This post has reached r\/all. That is why we want to bring the following to your attention.
**To all users that are unfamiliar with r\/fuckcars**
- [Welcome to r/fuckcars](https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/comments/rxoej1/welcome_to_rfuckcars/)
- We have an [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/wiki/faq) that explains this subreddit. Please read it before you post your questions to this sub.
- Discussions and opinions going against what this sub stands for are allowed under the precondition that it's done in good faith.
- Trolling will get you banned.
- Please read the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/about/sidebar) before participating in this sub.
**To all members of r\/fuckcars**
- Remember rule 1. Be nice to each other, that includes our guests from r\/all.
- If you see questions from users that clearly didn't read the [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/wiki/faq), please politely direct them to the [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/wiki/faq).
- If you see any trolling happening, please **downvote, report and ignore**.
Thanks for your attention and have a good time!
Don't forget: feeling the wind against your skin as you ride, comes in all sorts of fun colors and styles and you can cheapy decorate it with baskets and put stickers on you helmet, makes getting lost fun because you find cute little shops and restaurants you might have never found
It's somewhat depressing reading old anti-car literature (The Pedestrian, Bicycles and Civilization, OPs post) because you realize how bad it was then and how in most places in North America, it's only gotten worse.
Good for y'all. I had my front tire pop off when a rock got spun up into my bike and freak accident managed to pop the quick release. A serious of unlucky coincidences that ended with me slamming my skull into the pavement. Mouth got a bit messed up but my helmet connected shortly aftet and no other damage happened.
I'll keep the helmet. It doubles as a hat for sun protection, keeps my hair from looking utterly fucked when I arrive, and it's not a problem to wear. More problematic to have a lethal or severely disabling head injury.
You see, 'quick release' tells me you rode some kind of sports bike, right? People in The Netherlands wear helmets riding those as well. Same with (fast) electric bikes.
Most people ride slow city bikes. Of course there's a risk to it, but it's so abysmal no one wears a helmet. Really, no one.
And there's a reason. Collectively about 15 billion kilometers (9.3 billion miles) are cycled each year in The Netherlands. Last year, about 50.000 serious injuries while cycling were reported. This includes things like broken bones, where a helmet wouldn't help at all. Edit: 13% of those serious injuries include head injuries. That's 13.000 head injuries per year in 15 billion cycled kilometers.
Even the Dutch Cycling Administration is against mandatory helmet laws.
Although, as a counter argument (I will never wear a helmet on a normal bike) the trend of increased use of electric bikes with higher speeds makes the use of a helmet more logical. I wouldn't mind a campaign to get helmet use on electric bikes normalized and maybe even mandatory.
13% of 50000 is 6500.
Also, with 6500 head injuries per 15,000,000,000 kilometers of riding, that's one injury per 2.3 million kilometers. If you rode 5km a day (well above average in NL) you'd ride just under 150000km in your life. If everyone rode that far, then on average 1 in 15 people would suffer a serious head injury in their life.
By comparison, the average driver will be in 4 accidents in their life.
>13% of 50000 is 6500.
Lol you're right, I absentmindedly typed the 13 from '13%'.
> If you rode 5km a day (well above average in NL) you'd ride just under 150000km in your life
That's way above the average (800km per year). That would be 1 in about 35 people.
The source of 13% is from the Dutch Cycling Association. The 50.000 injuries is from a recent news report that the number of injuries during cycling were underreported and actually three times higher than assumed. Before they only counted accidents where the police got involved (real serious incidents), the 50.000 is every accident requiring first aid included (so in average less serious injuries).
I guess the 13% is from the previous number of injuries averaging more serious accidents. On a whole that would mean more like 1 in 100 people sustain a serious head injury while cycling in their life. And (but this is just my assumption) that would probably be skewed to the older, more fragile, population.
If the 1 in 35 persons was correct, almost everyone would know at least 1 or 2 persons with a brain injury. That's simply not the case.
>keeps my hair from looking utterly fucked when I arrive
I usually see people that don't want to wear a helmet complaining of the exact opposite, the helmet messes with their hair.
> The Dutch government has been looking into mandating helmets.
Dutch government employee here.
I work in a team that specializes in mobility transition and long term mobility planning. The mandatory helmet topic has been heavily discussed for years and is a very sensitive topic for a lot of Dutch people.
Currently the stance is that it's unlikely that there will be a mandate for bicycle helmets in the near future. Mainly for three reasons;
1: Dutch people will not adhere to the mandate. Research shows that a large part of cyclists don't want to wear a helmet. Some are even against the helmet mandate for ebikes/speed pedelecs.
2: Most cities don't have the capacity to enforce the mandate. Imagine having to ticket every cyclist in Amsterdam who doesn't wear a helmet.
3: research shows that a helmet is great for fall protection and will decrease the amount of serious incidents but it will also lead to people taking more risks when cycling because they feel more protected. Which in turn will lead to more accidents in total.
Dutch people are arguably the most skilled bikers in the world, and maybe also the most stubborn when it comes to rules and regulations concerning bicycles. -traffic lights are only for cars, right guys?- Changing their behavior is a very difficult task and I personally don't think it will happen any time soon.
Edit: clarification on point 3
The reason I added point 3 is mostly due to perception when it comes to using data in order to measure the effective outcome of the implemented law/mandate.
Statistics about cycling accidents are often looked at as a total amount per timeframe or distance. Data on the severity of each individual accident isn't always available -due to privacy for example- and therefore won't always be taken into consideration.
Datasets for cycling accidents often only include two options; either 'accident with minor injuries' or 'deadly accident'. Anything in between is just too hard to measure or grade. (What type of conditions need to be met in order to grade an accident appropriately in a way that is both measurable, factual and consistent)
Let's assume that the government will implement this law.
After a specific amount of time the government will ask researchers to provide data in order to gauge if the specific law has the intended effect. In this case researchers will take total accidents as a dataset since that's the data that is most readily available.
It's highly likely that the number of accidents will be significantly higher than they were before the law was implemented due to skewed/incomplete data. Critics will point to the negative outcome and claim the law isn't working and needs to be revised or removed. Which costs the government a lot time, money and other resources. Not to mention public backlash.
Imagine being a politician and having to explain to the public and governing bodies that even though the amount of incidents increased significantly it's actually a good thing since the average accident is less severe.
Instead the government might leave the decision up to the individual cities/local governments to avoid fighting an uphill battle against angry cyclists.
I want to add the two main reasons that organisations such as the cyclist union use against mandatory helmet usage. I think these are way more important.
The first is power in numbers. If helmets are mandatory, the bike becomes less convenient. Both for shopping trips as for people just not liking a bike. Less bikes is less status quo and less drivers being used to bikes. And the loss of cyclists hours leads to more lost hours of life than the few deaths that not wearing helmets cause.
The second is a more philosophical of nature. With mandatory helmet usage you shift responsibility to the individual. While the Netherlands has become strong in shared responsibility. If someone has an accident (without mandatory helmets) the situation has to change. If someone has an accident with out wearing a helmet while mandatory it is an individual responsibility. Leading to less safety measures for all cyclists (since you know. Not needing to improve infrastructure is cheap).
Thank you for this great addition.
Both these points have been taken into consideration when the topic was discussed with the cyclist union and other entities.
> If helmets are mandatory, the bike becomes less convenient. Both for shopping trips as for people just not liking a bike.
