Mitt Romney calls new bike lanes 'the height of stupidity' as bicyclists press Congress to make roads safer and e-bikes cheaper

[Mik]

I have to agree with him. Narrowing roadways to widen bike lanes makes little sense as does subsidizing ebikes.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/mitt-romney-calls-new-bike-lanes-the-height-of-stupidity-as-bicyclists-press-congress-to-make-roads-safer-and-e-bikes-cheaper/ar-AA19pS7A?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=10c4fb378c824e758c1c58efae489c35&ei=32

[jon-nyc]

It’s like any case of competing interests for a scarce resource in a zero-sum situation. And to a large extent where you stand is determined by where you sit - on a bike or in a car.

I think e-bikes are going to enable bike commuting in a much bigger way than we’ve seen with regular bikes because you don’t need to be that strong a biker and you don’t need to get sweaty. But for that to work there need to be bike lanes.

I think the key balance is put them in enough places to make commuting possible and not feel the need to put them everywhere.

NYC has a couple of avenues where they’ve made nice lanes, but most avenues are untouched.

[Mik]

I'm all for reasonable bike lanes. They have them in most places. Even before them I felt comfortable riding pretty much anywhere in the Cincinnati area.

But removing car lanes for bike lanes? Not practical and no, ebikes shouldn't be subsidized.

[Copper]

I don't like bike owners on a road they didn't pay for.

But, bike owners might be in a better position once we are 100% EVs.

Roads are paid for by gasoline taxes, no more gasoline means no more gasoline tax.

So there will have to be some other source.

[Aqua Letifer]

@Copper said in Mitt Romney calls new bike lanes 'the height of stupidity' as bicyclists press Congress to make roads safer and e-bikes cheaper:

I don't like bike owners on a road they didn't pay for.

This isn't Denmark. The vast majority of cyclists are also car owners. You have no idea what you're talking about.

[Jolly]

Nope, in America I'm afraid the silver-haired, little old lady would run over you and bicycle, too.

[Aqua Letifer]

@Jolly said in Mitt Romney calls new bike lanes 'the height of stupidity' as bicyclists press Congress to make roads safer and e-bikes cheaper:

Nope, in America I'm afraid the silver-haired, little old lady would run over you and bicycle, too.

Which is why following traffic laws on a bicycle can be stupid.

Speaking of stupid, ditto this binary thinking about ebikes. In some places they make more sense than a car in Every. Single. Use. Case. In others they'd be an abomination. So no, I'm not in favor of a blanket tax break, that's ridiculous.

[Mik]

I’m all for e bikes. Will probably get one eventually. I just don’t want to buy other people’s.

[Copper]

@Aqua-Letifer said in Mitt Romney calls new bike lanes 'the height of stupidity' as bicyclists press Congress to make roads safer and e-bikes cheaper:

The vast majority of cyclists are also car owners.

When they are driving the car
not while riding the bike.

Car drivers get roads because they pay for them.

Bike riders think they should get roads because they whine.

[Aqua Letifer]

@Copper said in Mitt Romney calls new bike lanes 'the height of stupidity' as bicyclists press Congress to make roads safer and e-bikes cheaper:

@Aqua-Letifer said in Mitt Romney calls new bike lanes 'the height of stupidity' as bicyclists press Congress to make roads safer and e-bikes cheaper:

The vast majority of cyclists are also car owners.

When they are driving the car
not while riding the bike.

Car drivers get roads because they pay for them.

Bike riders think they should get roads because they whine.

Stellar argument.