SomeAmateur@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
They don’t ride bikes and they don’t see many people riding them for practical uses (work, shopping etc) so for them it’s hard to sell the idea of bike infrastructure (that they think is for mainly recreational riders) making their commute slower and not the best use of tax money.
I get how this is flawed thinking and I want more pedestirian and bike friendly areas, but that is their perspective.
XeroxCool@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Surely, this question is targeted at USA/North Americans. The average commute is beyond biking distance. The average suburb is sprawled beyond biking convenience. So, exactly to your point, people reliant upon cars largely don’t see the benefit potential of bike lanes. You can point to tight older cities like NYC or Chicago, but, surprise, the cars in the city traffic aren’t fromthe city. They drove in form the surrounding neighborhoods to their jobs.
I biked for 2 years when I happened to get a career job in the town I lived. It made sense because I could cut through a park and skip the traffic light bottleneck. The 2nd closest career job I’ve ever had was 17 miles. The furthest was 65 miles.
zen@lemmy.zip 1 week ago
I’m Aussie, so unfortunately it’s targeted at Australians driving huge American pickup trucks. :(
XeroxCool@lemmy.world 1 week ago
I’m sorry we exported that ideology. I love utes. My next vehicle may very well be a tall American version of a ute to replace my compact pickup. Maybe I won’t need it by then if the home projects reduce in size. I wish more cars had trailer hitches here but, just like our daily driving “needs”, there’s this belief that only trucks can pull trailers. Even a 1.5m x 3m sofa hauler needs a F150