The person on the left is carrying bags, the one in orange is a delivery driver and a couple of people are wearing backpacks. Aside from car brained, Damaris is also blind.
Clearly they’re not bringing the goods, they’re bringing the services. That clown even said it himself. Refers to goods and services then only talks about the goods.
Furniture gets moved by bike here all the time in the Netherlands ? We got this amazing invention called a bakfiets (tub bike) or we just balance it on the back.
Bicycle trailers are a thing for a reason. I’m sure hauling a washer and dryer would be difficult but a sofa is easily achievable. For heavy stuff most places offer delivery for free or really cheap
A truck carrying freight ≠ a person driving home groceries. Groceries that typically fill up a car’s trunk just for 2-3 people; a bicycle isn’t carrying that. You’d need a rickshaw-like cart hooked onto it. They do exist though, for passengers, so making one for personal cargo loads is doable.
I wouldn’t want to do any of that in winter, though. Snow, ice, and sub-zero wind-chill (plus the further cooling effect while moving) are not when anyone should ever be on a bicycle.
Also, driving to a larger grocery store is non-negotiable for us because they’re the ones who stock the lower-demand allergy-safe foods. Guess how much a corn allergy sucks in America, on top of others. While most allergies and medical conditions are rarer than not, they are a huge problem.
Didn’t get me started on commuting - and youn literally can’t remote-work a labor job. Imagine having to make a 30+ minute car commute on a bicycle on top of a 9+ hour day.
So while yes, fuck cars, bicycles are not anywhere close to a magic bullet. Our entire civilization needs a comprehensive bottom-up overhaul that addresses every problem simultaneously, since most of them are interconnected.
Groceries, in particular, are more of an effect than a cause. Lots of people live without cars in New York City, or London, or Paris, or Toronto, or Tokyo, and they manage to eat. The reason you need to buy 7 days worth of food for two people all at once is because you live in a field far away from everything. “Getting Groceries” becomes a special trip, because, while driving, leaving the highway, stopping and parking are inconvenient.
As a pedestrian in a city, I was going to walk past 5 food stores on my way between work and home anyway, and it’s really not problem to walk in and buy only what I ran out of yesterday, or some special item I wanted for tonight’s dinner. It’s simple to shop for 5 or 10 minutes, five times a week, rather than one hour once a week, and never need more than a single bag of groceries at a time. And rather than being inconvenient, it’s actually great because I’m only buying what I need right now, the things I’m going to use as soon as I get home, so it’s very simple.
Allergies could be tricky, yeah. If you’re lucky the local shop, by nature of being smaller and more local, actually knows you and knows you need this stuff and stocks it because they know you’ll buy it from them. But that’s not a guarantee, for sure. That having been said, if the only people driving were people with corn allergies, the roads would be a much safer place!
@HexesofVexes@nehal3m Cycling commute times can be pretty compeditive in big cities, driving can have very bad worst case speeds where cycling is very stable.
The pictured example in Melbourne is 0:35 to 1:40 by car and 1:25 by bike. Yes the car will frequently win, but you can leave later to guarantee being in the office by 9. (TOA was set to 8:55am)
(The best and fastest is cycle to local station and catch the train)
But I mean, it doesn’t matter if you can’t carry a single 2x4x24ft lumber from home Depot to your house or from the lumber hard to home Depot. We got the main roads for that so big trucks can do that. Just commuting yourself from your house to work and back is enough.
In Amsterdam I got to see lots of little human powered delivery vans though. Mostly DHL. It was awesome to see. So it is doable in flat locations for sure.
Throughout history, most people have lived within an hour of work.
The biggest difficulty is retrofitting cities that have developed in the last century. Places that have been around for centuries were developed with walking in mind. Places that were developed around the automobile and climate contril are very difficult to convert.
The world has both quadrupled in population and urbanized over the past century as the car became the primary mode of transit in much of the world.
The only thing that makes transitioning even possible is that the landlord class would love to return to feudaliam.
It’s actually still doable, but requires some creative thinking to undo the damage done for half century. Train can carry people from suburb into the city, the last mile can be solved either by brt, tram, or by micromobility. Bus, tram, and bicycle need their own dedicated lane for this to work nicely. This won’t necessarily prevent people from driving but it will make driving not the only way to go to work.