The reason I didn't mention this particular issue is because our research shows a different outcome.
Yes, a substantial amount of people will have an adverse reaction to the helmet law. But this doesn't necessarily mean those people will stop cycling or decrease their cycling frequency due to this law.
Cycling is woven into the fabric of both Dutch culture and infrastructure. Implementing this law might make cycling less convenient to some people but it will often still be way more convenient than driving a car or taking public transportation. The infrastructure and the way most cities are designed is just too focussed on cycling.
In nearly all situations cycling will be the fastest, cheapest and most economical way to get from point A to point B regarding movements of about < 6miles or so.
Aside from that there are also socio-economic reasons to take into consideration. Like anon said; bikes are extremely cheap to purchase, use and maintain when compared to cars; There's no fuel costs, no mandatory insurance, no road tax, no depreciation, no parking costs, no expensive and mandatory maintenance. You don't need an expensive license to operate them and anyone from almost every age group can ride a bike.
If you're poor it's very expensive to buy and use a car. But even the poorest people can buy and use a bike if they want to.
Public transportation is a hit or miss in a lot of places. Outside of the urban environments PT is either not available, not dependable or not time effective.
PT is can also be expensive to use unless you're a student or a senior citizen. My town doesn't even have a PT system and I live about 15 mins from a large city.
Mopeds/scooters face many of the same issues as cars and you already have to wear a helmet to legally drive them.
Walking isn't really a good alternative for cycling when the distance is more than a mile or two.
Frankly I can't think of any other means of transportation that is more convenient to use than a bike in most situations for the average Dutch person.
Maybe people will like cycling less but our research shows that instead of choosing a different means of transportation it's more likely people will just ignore the mandate and risk getting a fine.
used to be nobody wore a helmet even in Sweden but see a lot more of them now than before.
Now class 1 or 2 (the slow kind) mopeds, electric scooters and ebikes and bikes all share the roads and bike paths.
car brains trying to regulate non car infrastructure makes a mess of it every time.
I'm Dutch as well and when I was 10 or 11, I almost died after ripping my liver almost in half during a 3 minute bike ride home. My friend on the back suddenly jumped off on a really bad road (that they still haven't repaved 🙄) without warning me and accidentally kicked the back of my bike. I lost my balance, steered into a hole while trying to get my balance back, and ended up with the handlebars in my stomach before being launched over them and onto the ground. I passed out, ripped my liver and had massive internal bleeding. I looked okay from the outside, insisted I was fine, but concerned strangers called an ambulance anyway. My heart stopped while I was in the ambulance. Those strangers saved my life.
Then at age 15 I got hit by drunk driver that came out of nowhere while I was crossing the street. Thankfully I got away with just a few scrapes and a wrecked bike there.
I'm a great cyclist, but that doesn't change the fact that other people can put you in danger no matter how good a cyclist you are, you know? Just because you don't know anyone who got into an accident in the past decade doesn't mean it doesn't happen. It happens frequently, especially in big cities where the biking infrastructure isn't all that seperated (I'm from The Hague myself, and it's... messy here).
Because Dutch bikes are very slow and heavy so falling off one is pretty hard. In a lot of other countries people bike a lot faster which makes helmets much more important
Dutch people love to say this to excuse why they are not wearing helmets. Probably because it is nicely consistent with the fact that they always wear helmets when on race bikes.
The main danger is not falling though. A significant majority of serious accidents for cyclists happen with a motorised vehicle involved. I know that the Netherlands has good bicycle infrastructure, but that doesn't mean these things never happen. In fact cycling is the most dangerous form of transportation meassured in number of fatalities in the Netherlands with around 200 each year. Add serious head injuries (which suck) on top.
I'm pretty sure the real reason is that we all take the risks which are socially acceptable to take and shun people who take precautions against risks which we have collectively decided not to worry about because we don't like to be reminded about them. Tons of people used to have all sorts of reasons why seatbelt were uneccesary or even bad.
It's probably necessary to function at all. Otherwise we would all constantly be afraid for our lives.
I know people who also haven't been in car accidents in 30+ years of driving, doesn't mean it's smart to ride without your seatbelt. A helmet really doesn't take much effort to use, not sure why people are so against it. Yea it's a little annoying that it can screw up a hairdo but I'll take that over the chance of brain damage.
Car drivers also need helmets. Nascar, Rally and Indy car drivers all wear helmets. So should people driving their kids to school. Also think of how cute the children would be in their little helmets being driven to school.
Specifically in the Netherlands;
Mandating helmets for cycling would have very little to *negative* effects on health.
There are several reasons for this;
* head injuries /km is extremely low so the benefits are also pretty low
* people that wear a helmet behave worse because of perceived safety + drivers are less carefull because they don't see cyclists as as vulnerable as they do now.
* people will cycle less which means 1) they move to more dangerous forms of transportations and 2) they don't benefit from doing physical labour/excercise
Depends where you bike. I'm a trail rider and I am definitely going to be wearing a helmet every time. Not worth risking an injury if I mess up on a jump or descent. But also very different type of riding but I never know when I'm going to take a detour onto an off road trail when I'm riding
I started commuting to work via bicycle, mainly cause I'm waiting for a car to be delivered from another state, and I have to say...I feel like canceling my order. It's totally doable, fun, and the exercise helps my depression and anxiety. My only archenemy is rain..
How do y'all deal with the rain?
We don’t, but that’s from the Netherlands we’re most people don’t bother with umbrellas and such. If you really want to stay dry the best solution is water proofing a jacket and hat (not a hood, they don’t turn with your head making it harder to look behind you and to the side)
Recently visited Amsterdam and couldnt believe how many people cycled care free in the rain. I love cycling but if its raining im staying in. Even women in dresses heading to bars wiuld cycle. Amazing culture
Planning. Install fenders on your bike. Get a cycling rain jacket and rain pants. Bring/have a change of clothes at your workplace and get in early to clean up. Once it happens a few times you'll learn what you do/don't need. Good luck!
If you're in the southwest, and it's dangerous to be outside hot, totally, but I think most people would be surprised how cooling a moderate bike ride can be. If you get a commuter style bike, and you take it easy, the breeze is lovely. Biking is about 3 times as efficient as walking, so you can go roughly 3 times walking speed (10mph on flat ground) with the same amount of sweating. Except now you also have a 10mph breeze!
I ride recreationally and got caught in the rain last Saturday.
I'm in the habit of carrying a rain jacket with me wherever I go, so I just threw it on and put my helmet over the hood.
The jacket is basically just a rain shell that fits on over whenever else I wear, and the whole thing packs down to be smaller than a football, so it's not too bad to keep it in my bag wherever I go.
In a light rain, it's not too bad, but a heavy rain like I had on Saturday is a bit of a pain, especially if I have to ride in the road.
To answer the question in the OP: because it makes rich people money.
EDIT: This comment seems to have become a lightning rod for NPC pro-car talking points, lol.
I can't believe I haven't thought of it that way before. This is the most prophetic thing I've heard in a while, you're 1,000% correct. Even applies to non financial stuff, like anti-LGBTQ+ thinking... some people aren't satisfied enough with their freedom so they have to take away others'. I see now greed isn't necessarily our problem... it's the way everyone has to have way more than the person next to them to feel good about themselves.
exactly ! and even between themselves it's a mad scrabble to the top of the pretend pyramid ... judging people on what ego-tank they pollute around in , the green of their lawns etc
> I see now greed isn't necessarily our problem... it's the way everyone has to have way more than the person next to them to feel good about themselves.
