The Bike Lobby is too powerful in DC...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"The Bike Lobby is too powerful in DC."

It's not exactly true that the Bike Lobby is inherently powerful. They actually don't represent a meaningful slice of DC voters. It's just that they have a large megaphone, paid for by the DC taxpayers. This enables them to lobby the Council, in concert with DDOT, the mayor's office and the builders (and loudly shout down those who oppose their plans) all on the public's dime.

The worst thing about it is people don't even want or use the bike lanes. The number of bicyclists in this city is miniscule and transit surveys show their number is shrinking. Our government is extremely solicitous of special interest groups though and there is no organized group opposed to bike lanes.

Plenty of people are using the bike lanes in DC. Where are you posting from? Vladivostok?

They don't. We all have eyes.

Some of us apparently use our eyes for something other than seeing. I hope you don't drive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Transit surveys show biking is becoming less popular in DC. The government is spending more and more money on fewer and fewer people.

Which, you know, is kind of weird, because year by year, I see more people biking in DC. Well, who am I going to trust, some anonymous rando on DCUM or my lying eyes?

Neither! You could just look at the data. It's not that hard. The Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments puts out an annual transit report. TL;DR: Every form of transportation is becoming less popular, except driving, which is way up. It also says cyclists are exactly who you'd think: white, young, upper income and (because of that) they live close to wear they work. Drivers are disproportionately Black and Hispanic.

This isn't in and of itself a reason to oppose bike lanes, though. And actually, people who live near to where they work are a good universe to target with policies that might get them not to drive, because then they're not adding to congestion on the roads (if they're in a protected bike lane, they are not interfering with car trips by people driving from farther away) and it may not be a significantly longer commute to bike rather than drive. Obviously, the main users of bike lanes are not going to be people coming from 15 or 20 miles away, it's going to be people who live and work relatively near where they're biking.

Basically you're saying we should spend billions of dollars building up an entirely separate transportation system for white cyclists who are rich enough to live in the most desirable parts of the city, and if that makes car traffic a whole lot worse for predominantly black and brown drivers who don't live within such easy distance of their jobs and other places they need to go, then I guess you'd just say that's too bad. Seems kind of racist, doesn't it?

Except that I was saying it would NOT make traffic worse, because it would remove those white people from the car lanes. The Connecticut Avenue plan won't make traffic worse, because it doesn't remove car driving lanes, it only removes parking.

(If it were up to me, I'd say anyone who's healthy enough to bike and lives less than 5 miles from their white-collar office should not be allowed to drive to work, but it isn't up to me.)

Bike lanes make car traffic worse -- a lot of worse. Isn't that the point? The city is trying to make driving so miserable that people will switch to bikes. Of course, there is zero evidence that is happening. Transit data shows driving is becoming more popular, and the number of people on bikes is shrinking.

That is not the point, and bike lanes do not make car traffic worse if you're not removing a lane of car traffic. The Connecticut Avenue plan isn't removing any car traffic and, in fact, it's adding turn lanes. No one thinks people will switch from driving to biking just because traffic is bad. They want people who live close enough to work to bike to feel safe biking.

There will be four travel lanes. One of them on each side also will be used by buses that will have to stop to let off and pick up passengers on "bus islands." No doubt they will also be blocked by delivery trucks and and others. The turn lanes will likely just encourage slow Connecticut Avenue traffic to divert into side streets. The plan is poorly thought through.

Have you ever driven north/south on any of the side streets off Connecticut? On any of them, does it seem likely you could conceivably go faster than you can on Connecticut? MAYBE Reno, but definitely not any of the others. There are four-way stops all over the place, speed humps on some, etc. There's no way significant traffic is diverting to side streets.

Pfft, I see your stop signs, bus stops, and crosswalks and raise you 10 MD drivers with paper tags in Nissans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A driver, bicyclist and pedestrian walk into a bakery. The baker brings them a plate of 12 cookies. The driver quickly snatches up 11 cookies, turns to the pedestrian and says, “Watch out! The bicyclist is going to steal your cookie!”

