Cycling is bad for the economy and bike lanes should be stopped

[Anonymous]

I only pay for the New York Times. They’re snobby but they’re the only real newspaper this god forsaken nation has.

If you want local stuff just check Twitter tbh. There’s nothing of good quality at the local level anymore. Newsrooms are deader than dead

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A cyclist is a disaster for the local economy. A cyclist does not buy a car and does not take out a car loan. They do not buy car insurance. They do not buy fuel. They do not send their car for service and repairs a couple times a year. They do not use paid parking. All of this means that they are existing outside of the transportation system that the rest of us use without contributing to the spreading out of its cost. This is bad for society.

But it goes further, cycling is an activity that is exercise. That means that the cyclist is less likely to become obese and more likely to be healthy. Healthy people are not needed for the economy. They don't buy drugs, they don't go to hospitals and doctors as much, they don't pay lots of co-pays to their HMO each year helping keep insurance cheaper for the rest of us.

Compare the investment in bike lanes to a similar investment in building a Popeye's Chicken restaurant. The bike lanes will add nothing to our area economy, indeed for the reasons above it will only erode it. The Popeye's Chicken though - just from the health impact - should create at least 30 jobs - 10 cardiologists, 10 dentists, 10 weight loss experts, in addition to the fast food workers and the general happiness of all of their patrons from the serotonin rush from eating the highly palatable fast food.

So, this is what our area officials should be thinking about when evaluating the bike lane plans by Big Bike. A bike lane? Or a Popeyes. The choice is obvious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A cyclist is a disaster for the local economy. A cyclist does not buy a car and does not take out a car loan. They do not buy car insurance. They do not buy fuel. They do not send their car for service and repairs a couple times a year. They do not use paid parking. All of this means that they are existing outside of the transportation system that the rest of us use without contributing to the spreading out of its cost. This is bad for society.

But it goes further, cycling is an activity that is exercise. That means that the cyclist is less likely to become obese and more likely to be healthy. Healthy people are not needed for the economy. They don't buy drugs, they don't go to hospitals and doctors as much, they don't pay lots of co-pays to their HMO each year helping keep insurance cheaper for the rest of us.

Compare the investment in bike lanes to a similar investment in building a Popeye's Chicken restaurant. The bike lanes will add nothing to our area economy, indeed for the reasons above it will only erode it. The Popeye's Chicken though - just from the health impact - should create at least 30 jobs - 10 cardiologists, 10 dentists, 10 weight loss experts, in addition to the fast food workers and the general happiness of all of their patrons from the serotonin rush from eating the highly palatable fast food.

So, this is what our area officials should be thinking about when evaluating the bike lane plans by Big Bike. A bike lane? Or a Popeyes. The choice is obvious.

Oh dear . . .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Or, you could just walk.

And take public transportation like a normal person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A cyclist is a disaster for the local economy. A cyclist does not buy a car and does not take out a car loan. They do not buy car insurance. They do not buy fuel. They do not send their car for service and repairs a couple times a year. They do not use paid parking. All of this means that they are existing outside of the transportation system that the rest of us use without contributing to the spreading out of its cost. This is bad for society.

But it goes further, cycling is an activity that is exercise. That means that the cyclist is less likely to become obese and more likely to be healthy. Healthy people are not needed for the economy. They don't buy drugs, they don't go to hospitals and doctors as much, they don't pay lots of co-pays to their HMO each year helping keep insurance cheaper for the rest of us.

Compare the investment in bike lanes to a similar investment in building a Popeye's Chicken restaurant. The bike lanes will add nothing to our area economy, indeed for the reasons above it will only erode it. The Popeye's Chicken though - just from the health impact - should create at least 30 jobs - 10 cardiologists, 10 dentists, 10 weight loss experts, in addition to the fast food workers and the general happiness of all of their patrons from the serotonin rush from eating the highly palatable fast food.

So, this is what our area officials should be thinking about when evaluating the bike lane plans by Big Bike. A bike lane? Or a Popeyes. The choice is obvious.

Oh dear . . .

That's great news! Now we can get rid of all the bike lanes because they decrase safety.

Of course it's irrelevant because in that study bike lanes are done as additions to traffic lanes while here in DC they are taking away traffic lanes.