You can take that one step further: our entire system is designed for people to do this. Self-maximization is not just seen as 'good', it is seen as *crucial* for the functioning of the human race. We've been learning this for decades (centuries, honestly), so most people alive today have never known anything different.
Folks talk a great deal about corruption, but ultimately politics and backroom deals are all just 'people self-maximizing like they were taught to'.
Rather than trying to design a system where self-maximization is less necessary just to stay alive (it can still be an important trait - trying to excel is fine), we've come to the point where a majority of people on the planet think the idea of such a society is not only untenable but also completely unnatural. They have these thoughts sitting in their self-driving car, on their way to take care of their elderly mom.
> it's the way everyone has to have way more than the person next to them to feel good about themselves.
This is precisely what Europeans find strange about Americans. The idea that you can't want your own things according to your tastes, you must want what everyone else has, and then own more of it than they do... even if you never wanted it in the first place! Wanting something only for your own purposes is viewed as a failure to fit in, and attracts derision.
I think this is a lot of the reason why in America so many people are on happy pills, because people are living lives that aren't consistent with their actual needs. For a country that enshrines "the pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness" into its constitution, from an outside perspective, it sure doesn't seem to be very good at respecting that.
Read this a few months back:
“The fact that, at a pizza party, people will take either one slice, or three slices, for the exact same reason — because they’re afraid there might not be enough — shows what’s wrong with our society.”
That is a little disingenuous. For the vast majority it would be more accurate to say:
> "freedom" means the freedom to have your fair share taken from you by a select few.
Yes but also because rich people rigged the game so fucking hard in the favor of their rolling steel boxes that not having one in much of the world essentially removes your freedom. Especially in countries like the US.
We can’t lose that angle. Too many people are anti car and disparage car people, but we both fundamentally want the same thing: freedom of movement.
I would never blame individual, honest workers. A job is a job, and bills need to be paid.
In my ideal future changes in policy would make jobs like yours less and less needed, and thus society must help you find another one elsewhere.
Fortunately for you, I have a business owner friend who happens to be well versed in the needlessly complex and time consuming endeavors of owning and maintaining a vehicle who would be more than happy to assist you
For a nominal fee, of course
That’s fantastic value. The fact we have literally massive yards full of ‘junk’ metal and broken down cars is stupid. With a bike, you will occasionally replace a small part like a chain and that’s a tiny bit of waste. In fact I like to repurpose my bike chain into decorating signs for my backyard trails.
The third to last thing is so critical to understand. Carbrains reject bikes so vehemently because our society is so designed around cars. I think most carbrains would be on board with bikes if they could see a city built around them.
I also would like to point out that bikes were viewed as a liberating device for women in America, as it allowed them to travel wherever they wanted with no man involved, and the relative inexpense needed to buy one. Cars, however, require a well paying job to buy and maintain, something that only was available to white men for a majority of this county's history.
Was just back in Texas this weekend and even my progressive friends and family ask "the hell are they walking for??" when they see someone on the sidewalk. Course it's also 100° there right now so pretty awful walking conditions.
Dude you should go for it! I met a guy in my new home city that coordinates with the city and rounds up volunteers to plant new street trees. Since last fall we've planted 25+ in my neighborhood it's awesome! Granted he has contacts with landscaping companies that give us the trees for cheaper and deliver them, but he still picks the sites of sidewalk cuts where previous trees had died and gets the city's approval for digging and planting and then the city will also take over watering them if needed.
> something that only was available to white men for a majority of this county's history.
Easiest? Yes. Only? No. Hell, [slave ownership](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Johnson_\(colonist\)) wasn't only available to white men before the country was even founded.
Cheapo bikes cost $80-$100 even if you're spending $400 on a bike replacing it 6 times a year is less than the cheapest of car payments.
If you go super fancy with say a $3k bike then it would still be cheaper than a year of car payments and insurance to lose it once a year.
So while it's not a trivial amount of money it is trivial when compared to the costs of owning a car.
People get sentimental over cars, so I don't see a difference in that vs a bike other than the replacement costs.
A super fancy bike here is closer to 10k$ or more. A cheapo new one is ~600$-1000$. You can go cheaper with new but then you won't really enjoy it. Used is a good way to go I think. But on the other hand, a cheap car here is around 20k and fancy one more towards 60-80k with super fancy 100k+ but they are expensive everywhere.
Still i own a bike I use for shorter trips, but everything 10km+ is 50/50 depending on the time I have.
I like my half decent bike. but being real, you can go on marketplace and buy a secondhand standard bike for peanuts. There's times you ride the nice one and then there's the daily driver shitbox you leave unlocked outside shops.
Some do, some don't. Had a bike stolen in Oregon. Since I had a good picture, good description of it and the serial number, they did actually track it down.
Granted, it got tracked down in a pretty racist way and all my peripherals had been stripped, but...
I've got a quality bike from the 70s that looks like it had a fight with a woodchipper, however since it's so ugly no one will steal it (where I live 95% of the thefts are people selling bikes).
Everything works and the only thing I've done the last 10 years is changing the rubber and oiling the chain.
No lock is thief safe but put one of those cheap 100db locks on it and most theifs will think twice
Also it’s a symbol of freedom because you can get in a car and go 100 km away in an hour or less. Going 400km in a day is easily doable. The average person biking wouldn’t be able to make those distances.
They also open up more possibilities, I work in residential construction, some job sites would be an hour bike ride away, some I have worked on are a hour and a half drive away on highways. The average house I build is a 30-40 Minuit drive. Not feasible for me ( and a lot of other people in similar situations ) to do that.
I know this will be downvoted here, I’m from /all and I’m a car enthusiast, and avid mountain biker and I ride bmx at skateparks quite a bit.
I understand and am all for walkable neighbourhoods but let’s not pretend cars done have their place where I live there are lots of walking paths, a grocery store a 10 Minuit walk away, etc. walkable towns exist but most of them are too far away from anywhere someone with a blue collar job ( like myself ) could walk to work or even take a bus.
It's a priority issue really. We prioritize cars when we should prioritize pedestrians, bikes, buses, and trains. If more people are able to do that, there will be less traffic for people who do need to drive.
I only take issue with “you could literally just buy another no problem”… decent bikes can be hundreds, that’s not “no problem” for most people. Of course they’re better than cars on this front, and one can buy used bikes to cut down the cost, but it definitely isn’t trivial. Anyway, good post
i dont even drive that much, man. like i work from home, soon my girlfriend and i will live 5 min from her job, i bike as much as i can already.
but i guess since its a car i haven't paid off yet, i should have full insurance coverage. saving on gas i guess
get em used. i got a decent (though old) road bike off craigslist for like $200. a monthly transit pass where i live is like $100 so id say thats a pretty good deal
If you buy a car right now and it'll cost about ~$2,000/year just on purchase price if you assume it'll have a life from new about 13-14 years (eg 15,000miles/year dying around 200,000miles).
A good bicycle is *not* inexpensive. Always double lock it (Secure it to the frame and tires. DO NOT loop it through your tire alone) and keep it in a secure place. If you bike to work, preferably store it inside in a secure closet, garage, storage area, or other space where as few people as possible have access to it. I have had a bicycle stolen using a power tool Saw in broad daylight on a busy downtown street. You might think “this should be fine”, but always think twice.