Here’s a better analogy. A bakery has three lines: one for drivers, one for cyclists, and one for pedestrians. The cyclist walks in and says “finally, a dedicated line for cyclists,” and gets his cookie. Not satisfied with one cookie, the cyclist then gets in the driver line. Instead of waiting his turn, the cyclist cuts to the front of the line while giving everyone the middle finger and gets another cookie. The cyclist still wants another cookie, so he goes to the pedestrian line and bullies everyone out of the way while angrily screaming “on your left.”

If your obsession were about something with no effect on real people in the real world, like the geography of Mordor, or whether black dwarf stars will eventually exist, that would be one thing. But your obsession about hating people when they are on bicycles? That's disturbing and would have the potential to cause real harm to real people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A driver, bicyclist and pedestrian walk into a bakery. The baker brings them a plate of 12 cookies. The driver quickly snatches up 11 cookies, turns to the pedestrian and says, “Watch out! The bicyclist is going to steal your cookie!”

Here’s a better analogy. A bakery has three lines: one for drivers, one for cyclists, and one for pedestrians. The cyclist walks in and says “finally, a dedicated line for cyclists,” and gets his cookie. Not satisfied with one cookie, the cyclist then gets in the driver line. Instead of waiting his turn, the cyclist cuts to the front of the line while giving everyone the middle finger and gets another cookie. The cyclist still wants another cookie, so he goes to the pedestrian line and bullies everyone out of the way while angrily screaming “on your left.”

DP, touch grass.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"The Bike Lobby is too powerful in DC."

It's not exactly true that the Bike Lobby is inherently powerful. They actually don't represent a meaningful slice of DC voters. It's just that they have a large megaphone, paid for by the DC taxpayers. This enables them to lobby the Council, in concert with DDOT, the mayor's office and the builders (and loudly shout down those who oppose their plans) all on the public's dime.

The worst thing about it is people don't even want or use the bike lanes. The number of bicyclists in this city is miniscule and transit surveys show their number is shrinking. Our government is extremely solicitous of special interest groups though and there is no organized group opposed to bike lanes.

Plenty of people are using the bike lanes in DC. Where are you posting from? Vladivostok?

Look at the data. It’s comical how few people ride bikes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"The Bike Lobby is too powerful in DC."

It's not exactly true that the Bike Lobby is inherently powerful. They actually don't represent a meaningful slice of DC voters. It's just that they have a large megaphone, paid for by the DC taxpayers. This enables them to lobby the Council, in concert with DDOT, the mayor's office and the builders (and loudly shout down those who oppose their plans) all on the public's dime.

The worst thing about it is people don't even want or use the bike lanes. The number of bicyclists in this city is miniscule and transit surveys show their number is shrinking. Our government is extremely solicitous of special interest groups though and there is no organized group opposed to bike lanes.

Plenty of people are using the bike lanes in DC. Where are you posting from? Vladivostok?

Look at the data. It’s comical how few people ride bikes.

Look at the bike lanes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A driver, bicyclist and pedestrian walk into a bakery. The baker brings them a plate of 12 cookies. The driver quickly snatches up 11 cookies, turns to the pedestrian and says, “Watch out! The bicyclist is going to steal your cookie!”

Here’s a better analogy. A bakery has three lines: one for drivers, one for cyclists, and one for pedestrians. The cyclist walks in and says “finally, a dedicated line for cyclists,” and gets his cookie. Not satisfied with one cookie, the cyclist then gets in the driver line. Instead of waiting his turn, the cyclist cuts to the front of the line while giving everyone the middle finger and gets another cookie. The cyclist still wants another cookie, so he goes to the pedestrian line and bullies everyone out of the way while angrily screaming “on your left.”

If your obsession were about something with no effect on real people in the real world, like the geography of Mordor, or whether black dwarf stars will eventually exist, that would be one thing. But your obsession about hating people when they are on bicycles? That's disturbing and would have the potential to cause real harm to real people.

You hate this post because it hits so close to home for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"The Bike Lobby is too powerful in DC."

