toaster

Additionally, when you build driving to be the only feasible option then those who cannot drive cannot get around. This includes but is not limited to the elderly, children, and those with disabilities.

There are cycles available for almost every type of disability – it’s actually an inclusive mode of transport that will often act as a mobility aid for people who find walking difficult, people who can't walk far and even those who cannot walk at all.

Evidence from the Netherlands (and increasingly from the UK, where new infrastructure has been built) shows that high quality cycling infrastructure is often shared with wheelchairs, mobility scooters and other assistive modes of transport.

And in general, cycling infrastructure should go hand-in-hand with other improvements to the physical environment too – like smooth, continuous footways across side roads, for example.

So in fact the truth is the opposite of the myth – cycling actually gives people with physical disabilities more transport options and independence, not less.

It's not surprising when we've created an induced demand for driving through which infrastructure we build and subsidize. However, the numbers in Germany and China are changing as they push for non car-centric infrastructure. I can't speak to the other countries.

Places like Copenhagen and Amsterdam used to be full of roads and parking lots. When they built public transit and safe bike infrastructure for shorter trips, they induced a demand and people ditched their cars for safer, cheaper, and more convenient alternatives.

Many communities have some number of jerks. I actually find that people constantly stereotype based on outliers they hear about online. I've met very few vegans who were normal, reasonable prople, yet I've met very many people who steteotype and hate on vegans despite knowing none.

Reducing congestion is mostly attempted by building and expanding highways, which is proven not to reduce congestion. The vast majority of the budget is spent on building and expending highways.

This makes me happy :)

MapComplete has a feature to post Mangrove reviews too!

the real problem isn’t the vehicle, it’s its speed and compared to the traffic around it.

I distinguished that speed of a vehicle itself is an issue and not primarily, as you stated, how its speed relates to traffic around it. A car that's going with the flow of traffic at 80km/h is still fatal to be hit by when you're walking or biking.

The real problem is speed, doesn’t matter how much mass or energy a vehicle can have if it’s not moving.

This shows a fundamental lack of understanding; a stationary vehicle has no kinetic energy. When you get hit by a car, the energy you are hit with (kinetic energy) depends on the mass and speed of the vehicle.

My dad got hit by a kid in a bicycle causing a wound that never really healed.

I'm sorry to hear that, it sounds like I really difficult experience. I fail to see how a child making a mistake while riding a bike is relevant to your claim that "the real problem isn’t the vehicle, it’s its speed and compared to the traffic around it." and how "cars have to slow down because of bicycles" is the cause of danger. Orders of magnitude more people and children die being hit by cars than any other form of transportation and the answer is not blaming people on bikes for collisions since they "made" cars change their speed relative to traffic around them.

People die from doing activities with risk, the answer is not to lock yourself in a room and live afraid

No such claim was made.

That you dismiss the utility of cars is more of a commentary of the bubble and environment you’ve had the opportunity to enjoy

Nobody is denying the utility of vehicles. Our infrastructure are designed with cars having absolute top priority, making short trips by bike and walking dangerous. Most trips in cities are short and doable by bike or walking, but when the infrastructure is poor and people perceive it to be an unacceptable risk, they take a car. How many times have you seen people riding on sidewalks because they don't feel that the line of painted bike lane protects them from a driver on their phone who could kill them? Or someone on a mobility scooter in a bike lane because the uneven, discontinuous sidewalk that lowers for cars at each crossing presents more danger of them falling over? I bike, I walk, and I drive; everything I've mentioned is the product of not living in a bubble, otherwise I wouldn't see the problems.

I'm starting to see ad hominem and straw man arguments, so I'm not going to put the energy into continuing this conversation. Enjoy the rest of your day. :)

Certainly! And that's the problem. We've been spending billions to expand highways and add new highways through cities, while chronically under-funding public transit and designing roads that are unsafe to cyclists and pedestrians. As cities continue to grow, adding highway lanes counterintuitively increases traffic due to induced and latent demand, when the most people will be moved by public transit, walking and bicycling. The only cure to traffic is viable alternatives to driving.

Cars take the most amount of space to transport the least amount of people. There are extremely densely populated cities all over the world that routinely move people in from hundreds of kilometres away every day for work. A single Japanese Shinkansen train can move 15,640,000 people per day and operate up to 500km/h. But even busses would suffice as the infographic below shows.

Cars take the most amount of space to transport the least amount of people. There are extremely densely populated cities all over the world that routinely move people in from hundreds of kilometres away every day for work. A single Japanese Shinkansen train can move 15,640,000 people per day and operate up to 500km/h. But even busses would suffice as the infographic below shows.

Never a bad idea! Typically, bicycle lights and maybe some reflective tape strips on your bike provide plenty of visibility too. :)