramatically depend on the disability in question. For some, yes.