It's not exactly true that the Bike Lobby is inherently powerful. They actually don't represent a meaningful slice of DC voters. It's just that they have a large megaphone, paid for by the DC taxpayers. This enables them to lobby the Council, in concert with DDOT, the mayor's office and the builders (and loudly shout down those who oppose their plans) all on the public's dime.

The worst thing about it is people don't even want or use the bike lanes. The number of bicyclists in this city is miniscule and transit surveys show their number is shrinking. Our government is extremely solicitous of special interest groups though and there is no organized group opposed to bike lanes.

Plenty of people are using the bike lanes in DC. Where are you posting from? Vladivostok?

They don't. We all have eyes.

Some of us apparently use our eyes for something other than seeing. I hope you don't drive.

Ah yes, the usual retort from the socially maladjusted poster. My eyesight is fine. The bike lanes are almost always empty, especially in winter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"The Bike Lobby is too powerful in DC."

It's not exactly true that the Bike Lobby is inherently powerful. They actually don't represent a meaningful slice of DC voters. It's just that they have a large megaphone, paid for by the DC taxpayers. This enables them to lobby the Council, in concert with DDOT, the mayor's office and the builders (and loudly shout down those who oppose their plans) all on the public's dime.

The worst thing about it is people don't even want or use the bike lanes. The number of bicyclists in this city is miniscule and transit surveys show their number is shrinking. Our government is extremely solicitous of special interest groups though and there is no organized group opposed to bike lanes.

Plenty of people are using the bike lanes in DC. Where are you posting from? Vladivostok?

They don't. We all have eyes.

Some of us apparently use our eyes for something other than seeing. I hope you don't drive.

I hope you don’t use your eyes for biking because apparently you hallucinate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"The Bike Lobby is too powerful in DC."

It's not exactly true that the Bike Lobby is inherently powerful. They actually don't represent a meaningful slice of DC voters. It's just that they have a large megaphone, paid for by the DC taxpayers. This enables them to lobby the Council, in concert with DDOT, the mayor's office and the builders (and loudly shout down those who oppose their plans) all on the public's dime.

The worst thing about it is people don't even want or use the bike lanes. The number of bicyclists in this city is miniscule and transit surveys show their number is shrinking. Our government is extremely solicitous of special interest groups though and there is no organized group opposed to bike lanes.

Plenty of people are using the bike lanes in DC. Where are you posting from? Vladivostok?

Look at the data. It’s comical how few people ride bikes.

Look at the bike lanes.

I know. They totally support the conclusion that very few people ride bikes.

[Anonymous]

We have solved this. No more lanes for now. Let’s get back to crime prevention.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They practically run the council or damn near close to it! We don't need more bike lanes, we need more ENFORCEMENT of existing laws and infrastructure.

Is that true?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They practically run the council or damn near close to it! We don't need more bike lanes, we need more ENFORCEMENT of existing laws and infrastructure.

Is that true?

Lol, drivers crap a brick when actual laws are enforced. It is hilarious reading someone's rant about getting a stop sign ticket. And then they post the video... of them running a stop sign.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They practically run the council or damn near close to it! We don't need more bike lanes, we need more ENFORCEMENT of existing laws and infrastructure.

Is that true?

Lol, drivers crap a brick when actual laws are enforced. It is hilarious reading someone's rant about getting a stop sign ticket. And then they post the video... of them running a stop sign.

Do you know what's even funnier? When the complaints from pedestrains about bicyclists and drivers running stop signs got too much, the solution from our ostensible pedestrian "advocates" was to make it legal for bicyclists to run stop signs. Problem solved, now bikes never have to stop at a stop sign.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They practically run the council or damn near close to it! We don't need more bike lanes, we need more ENFORCEMENT of existing laws and infrastructure.

Is that true?

Lol, drivers crap a brick when actual laws are enforced. It is hilarious reading someone's rant about getting a stop sign ticket. And then they post the video... of them running a stop sign.

Do you know what's even funnier? When the complaints from pedestrains about bicyclists and drivers running stop signs got too much, the solution from our ostensible pedestrian "advocates" was to make it legal for bicyclists to run stop signs. Problem solved, now bikes never have to stop at a stop sign.

You're still mad about that stop sign fine. Ha!