You also seem to be forgetting that increasing congestion is DDOT's explicit goal. But at least we're all in agreement now. Bike lanes make streets less safe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A cyclist is a disaster for the local economy. A cyclist does not buy a car and does not take out a car loan. They do not buy car insurance. They do not buy fuel. They do not send their car for service and repairs a couple times a year. They do not use paid parking. All of this means that they are existing outside of the transportation system that the rest of us use without contributing to the spreading out of its cost. This is bad for society.

But it goes further, cycling is an activity that is exercise. That means that the cyclist is less likely to become obese and more likely to be healthy. Healthy people are not needed for the economy. They don't buy drugs, they don't go to hospitals and doctors as much, they don't pay lots of co-pays to their HMO each year helping keep insurance cheaper for the rest of us.

Compare the investment in bike lanes to a similar investment in building a Popeye's Chicken restaurant. The bike lanes will add nothing to our area economy, indeed for the reasons above it will only erode it. The Popeye's Chicken though - just from the health impact - should create at least 30 jobs - 10 cardiologists, 10 dentists, 10 weight loss experts, in addition to the fast food workers and the general happiness of all of their patrons from the serotonin rush from eating the highly palatable fast food.

So, this is what our area officials should be thinking about when evaluating the bike lane plans by Big Bike. A bike lane? Or a Popeyes. The choice is obvious.

Oh dear . . .

That's great news! Now we can get rid of all the bike lanes because they decrase safety.

Of course it's irrelevant because in that study bike lanes are done as additions to traffic lanes while here in DC they are taking away traffic lanes.

You also seem to be forgetting that increasing congestion is DDOT's explicit goal. But at least we're all in agreement now. Bike lanes make streets less safe.

On this satirical thread, your post fits in perfectly!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A cyclist is a disaster for the local economy. A cyclist does not buy a car and does not take out a car loan. They do not buy car insurance. They do not buy fuel. They do not send their car for service and repairs a couple times a year. They do not use paid parking. All of this means that they are existing outside of the transportation system that the rest of us use without contributing to the spreading out of its cost. This is bad for society.

But it goes further, cycling is an activity that is exercise. That means that the cyclist is less likely to become obese and more likely to be healthy. Healthy people are not needed for the economy. They don't buy drugs, they don't go to hospitals and doctors as much, they don't pay lots of co-pays to their HMO each year helping keep insurance cheaper for the rest of us.

Compare the investment in bike lanes to a similar investment in building a Popeye's Chicken restaurant. The bike lanes will add nothing to our area economy, indeed for the reasons above it will only erode it. The Popeye's Chicken though - just from the health impact - should create at least 30 jobs - 10 cardiologists, 10 dentists, 10 weight loss experts, in addition to the fast food workers and the general happiness of all of their patrons from the serotonin rush from eating the highly palatable fast food.

So, this is what our area officials should be thinking about when evaluating the bike lane plans by Big Bike. A bike lane? Or a Popeyes. The choice is obvious.

Oh dear . . .

That's great news! Now we can get rid of all the bike lanes because they decrase safety.

Of course it's irrelevant because in that study bike lanes are done as additions to traffic lanes while here in DC they are taking away traffic lanes.

You also seem to be forgetting that increasing congestion is DDOT's explicit goal. But at least we're all in agreement now. Bike lanes make streets less safe.

On this satirical thread, your post fits in perfectly!

Your talking to a bot or a driver, neither one can pass a Turing test these days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A cyclist is a disaster for the local economy. A cyclist does not buy a car and does not take out a car loan. They do not buy car insurance. They do not buy fuel. They do not send their car for service and repairs a couple times a year. They do not use paid parking. All of this means that they are existing outside of the transportation system that the rest of us use without contributing to the spreading out of its cost. This is bad for society.

But it goes further, cycling is an activity that is exercise. That means that the cyclist is less likely to become obese and more likely to be healthy. Healthy people are not needed for the economy. They don't buy drugs, they don't go to hospitals and doctors as much, they don't pay lots of co-pays to their HMO each year helping keep insurance cheaper for the rest of us.

Compare the investment in bike lanes to a similar investment in building a Popeye's Chicken restaurant. The bike lanes will add nothing to our area economy, indeed for the reasons above it will only erode it. The Popeye's Chicken though - just from the health impact - should create at least 30 jobs - 10 cardiologists, 10 dentists, 10 weight loss experts, in addition to the fast food workers and the general happiness of all of their patrons from the serotonin rush from eating the highly palatable fast food.