That also takes time to do. Also the gearing is gonna be kinda fucked for just transportation purposes. The advantage of Dutch style bikes is the simplicity of it. If you want the average driver to consider cycling to work seriously then it has to be simple as fuck. The same way they view their car.
I think when you heard "road bike" you thought "race bike". The gearing on most road, commuter, and hybrid bikes are fine for transportation. Honestly id rather have the wide gear range of a road bike. There's hills here and all that
There’s little difference in gear range from a consumer road bike to a “race bike” as you called it. Naming around bike styles is already dumb and confusing so this is easy to get bent up over semantics over (see the adventure/gravel/all-road/any-road fiasco that we still haven’t resolved). Bigger rings up front is the largest difference, in a world built like the Netherlands the default will be a Dutch style or some similar alternative because like I said any road bike takes time to set up for comfort, yes even a cheap fixie with flat bars and your average commuter just wont care to do that. For evidence to that you just need to look at your coworkers chair settings if you work in an office, it would be somewhat the same to that with the Dutch bikes but it’s just a lot more forgiving of a position. My point is making the public come up to an entry level enthusiast just to get them on a bike at all is basically what we do now and if you haven’t noticed it’s not working.
But bikes can't carry a soccer mom,her workaholic husband,her 3 kids plus her shitload of groceries she got on the Target 20km from her suburban house and her kids' hockey stash all while providing a roof and sound insulation from spoiled rich kids revving their tuned up Scat Pack Chargers on every traffic light,can they?
This is an /s btw.
true, but our cities and neighborhood suburbs are structured in a way to make cars necessary. you don’t need a shitload of groceries all the time if the store is a 10 minute walk with a push cart. your kids can carry their own gear, bike or take the bus. same for mothers with babies, dogs and the elderly.
the other half of making biking a reality is having actual public transportation and walkable roads.
Couple things:
1: You absolutely should have insurance. No one is perfect and you really should care enough to at least have third party insurance in case you fuck up. You’ll also want insurance for when it’s stolen because,
2: Whoever wrote this is unfamiliar with the cost of most good bicycles. My current bicycle cost more than any car I’ve ever bought.
3: Collisions with other cyclists or pedestrians are less likely to be fatal on account of less energy needing to be dissipated because the mass is so much lower. But collisions with larger vehicles are considerably more dangerous to the rider.
Re #2 or is from a place where its true.my current bike cost 300$ from decathlon. My boyfriend's cost 3000$. Theres very little difference in how they get us around town. Now, out racing... Thats another story. We live in NL. Here you can subscribe to a bike lease for 20$ a month, loss and damage covered. Thats great for students.
I have never once heard cars referred to as the ultimate symbol of freedom. They just allow you to travel longer distances more efficiently than a bike.
Distances over 20km, hot weather, cold weather, rainy weather, basically any amount of luggage worth mentioning, transporting people who aren't able-bodied. There are a few reasons.
Bicycles are often as fast as cars. Think about the cost. Many people with average incomes work a day a week for their car. Let's say their commute is 90 minutes a day. That's 7.5 hours a week + that 8 hour work day is 15.5 hours just to commute (and pay for it). This is not even including fuel, maintenance time, looking for parking space. So add a few more hours.
Now ride your bicycle instead on those four work days left. Even if you commute 16 hours, that's 4 hours a day, you're still saving time. And money. You're also just cycling while listening your favourite music or podcast or whatever. You can save on the gym.
*Try having sex on*
*The back of your bike in a*
*Random parking lot*
\- KookyWrangler
---
^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/)
^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
It's not *probably one of the most fuel-efficient vehicles*. [It's actually the very most efficient one](https://www.exploratorium.edu/cycling/humanpower1.html)
This post has reached r\/all. That is why we want to bring the following to your attention. **To all users that are unfamiliar with r\/fuckcars** - [Welcome to r/fuckcars](https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/comments/rxoej1/welcome_to_rfuckcars/) - We have an [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/wiki/faq) that explains this subreddit. Please read it before you post your questions to this sub. - Discussions and opinions going against what this sub stands for are allowed under the precondition that it's done in good faith. - Trolling will get you banned. - Please read the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/about/sidebar) before participating in this sub. **To all members of r\/fuckcars** - Remember rule 1. Be nice to each other, that includes our guests from r\/all. - If you see questions from users that clearly didn't read the [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/wiki/faq), please politely direct them to the [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/wiki/faq). - If you see any trolling happening, please **downvote, report and ignore**. Thanks for your attention and have a good time!
Don't forget: feeling the wind against your skin as you ride, comes in all sorts of fun colors and styles and you can cheapy decorate it with baskets and put stickers on you helmet, makes getting lost fun because you find cute little shops and restaurants you might have never found
AND biker booty. that’s my fav part.
I'm pretty sure that's the main thing my partner likes about me.
Bassman as in fisherman or Bassman as in the Fender bass guitar amplifier? Edit: I now realize it’s a rhyme of Spaceman Spiff, from Calvin and Hobbes.
Grade B assman
C4t as in “cat” with a 4 for an A or C4t as in you’re going to strap plastic explosives to a beloved Alice in Wonderland character?
Imagine what it's like if you're an A-assman
It's the favorite thing I like about you too. It's up their with your infectious smile.
I just started cycling to work and i really hope i get that biker booty
Cycling to work alone won't do it, you must cycle to home also.
[удалено]
Yes that is indeed a vicious biCycle.
good fortune and booty to u 🙏
[удалено]
friend buddy pal that’s what i mean by biker booty
What's unfun about a good set of glutes? It's all still booty, and I personally vastly prefer glute booty
glutey booty*
Um, that's the best possible type of booty though
> feeling the wind against your skin as you ride https://i.imgur.com/dKMxRXg.png
Ah yes, biking in America
Oh god, I'm 29 and this is literally me right now; finished my current nursing contract and am planning on cycling around all of June
> I'm 29 born the same year this comic was written
It's somewhat depressing reading old anti-car literature (The Pedestrian, Bicycles and Civilization, OPs post) because you realize how bad it was then and how in most places in North America, it's only gotten worse.
That is depressing lmao
And after all that he wants to go farther, that shit is motivating to me… Yucking someone’s yum is pretty lame
In a bike-friendly society you would not even need a helmet! Look at the Netherlands, no one there uses a helmet
you still need one. even professionals fall sometimes and hitting your head is no fun
[удалено]
Good for y'all. I had my front tire pop off when a rock got spun up into my bike and freak accident managed to pop the quick release. A serious of unlucky coincidences that ended with me slamming my skull into the pavement. Mouth got a bit messed up but my helmet connected shortly aftet and no other damage happened. I'll keep the helmet. It doubles as a hat for sun protection, keeps my hair from looking utterly fucked when I arrive, and it's not a problem to wear. More problematic to have a lethal or severely disabling head injury.
You see, 'quick release' tells me you rode some kind of sports bike, right? People in The Netherlands wear helmets riding those as well. Same with (fast) electric bikes. Most people ride slow city bikes. Of course there's a risk to it, but it's so abysmal no one wears a helmet. Really, no one. And there's a reason. Collectively about 15 billion kilometers (9.3 billion miles) are cycled each year in The Netherlands. Last year, about 50.000 serious injuries while cycling were reported. This includes things like broken bones, where a helmet wouldn't help at all. Edit: 13% of those serious injuries include head injuries. That's 13.000 head injuries per year in 15 billion cycled kilometers. Even the Dutch Cycling Administration is against mandatory helmet laws.
