k99x55

I'm not saying to ban cars, just to de-prioritize them The use case for bicycle-and-similars is way more than the use case for cars specially urban places (also outside urban places)

"Corporate culture" has had a downward history everywhere since companies started weaponizing "culture" to demand a one-way loyalty from employees so as to extract more unpaid labor from them.

Would ion engines leave a trace in space signaling alien civilizations our location? We are risking being annihilated by a dark forest strike.

Ok, a bit sci-fi but I had to say it.

Cycle infrastructure needs to be continuous, feel safe to ride, and exist where people actually go to, not near the riverside.

Build them and they will come.

Cycle infra is not only cycle lanes. Cycle lanes are needed only where cars move fast (>30kmh). What is even more important is traffic calming in residential streets. LTNs, modal filters etc. Build for people, not cars.

Is this the media doing disinformation service for the US imperialism, based on flimsy evidence (or fabricated evidence)?

ok I was a bit harsh, I have been watching too much Not Just Bikes/Urban channels and I see too many cars everywhere lol

30k is a good daily ride. Keep it up!

> it is better to cry in a Mercedes than on a bike

Do you perceive bicycle as a poor man's mode of transport?

Rich countries is where everyone can travel by public transport or bicycle (or car). Poor countries is where everyone HAS to travel by car (locked in car dependency)

I see what you are trying to say: its better to cry and have wealth than to cry and not have wealth. But bike=poor, car=rich is not a good analogy. It sends the message bikes/public transport are for loosers, when its not. Well it might be in car-centric societies, but not in more fair societies.

well duh