Because we haven’t built the necessary infrastructure. Also because people don’t like change. Getting around without a car is a skill that will need to be developed, and most people have little reason to develop it. That will probably resolve naturally over time, if the built environment allows people to experience cycling as a safe, convenient way to get around, and as people in your social network introduce you to urban cycling.
But I mean there are a lot of people, myself included, who do currently find it preferable. The difference is I’m willing to invest a little more time and experience some discomfort around safety. The more you chip away at those issues, the more people will cycle, which will improve safety and get more people familiar with the idea.
just_another_person@lemmy.world 7 hours ago
Yes, so how in ANY of my comments am I being inaccurate or wrong about anything, because you’ve got the wrong grioe, exactly?
My God.
LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 7 hours ago
You claimed that building better infrastructure won’t solve our transportation issues because our cities were built for cars while Dutch cities weren’t. None of that is true.
But I’m not sure why you want me to repeat the entire debate we just had. I’ve already corrected the points you made above. If you’re still confused, read again and ask specific questions.
just_another_person@lemmy.world 7 hours ago
Literally NEVER said any of that 🤣🤣
My first comment was even that these systems are great if they can work where they are.
WITAF is up with people in the comments lately. Wow.
LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 6 hours ago
But that’s the crux of the disagreement. They can work anywhere.