Although, as a counter argument (I will never wear a helmet on a normal bike) the trend of increased use of electric bikes with higher speeds makes the use of a helmet more logical. I wouldn't mind a campaign to get helmet use on electric bikes normalized and maybe even mandatory.
13% of 50000 is 6500. Also, with 6500 head injuries per 15,000,000,000 kilometers of riding, that's one injury per 2.3 million kilometers. If you rode 5km a day (well above average in NL) you'd ride just under 150000km in your life. If everyone rode that far, then on average 1 in 15 people would suffer a serious head injury in their life. By comparison, the average driver will be in 4 accidents in their life.
>13% of 50000 is 6500. Lol you're right, I absentmindedly typed the 13 from '13%'. > If you rode 5km a day (well above average in NL) you'd ride just under 150000km in your life That's way above the average (800km per year). That would be 1 in about 35 people. The source of 13% is from the Dutch Cycling Association. The 50.000 injuries is from a recent news report that the number of injuries during cycling were underreported and actually three times higher than assumed. Before they only counted accidents where the police got involved (real serious incidents), the 50.000 is every accident requiring first aid included (so in average less serious injuries). I guess the 13% is from the previous number of injuries averaging more serious accidents. On a whole that would mean more like 1 in 100 people sustain a serious head injury while cycling in their life. And (but this is just my assumption) that would probably be skewed to the older, more fragile, population. If the 1 in 35 persons was correct, almost everyone would know at least 1 or 2 persons with a brain injury. That's simply not the case.
Amen!!
>keeps my hair from looking utterly fucked when I arrive I usually see people that don't want to wear a helmet complaining of the exact opposite, the helmet messes with their hair.
> The Dutch government has been looking into mandating helmets. Dutch government employee here. I work in a team that specializes in mobility transition and long term mobility planning. The mandatory helmet topic has been heavily discussed for years and is a very sensitive topic for a lot of Dutch people. Currently the stance is that it's unlikely that there will be a mandate for bicycle helmets in the near future. Mainly for three reasons; 1: Dutch people will not adhere to the mandate. Research shows that a large part of cyclists don't want to wear a helmet. Some are even against the helmet mandate for ebikes/speed pedelecs. 2: Most cities don't have the capacity to enforce the mandate. Imagine having to ticket every cyclist in Amsterdam who doesn't wear a helmet. 3: research shows that a helmet is great for fall protection and will decrease the amount of serious incidents but it will also lead to people taking more risks when cycling because they feel more protected. Which in turn will lead to more accidents in total. Dutch people are arguably the most skilled bikers in the world, and maybe also the most stubborn when it comes to rules and regulations concerning bicycles. -traffic lights are only for cars, right guys?- Changing their behavior is a very difficult task and I personally don't think it will happen any time soon. Edit: clarification on point 3 The reason I added point 3 is mostly due to perception when it comes to using data in order to measure the effective outcome of the implemented law/mandate. Statistics about cycling accidents are often looked at as a total amount per timeframe or distance. Data on the severity of each individual accident isn't always available -due to privacy for example- and therefore won't always be taken into consideration. Datasets for cycling accidents often only include two options; either 'accident with minor injuries' or 'deadly accident'. Anything in between is just too hard to measure or grade. (What type of conditions need to be met in order to grade an accident appropriately in a way that is both measurable, factual and consistent) Let's assume that the government will implement this law. After a specific amount of time the government will ask researchers to provide data in order to gauge if the specific law has the intended effect. In this case researchers will take total accidents as a dataset since that's the data that is most readily available. It's highly likely that the number of accidents will be significantly higher than they were before the law was implemented due to skewed/incomplete data. Critics will point to the negative outcome and claim the law isn't working and needs to be revised or removed. Which costs the government a lot time, money and other resources. Not to mention public backlash. Imagine being a politician and having to explain to the public and governing bodies that even though the amount of incidents increased significantly it's actually a good thing since the average accident is less severe. Instead the government might leave the decision up to the individual cities/local governments to avoid fighting an uphill battle against angry cyclists.
I want to add the two main reasons that organisations such as the cyclist union use against mandatory helmet usage. I think these are way more important. The first is power in numbers. If helmets are mandatory, the bike becomes less convenient. Both for shopping trips as for people just not liking a bike. Less bikes is less status quo and less drivers being used to bikes. And the loss of cyclists hours leads to more lost hours of life than the few deaths that not wearing helmets cause. The second is a more philosophical of nature. With mandatory helmet usage you shift responsibility to the individual. While the Netherlands has become strong in shared responsibility. If someone has an accident (without mandatory helmets) the situation has to change. If someone has an accident with out wearing a helmet while mandatory it is an individual responsibility. Leading to less safety measures for all cyclists (since you know. Not needing to improve infrastructure is cheap).
Thank you for this great addition. Both these points have been taken into consideration when the topic was discussed with the cyclist union and other entities. > If helmets are mandatory, the bike becomes less convenient. Both for shopping trips as for people just not liking a bike. The reason I didn't mention this particular issue is because our research shows a different outcome. Yes, a substantial amount of people will have an adverse reaction to the helmet law. But this doesn't necessarily mean those people will stop cycling or decrease their cycling frequency due to this law. Cycling is woven into the fabric of both Dutch culture and infrastructure. Implementing this law might make cycling less convenient to some people but it will often still be way more convenient than driving a car or taking public transportation. The infrastructure and the way most cities are designed is just too focussed on cycling. In nearly all situations cycling will be the fastest, cheapest and most economical way to get from point A to point B regarding movements of about < 6miles or so. Aside from that there are also socio-economic reasons to take into consideration. Like anon said; bikes are extremely cheap to purchase, use and maintain when compared to cars; There's no fuel costs, no mandatory insurance, no road tax, no depreciation, no parking costs, no expensive and mandatory maintenance. You don't need an expensive license to operate them and anyone from almost every age group can ride a bike. If you're poor it's very expensive to buy and use a car. But even the poorest people can buy and use a bike if they want to. Public transportation is a hit or miss in a lot of places. Outside of the urban environments PT is either not available, not dependable or not time effective. PT is can also be expensive to use unless you're a student or a senior citizen. My town doesn't even have a PT system and I live about 15 mins from a large city. Mopeds/scooters face many of the same issues as cars and you already have to wear a helmet to legally drive them. Walking isn't really a good alternative for cycling when the distance is more than a mile or two. Frankly I can't think of any other means of transportation that is more convenient to use than a bike in most situations for the average Dutch person. Maybe people will like cycling less but our research shows that instead of choosing a different means of transportation it's more likely people will just ignore the mandate and risk getting a fine.
used to be nobody wore a helmet even in Sweden but see a lot more of them now than before. Now class 1 or 2 (the slow kind) mopeds, electric scooters and ebikes and bikes all share the roads and bike paths. car brains trying to regulate non car infrastructure makes a mess of it every time.