So, this is what our area officials should be thinking about when evaluating the bike lane plans by Big Bike. A bike lane? Or a Popeyes. The choice is obvious.

Oh dear . . .

That's great news! Now we can get rid of all the bike lanes because they decrase safety.

Of course it's irrelevant because in that study bike lanes are done as additions to traffic lanes while here in DC they are taking away traffic lanes.

You also seem to be forgetting that increasing congestion is DDOT's explicit goal. But at least we're all in agreement now. Bike lanes make streets less safe.

On this satirical thread, your post fits in perfectly!

If only it was. It sounds so absurd and insane but unfortunately it is true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A cyclist is a disaster for the local economy. A cyclist does not buy a car and does not take out a car loan. They do not buy car insurance. They do not buy fuel. They do not send their car for service and repairs a couple times a year. They do not use paid parking. All of this means that they are existing outside of the transportation system that the rest of us use without contributing to the spreading out of its cost. This is bad for society.

But it goes further, cycling is an activity that is exercise. That means that the cyclist is less likely to become obese and more likely to be healthy. Healthy people are not needed for the economy. They don't buy drugs, they don't go to hospitals and doctors as much, they don't pay lots of co-pays to their HMO each year helping keep insurance cheaper for the rest of us.

Compare the investment in bike lanes to a similar investment in building a Popeye's Chicken restaurant. The bike lanes will add nothing to our area economy, indeed for the reasons above it will only erode it. The Popeye's Chicken though - just from the health impact - should create at least 30 jobs - 10 cardiologists, 10 dentists, 10 weight loss experts, in addition to the fast food workers and the general happiness of all of their patrons from the serotonin rush from eating the highly palatable fast food.

So, this is what our area officials should be thinking about when evaluating the bike lane plans by Big Bike. A bike lane? Or a Popeyes. The choice is obvious.

Oh dear . . .

That's great news! Now we can get rid of all the bike lanes because they decrase safety.

Of course it's irrelevant because in that study bike lanes are done as additions to traffic lanes while here in DC they are taking away traffic lanes.

You also seem to be forgetting that increasing congestion is DDOT's explicit goal. But at least we're all in agreement now. Bike lanes make streets less safe.

Conn Ave would have gone from 4 driving lanes and 2 parking lanes to 5 car-through-lanes, bike lanes and some parking.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A cyclist is a disaster for the local economy. A cyclist does not buy a car and does not take out a car loan. They do not buy car insurance. They do not buy fuel. They do not send their car for service and repairs a couple times a year. They do not use paid parking. All of this means that they are existing outside of the transportation system that the rest of us use without contributing to the spreading out of its cost. This is bad for society.

But it goes further, cycling is an activity that is exercise. That means that the cyclist is less likely to become obese and more likely to be healthy. Healthy people are not needed for the economy. They don't buy drugs, they don't go to hospitals and doctors as much, they don't pay lots of co-pays to their HMO each year helping keep insurance cheaper for the rest of us.

Compare the investment in bike lanes to a similar investment in building a Popeye's Chicken restaurant. The bike lanes will add nothing to our area economy, indeed for the reasons above it will only erode it. The Popeye's Chicken though - just from the health impact - should create at least 30 jobs - 10 cardiologists, 10 dentists, 10 weight loss experts, in addition to the fast food workers and the general happiness of all of their patrons from the serotonin rush from eating the highly palatable fast food.

So, this is what our area officials should be thinking about when evaluating the bike lane plans by Big Bike. A bike lane? Or a Popeyes. The choice is obvious.

Oh dear . . .

That's great news! Now we can get rid of all the bike lanes because they decrase safety.

Of course it's irrelevant because in that study bike lanes are done as additions to traffic lanes while here in DC they are taking away traffic lanes.

You also seem to be forgetting that increasing congestion is DDOT's explicit goal. But at least we're all in agreement now. Bike lanes make streets less safe.

Conn Ave would have gone from 4 driving lanes and 2 parking lanes to 5 car-through-lanes, bike lanes and some parking.