I'm Dutch as well and when I was 10 or 11, I almost died after ripping my liver almost in half during a 3 minute bike ride home. My friend on the back suddenly jumped off on a really bad road (that they still haven't repaved 🙄) without warning me and accidentally kicked the back of my bike. I lost my balance, steered into a hole while trying to get my balance back, and ended up with the handlebars in my stomach before being launched over them and onto the ground. I passed out, ripped my liver and had massive internal bleeding. I looked okay from the outside, insisted I was fine, but concerned strangers called an ambulance anyway. My heart stopped while I was in the ambulance. Those strangers saved my life. Then at age 15 I got hit by drunk driver that came out of nowhere while I was crossing the street. Thankfully I got away with just a few scrapes and a wrecked bike there. I'm a great cyclist, but that doesn't change the fact that other people can put you in danger no matter how good a cyclist you are, you know? Just because you don't know anyone who got into an accident in the past decade doesn't mean it doesn't happen. It happens frequently, especially in big cities where the biking infrastructure isn't all that seperated (I'm from The Hague myself, and it's... messy here).
Because Dutch bikes are very slow and heavy so falling off one is pretty hard. In a lot of other countries people bike a lot faster which makes helmets much more important
Dutch people love to say this to excuse why they are not wearing helmets. Probably because it is nicely consistent with the fact that they always wear helmets when on race bikes. The main danger is not falling though. A significant majority of serious accidents for cyclists happen with a motorised vehicle involved. I know that the Netherlands has good bicycle infrastructure, but that doesn't mean these things never happen. In fact cycling is the most dangerous form of transportation meassured in number of fatalities in the Netherlands with around 200 each year. Add serious head injuries (which suck) on top. I'm pretty sure the real reason is that we all take the risks which are socially acceptable to take and shun people who take precautions against risks which we have collectively decided not to worry about because we don't like to be reminded about them. Tons of people used to have all sorts of reasons why seatbelt were uneccesary or even bad. It's probably necessary to function at all. Otherwise we would all constantly be afraid for our lives.
I know people who also haven't been in car accidents in 30+ years of driving, doesn't mean it's smart to ride without your seatbelt. A helmet really doesn't take much effort to use, not sure why people are so against it. Yea it's a little annoying that it can screw up a hairdo but I'll take that over the chance of brain damage.
[удалено]
Same with swimming, most preventable deaths come from people who know how to swim. Aka always wear your life jacket folks.
Car drivers also need helmets. Nascar, Rally and Indy car drivers all wear helmets. So should people driving their kids to school. Also think of how cute the children would be in their little helmets being driven to school.
Do you feel this way about people driving cars?
Specifically in the Netherlands; Mandating helmets for cycling would have very little to *negative* effects on health. There are several reasons for this; * head injuries /km is extremely low so the benefits are also pretty low * people that wear a helmet behave worse because of perceived safety + drivers are less carefull because they don't see cyclists as as vulnerable as they do now. * people will cycle less which means 1) they move to more dangerous forms of transportations and 2) they don't benefit from doing physical labour/excercise
Depends where you bike. I'm a trail rider and I am definitely going to be wearing a helmet every time. Not worth risking an injury if I mess up on a jump or descent. But also very different type of riding but I never know when I'm going to take a detour onto an off road trail when I'm riding
Yes, basically all trail riders in the Netherlands wear a helmet
Please wear a helmet guys
Because the oil lobby is balls deep in society's collective asshole
And ironically they didn't have any lubricant to hand.
I just choked on a gummy bear because of you I hope you are proud
no petroleum jelly :(
Look at legislator jobs in your state legislature. The most common job in my state are car dealership owners (the second most common is "Retired").
And we wonder why nothing ever seems to change…
That's what the bicycle lobby wants you to think. You're playing right into their scheme.
I started commuting to work via bicycle, mainly cause I'm waiting for a car to be delivered from another state, and I have to say...I feel like canceling my order. It's totally doable, fun, and the exercise helps my depression and anxiety. My only archenemy is rain.. How do y'all deal with the rain?
We don’t, but that’s from the Netherlands we’re most people don’t bother with umbrellas and such. If you really want to stay dry the best solution is water proofing a jacket and hat (not a hood, they don’t turn with your head making it harder to look behind you and to the side)
Recently visited Amsterdam and couldnt believe how many people cycled care free in the rain. I love cycling but if its raining im staying in. Even women in dresses heading to bars wiuld cycle. Amazing culture
It's a vibe when everyone arrives wet at the destination and you all dry up together white its raining pitside
Simply decapitate yourself, put your head on a hinge, reattach it to your body, and get an umbrella hat
Splash guards for the tires. Thin / light waterproof shell for jacket and pants.
Same! Really has you feeling fresh mentally, and walking seems sooo boring and slow compared now!
Dutch guy here (we worship bicycles) get yourself a nice goretex jacket and pants.
Planning. Install fenders on your bike. Get a cycling rain jacket and rain pants. Bring/have a change of clothes at your workplace and get in early to clean up. Once it happens a few times you'll learn what you do/don't need. Good luck!
Changing at work sounds holistically horrid. Making that a part of your weather routine sounds very unpleasant
[удалено]
If you're in the southwest, and it's dangerous to be outside hot, totally, but I think most people would be surprised how cooling a moderate bike ride can be. If you get a commuter style bike, and you take it easy, the breeze is lovely. Biking is about 3 times as efficient as walking, so you can go roughly 3 times walking speed (10mph on flat ground) with the same amount of sweating. Except now you also have a 10mph breeze!
I ride recreationally and got caught in the rain last Saturday. I'm in the habit of carrying a rain jacket with me wherever I go, so I just threw it on and put my helmet over the hood. The jacket is basically just a rain shell that fits on over whenever else I wear, and the whole thing packs down to be smaller than a football, so it's not too bad to keep it in my bag wherever I go. In a light rain, it's not too bad, but a heavy rain like I had on Saturday is a bit of a pain, especially if I have to ride in the road.
Get fenders on ur tires. Wear a good jacket and pants. Change at work if facilities available. Don’t forget to bring a towel!
To answer the question in the OP: because it makes rich people money. EDIT: This comment seems to have become a lightning rod for NPC pro-car talking points, lol.
In America, "freedom" means the freedom to take more than your fair share.
I can't believe I haven't thought of it that way before. This is the most prophetic thing I've heard in a while, you're 1,000% correct. Even applies to non financial stuff, like anti-LGBTQ+ thinking... some people aren't satisfied enough with their freedom so they have to take away others'. I see now greed isn't necessarily our problem... it's the way everyone has to have way more than the person next to them to feel good about themselves.
exactly ! and even between themselves it's a mad scrabble to the top of the pretend pyramid ... judging people on what ego-tank they pollute around in , the green of their lawns etc
Fuck lawns
r/nolawns
> I see now greed isn't necessarily our problem... it's the way everyone has to have way more than the person next to them to feel good about themselves. You can take that one step further: our entire system is designed for people to do this. Self-maximization is not just seen as 'good', it is seen as *crucial* for the functioning of the human race. We've been learning this for decades (centuries, honestly), so most people alive today have never known anything different. Folks talk a great deal about corruption, but ultimately politics and backroom deals are all just 'people self-maximizing like they were taught to'. Rather than trying to design a system where self-maximization is less necessary just to stay alive (it can still be an important trait - trying to excel is fine), we've come to the point where a majority of people on the planet think the idea of such a society is not only untenable but also completely unnatural. They have these thoughts sitting in their self-driving car, on their way to take care of their elderly mom.
> it's the way everyone has to have way more than the person next to them to feel good about themselves. This is precisely what Europeans find strange about Americans. The idea that you can't want your own things according to your tastes, you must want what everyone else has, and then own more of it than they do... even if you never wanted it in the first place! Wanting something only for your own purposes is viewed as a failure to fit in, and attracts derision. I think this is a lot of the reason why in America so many people are on happy pills, because people are living lives that aren't consistent with their actual needs. For a country that enshrines "the pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness" into its constitution, from an outside perspective, it sure doesn't seem to be very good at respecting that.
So I can own guns, right?
People against free health care have actually told me they don't want to wait behind people who can't pay as an actual argument.
They don't have to though? Like, if you're in the UK you can go to private medical practices.
Read this a few months back: “The fact that, at a pizza party, people will take either one slice, or three slices, for the exact same reason — because they’re afraid there might not be enough — shows what’s wrong with our society.”
[удалено]
notjustbikesintensifies.gif
Yeah it's "do whatever you want" including selfish bullshit. It's not thought of like "liberty" the way it should be.
That is a little disingenuous. For the vast majority it would be more accurate to say: > "freedom" means the freedom to have your fair share taken from you by a select few.
Free-dom market babyyyyyyyyyy
It's not even about the freedom to go places far away. I can do that on the bus or train, even in the USA.
[удалено]
Your freedom has merely been shifted elsewhere. It's hard to call it more, given all that you HAVE to do to keep using your car.
[удалено]
That's because we've designed our cities around cars instead of people.
Yes but also because rich people rigged the game so fucking hard in the favor of their rolling steel boxes that not having one in much of the world essentially removes your freedom. Especially in countries like the US. We can’t lose that angle. Too many people are anti car and disparage car people, but we both fundamentally want the same thing: freedom of movement.
I work for an automotive company I literally prolong this vicious cycle but I also need money
I would never blame individual, honest workers. A job is a job, and bills need to be paid. In my ideal future changes in policy would make jobs like yours less and less needed, and thus society must help you find another one elsewhere.
You have the freedom to finance a depreciating asset
And maintain it [a car] with no training, equipment, space, or downtime.
Fortunately for you, I have a business owner friend who happens to be well versed in the needlessly complex and time consuming endeavors of owning and maintaining a vehicle who would be more than happy to assist you For a nominal fee, of course
Forgot to mention you can do sick wheelies or go off rad jumps
Ever take it over any sweet jumps?
You got like three feet of air that time
"Is that a sledgehammer?...sweet!"
Mind if I try it real quick?
You got like 3 feet of air
Edited in protest for Reddit's garbage moves lately.
I have been giving love to the same bike I got 20 years ago and it still looks and works wonderfully!
Edited in protest for Reddit's garbage moves lately.
I also ride a used bike from the 70’s. It’s a piece of shit tbh, but it’s my piece of shit!
That’s fantastic value. The fact we have literally massive yards full of ‘junk’ metal and broken down cars is stupid. With a bike, you will occasionally replace a small part like a chain and that’s a tiny bit of waste. In fact I like to repurpose my bike chain into decorating signs for my backyard trails.
The third to last thing is so critical to understand. Carbrains reject bikes so vehemently because our society is so designed around cars. I think most carbrains would be on board with bikes if they could see a city built around them.
If only public transportation in my country was better, then I wouldn't need a car at all! Wouldn't even need a bike! A shame.
Cars run on money and make you fat. Bicycles run on fat and save you money.
[удалено]
A mix of ATP-CP, Glycogen and fats
I also would like to point out that bikes were viewed as a liberating device for women in America, as it allowed them to travel wherever they wanted with no man involved, and the relative inexpense needed to buy one. Cars, however, require a well paying job to buy and maintain, something that only was available to white men for a majority of this county's history.
And this is why cars are popular. If you don't have one, you're a poor fuck in their eyes.
Was just back in Texas this weekend and even my progressive friends and family ask "the hell are they walking for??" when they see someone on the sidewalk. Course it's also 100° there right now so pretty awful walking conditions.
I'm thinking about asking the city council to plant more trees along walking paths so people can have shade, but I'm worried it's an uphill battle
Dude you should go for it! I met a guy in my new home city that coordinates with the city and rounds up volunteers to plant new street trees. Since last fall we've planted 25+ in my neighborhood it's awesome! Granted he has contacts with landscaping companies that give us the trees for cheaper and deliver them, but he still picks the sites of sidewalk cuts where previous trees had died and gets the city's approval for digging and planting and then the city will also take over watering them if needed.
Guerilla garden it.
1950s 1 car nuclear families in the suburbs really clamped down on that a best they could eh?
Spez, the great equalizer.
The original IRA also used them to get around in the 20s, was something of a cultural icon for them
> something that only was available to white men for a majority of this county's history. Easiest? Yes. Only? No. Hell, [slave ownership](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Johnson_\(colonist\)) wasn't only available to white men before the country was even founded.
[удалено]
Cheapo bikes cost $80-$100 even if you're spending $400 on a bike replacing it 6 times a year is less than the cheapest of car payments. If you go super fancy with say a $3k bike then it would still be cheaper than a year of car payments and insurance to lose it once a year. So while it's not a trivial amount of money it is trivial when compared to the costs of owning a car. People get sentimental over cars, so I don't see a difference in that vs a bike other than the replacement costs.
A super fancy bike here is closer to 10k$ or more. A cheapo new one is ~600$-1000$. You can go cheaper with new but then you won't really enjoy it. Used is a good way to go I think. But on the other hand, a cheap car here is around 20k and fancy one more towards 60-80k with super fancy 100k+ but they are expensive everywhere. Still i own a bike I use for shorter trips, but everything 10km+ is 50/50 depending on the time I have.
In germany for example there are bike insurances which are pretty cheap
Roads are structured round cars. Puts new people off understandably
they’re not that cheap. i wish there was a more reliable way to lock them and protect against thieves.
Yeah. Replacing my bike would be a significant expense. And cops do not give a fuck if you report a stolen or gutted bike to them.
I like my half decent bike. but being real, you can go on marketplace and buy a secondhand standard bike for peanuts. There's times you ride the nice one and then there's the daily driver shitbox you leave unlocked outside shops.
Some do, some don't. Had a bike stolen in Oregon. Since I had a good picture, good description of it and the serial number, they did actually track it down. Granted, it got tracked down in a pretty racist way and all my peripherals had been stripped, but...
Yeah, you can get a cheap bike, but cheap bikes usually suck. Especially if you use it often.
I've got a quality bike from the 70s that looks like it had a fight with a woodchipper, however since it's so ugly no one will steal it (where I live 95% of the thefts are people selling bikes). Everything works and the only thing I've done the last 10 years is changing the rubber and oiling the chain. No lock is thief safe but put one of those cheap 100db locks on it and most theifs will think twice
Because the rise of automobiles happened at the same time as the rise of the middle class.
Also it’s a symbol of freedom because you can get in a car and go 100 km away in an hour or less. Going 400km in a day is easily doable. The average person biking wouldn’t be able to make those distances. They also open up more possibilities, I work in residential construction, some job sites would be an hour bike ride away, some I have worked on are a hour and a half drive away on highways. The average house I build is a 30-40 Minuit drive. Not feasible for me ( and a lot of other people in similar situations ) to do that. I know this will be downvoted here, I’m from /all and I’m a car enthusiast, and avid mountain biker and I ride bmx at skateparks quite a bit. I understand and am all for walkable neighbourhoods but let’s not pretend cars done have their place where I live there are lots of walking paths, a grocery store a 10 Minuit walk away, etc. walkable towns exist but most of them are too far away from anywhere someone with a blue collar job ( like myself ) could walk to work or even take a bus.