Pfft your actual facts dont stack up to my warped perception, so get outta here and back to the crecent trail with you!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A cyclist is a disaster for the local economy. A cyclist does not buy a car and does not take out a car loan. They do not buy car insurance. They do not buy fuel. They do not send their car for service and repairs a couple times a year. They do not use paid parking. All of this means that they are existing outside of the transportation system that the rest of us use without contributing to the spreading out of its cost. This is bad for society.

But it goes further, cycling is an activity that is exercise. That means that the cyclist is less likely to become obese and more likely to be healthy. Healthy people are not needed for the economy. They don't buy drugs, they don't go to hospitals and doctors as much, they don't pay lots of co-pays to their HMO each year helping keep insurance cheaper for the rest of us.

Compare the investment in bike lanes to a similar investment in building a Popeye's Chicken restaurant. The bike lanes will add nothing to our area economy, indeed for the reasons above it will only erode it. The Popeye's Chicken though - just from the health impact - should create at least 30 jobs - 10 cardiologists, 10 dentists, 10 weight loss experts, in addition to the fast food workers and the general happiness of all of their patrons from the serotonin rush from eating the highly palatable fast food.

So, this is what our area officials should be thinking about when evaluating the bike lane plans by Big Bike. A bike lane? Or a Popeyes. The choice is obvious.

Oh dear . . .

That's great news! Now we can get rid of all the bike lanes because they decrase safety.

Of course it's irrelevant because in that study bike lanes are done as additions to traffic lanes while here in DC they are taking away traffic lanes.

You also seem to be forgetting that increasing congestion is DDOT's explicit goal. But at least we're all in agreement now. Bike lanes make streets less safe.

Conn Ave would have gone from 4 driving lanes and 2 parking lanes to 5 car-through-lanes, bike lanes and some parking.

Pfft your actual facts dont stack up to my warped perception, so get outta here and back to the crecent trail with you!

That's certainly one way of describing it. Not the most honest but certainly a description. Another way to describe it would mention that during rush hour it was 4 lanes, in peak direction, and no parking which then got brought down to 3 lanes with parking and is now slated to drop to 2 lanes with separate parking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A cyclist is a disaster for the local economy. A cyclist does not buy a car and does not take out a car loan. They do not buy car insurance. They do not buy fuel. They do not send their car for service and repairs a couple times a year. They do not use paid parking. All of this means that they are existing outside of the transportation system that the rest of us use without contributing to the spreading out of its cost. This is bad for society.

But it goes further, cycling is an activity that is exercise. That means that the cyclist is less likely to become obese and more likely to be healthy. Healthy people are not needed for the economy. They don't buy drugs, they don't go to hospitals and doctors as much, they don't pay lots of co-pays to their HMO each year helping keep insurance cheaper for the rest of us.

Compare the investment in bike lanes to a similar investment in building a Popeye's Chicken restaurant. The bike lanes will add nothing to our area economy, indeed for the reasons above it will only erode it. The Popeye's Chicken though - just from the health impact - should create at least 30 jobs - 10 cardiologists, 10 dentists, 10 weight loss experts, in addition to the fast food workers and the general happiness of all of their patrons from the serotonin rush from eating the highly palatable fast food.

So, this is what our area officials should be thinking about when evaluating the bike lane plans by Big Bike. A bike lane? Or a Popeyes. The choice is obvious.

Oh dear . . .

That's great news! Now we can get rid of all the bike lanes because they decrase safety.

Of course it's irrelevant because in that study bike lanes are done as additions to traffic lanes while here in DC they are taking away traffic lanes.

You also seem to be forgetting that increasing congestion is DDOT's explicit goal. But at least we're all in agreement now. Bike lanes make streets less safe.

Conn Ave would have gone from 4 driving lanes and 2 parking lanes to 5 car-through-lanes, bike lanes and some parking.

Pfft your actual facts dont stack up to my warped perception, so get outta here and back to the crecent trail with you!

That's certainly one way of describing it. Not the most honest but certainly a description. Another way to describe it would mention that during rush hour it was 4 lanes, in peak direction, and no parking which then got brought down to 3 lanes with parking and is now slated to drop to 2 lanes with separate parking.

Nah, that plan is dead dead

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or, you could just walk.

And take public transportation like a normal person.

The norm in DC is BIPOC / minority. And BIPOC people take public transportation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or, you could just walk.

And take public transportation like a normal person.

The norm in DC is BIPOC / minority. And BIPOC people take public transportation.

Black folks don’t bike.