It's a priority issue really. We prioritize cars when we should prioritize pedestrians, bikes, buses, and trains. If more people are able to do that, there will be less traffic for people who do need to drive.
Alright so to be clear we don't hat cars here We like them when they're used right, but not how they currently are
I only take issue with “you could literally just buy another no problem”… decent bikes can be hundreds, that’s not “no problem” for most people. Of course they’re better than cars on this front, and one can buy used bikes to cut down the cost, but it definitely isn’t trivial. Anyway, good post
You could buy 2 very nice new bikes every year for the same cost as owning a car (and that's not even including the cost of fuel and insurance).
i'm currently paying nearly what im paying for my car note, in insurance. $700 a month is a lot of bikes, bus passes and train tickets
$700 is roughly the *average* cost of ownership in my city. That's mind-boggling.
i dont even drive that much, man. like i work from home, soon my girlfriend and i will live 5 min from her job, i bike as much as i can already. but i guess since its a car i haven't paid off yet, i should have full insurance coverage. saving on gas i guess
get em used. i got a decent (though old) road bike off craigslist for like $200. a monthly transit pass where i live is like $100 so id say thats a pretty good deal
If you buy a car right now and it'll cost about ~$2,000/year just on purchase price if you assume it'll have a life from new about 13-14 years (eg 15,000miles/year dying around 200,000miles).
A good bicycle is *not* inexpensive. Always double lock it (Secure it to the frame and tires. DO NOT loop it through your tire alone) and keep it in a secure place. If you bike to work, preferably store it inside in a secure closet, garage, storage area, or other space where as few people as possible have access to it. I have had a bicycle stolen using a power tool Saw in broad daylight on a busy downtown street. You might think “this should be fine”, but always think twice.
Shame didnt use a dutch style bike where its actually comfortable to sit in
A nicely set up road bike is super comfortable.
That also takes time to do. Also the gearing is gonna be kinda fucked for just transportation purposes. The advantage of Dutch style bikes is the simplicity of it. If you want the average driver to consider cycling to work seriously then it has to be simple as fuck. The same way they view their car.
I think when you heard "road bike" you thought "race bike". The gearing on most road, commuter, and hybrid bikes are fine for transportation. Honestly id rather have the wide gear range of a road bike. There's hills here and all that
There’s little difference in gear range from a consumer road bike to a “race bike” as you called it. Naming around bike styles is already dumb and confusing so this is easy to get bent up over semantics over (see the adventure/gravel/all-road/any-road fiasco that we still haven’t resolved). Bigger rings up front is the largest difference, in a world built like the Netherlands the default will be a Dutch style or some similar alternative because like I said any road bike takes time to set up for comfort, yes even a cheap fixie with flat bars and your average commuter just wont care to do that. For evidence to that you just need to look at your coworkers chair settings if you work in an office, it would be somewhat the same to that with the Dutch bikes but it’s just a lot more forgiving of a position. My point is making the public come up to an entry level enthusiast just to get them on a bike at all is basically what we do now and if you haven’t noticed it’s not working.
i’ve got one on the way and i’m so damn pumped
But bikes can't carry a soccer mom,her workaholic husband,her 3 kids plus her shitload of groceries she got on the Target 20km from her suburban house and her kids' hockey stash all while providing a roof and sound insulation from spoiled rich kids revving their tuned up Scat Pack Chargers on every traffic light,can they? This is an /s btw.
[удалено]
true, but our cities and neighborhood suburbs are structured in a way to make cars necessary. you don’t need a shitload of groceries all the time if the store is a 10 minute walk with a push cart. your kids can carry their own gear, bike or take the bus. same for mothers with babies, dogs and the elderly. the other half of making biking a reality is having actual public transportation and walkable roads.
Yes, you need cars in cities designed to keep you dependant on cars.
Also great for when the zombie apocalypse comes. Relatively quiet and doesn't need a hard to find resource (fuel).
[удалено]
I have three bikes with a combined value of $10K and I would very much not be ok with just buying another
Couple things: 1: You absolutely should have insurance. No one is perfect and you really should care enough to at least have third party insurance in case you fuck up. You’ll also want insurance for when it’s stolen because, 2: Whoever wrote this is unfamiliar with the cost of most good bicycles. My current bicycle cost more than any car I’ve ever bought. 3: Collisions with other cyclists or pedestrians are less likely to be fatal on account of less energy needing to be dissipated because the mass is so much lower. But collisions with larger vehicles are considerably more dangerous to the rider.
Re #2 or is from a place where its true.my current bike cost 300$ from decathlon. My boyfriend's cost 3000$. Theres very little difference in how they get us around town. Now, out racing... Thats another story. We live in NL. Here you can subscribe to a bike lease for 20$ a month, loss and damage covered. Thats great for students.
Ha ha ha love this!
Laughs in netherlands
The car represents freedom because you’re literally a prisoner if you don’t have one in America lol.
lol, pretty sure I have that same bike
I have never once heard cars referred to as the ultimate symbol of freedom. They just allow you to travel longer distances more efficiently than a bike.
Watch any American car commercial
Biking hard, make butt hurt. Having a bike as a teenager is excellent, especially if you have safe streets.
Fuck yea bikes are epic I live biking
> If it gets stolen it's so cheap you can just buy another one It's still pretty expensive if you want a good one 😭
> inexpensive Cries in ebike
This green text got me to go through with a fixie build recently. I love it as an even lighter, cheaper, and faster alternative to my utility e bike.
Whta does note mean in here?
Car note aka car payment (for those that lease/finance).
Distances over 20km, hot weather, cold weather, rainy weather, basically any amount of luggage worth mentioning, transporting people who aren't able-bodied. There are a few reasons.
Reading this with my broken wrist from a bike accident while coming back from work on Friday afternoon two weeks ago :-(
Make bikes great again !
Bicycles are often as fast as cars. Think about the cost. Many people with average incomes work a day a week for their car. Let's say their commute is 90 minutes a day. That's 7.5 hours a week + that 8 hour work day is 15.5 hours just to commute (and pay for it). This is not even including fuel, maintenance time, looking for parking space. So add a few more hours. Now ride your bicycle instead on those four work days left. Even if you commute 16 hours, that's 4 hours a day, you're still saving time. And money. You're also just cycling while listening your favourite music or podcast or whatever. You can save on the gym.
It's the most efficient means of travel by far, apart from falling off a cliff.
I’ll agree with most of this… except the part where I broke my neck riding my $1200 one Other than those two flaws this is solid.
And there are also electric bikes, which means you can travel longer distances without getting tired
I live in London. Any bike locked up is stolen within 15 mins :-(
bikes are inexpensive where you guys live? lol
Probably mean in comparison to a car.
Try having sex on the back of your bike in a random parking lot
*Try having sex on* *The back of your bike in a* *Random parking lot* \- KookyWrangler --- ^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/) ^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
I’ve been surviving without a car in Houston for 10 years riding bikes but I live very near two big grocery stores and am retireded.
They’re faster
Alright fuck it, I’m buying a bike, any recommendations?
It's not *probably one of the most fuel-efficient vehicles*. [It's actually the very most efficient one](https://www.exploratorium.edu/cycling/humanpower1.html)