Places that were developed around the automobile and climate contril are very difficult to convert.
Iirc Amsterdam is basically that, it used to be car-centric but the government take away that monopoly and give it back to bicycle and micro-mobile. Paris is another recent example on how bicycle usage is rising if given the proper safety infrastructure to ride around. It’s also a car-centric city before this.
It’s not that it’s hard, it’s just lack of political will and dinosaur way of thinking. It’s something that never crossed their mind.
Cities design around walking is technically harder because the space limitation if they want to share it with car, but tend to have everything in close proximity, which in that case it’s far easier to just ban car from entering and cater the street to just pedestrian and bicycle/non-electric scooter. Cities design around car however, is easier to convert, as they tend to have wider road and more lane for car. They just need to take away one lane and give it to cyclist and that’s it. The only hard part is going through the legislation and carbrain.
The thing about auto-centric design is that it covers transportation from end to end. Other methods require a much more complicated network of fist and last-mile solutions that aren’t easily adapted.
“Just use park and rides” doesn’t solve the problem. It just moves the traffic to the transit stations. And now it’s more expensive and slower than the existing system.
Houston put in a light rail system that costs 1% of every dollar spent in the city, costs a ton to ride, adds 45 minutes to a trip downtown, and drastically increases the odds of your car getting broken into at the park-and-ride. So yeah - there’s pushback against expanding it.
@chiliedogg@Annoyed_Crabby@fuck_cars
I'd bet that a lot of that inefficiency was built in as a precondition of its passage. That's how it works in red states. Let blue islands implement "woke" policies, but only in ways that kneecap them from the beginning, so you can campaign against their "failure" in a few years.
There’s also inherrent difficulty when the city is so spread out (The Grand Parkway outer loop has a 60-mile diameter, compared to Paris’s 15), and walking outside is a health hazard 3-4 months out of the year.
@chiliedogg
I understand the impulse to call them inherent, but they're really just consequences of the same bad policy that kept people off public transit for 60 years.
What’s a concrete, real way to fix these cities that doesn’t require millions of people to give up their homes to move into more-expensive apartments they don’t own, addresses the fact that being outside for more than a few minutes simply isn’t safe for a significant portion of the population for almost half the year, and doesn’t significantly add to commute times?
@chiliedogg wow this is a nice summary from which to start defining possible solutions. Off the top of my head, it would be low-rise residential co-op ownership clusters with adjoining, enclosed spaces like small Milan gallerias. Residential clusters will be connected by main commercial streets with offices and stores. Cluster groups form towns and cars would only be allowed to travel between towns but not within. Millions of people still need to transition to this, there’s no way around that.
Absolutely. I work in the planning department of a municipality that’s a tiny enclave for the super-wealthy. The average new home here is over 10 times the price of the regional average. I recently issued a permit for a 5,000 square-foot guest house with a tennis pavillion on the roof.
Our residents don’t want neighbors. They don’t want a sense of cummunity. They want their special enclave with a police force that exists to keep out the homeless people from the major city that surrounds us.
I don’t live here of course. I have to drive 90 minutes every morning because my annual salary won’t cover a week’s mortgage for some of these houses.
I don’t live in the US so maybe I’m mistaken but in my opinion a possibility could be :
Wait for a small group of houses in the suburbs to be available (preferably towards the center) and transform them in convenience stores, schools, office space, etc
Next you can link multiple suburbs like that with train/tram or metro for exemple. And you can even leave roads connecting zones for delivery or for people needing to go to another town or things like that
Couple that to a good public transport system overall and now you’re living in a space were there’s less danger due to car circulation, you don’t need to drive multiple km to do groceries, kids can walk(or commute via PT) to school, etc
Do you think we don’t have offices, schools, and C-stores in the suburbs?
We also have sidewalks, bike lanes, walkable shopping districts, etc, but in Texas they don’t get used because it’s 110° for months at a time and you don’t want to have to take a shower every time you change locations.
But the problem is those C-stores and small offices don’t bring the jobs required to support the suburbs. Most people have to work in the city, so they have to commute, and getting from their house to the office is what creates traffic.
I’ll accept that maybe my vision of the suburbs is biased by films and TV shows 😅
I live in a city where temperature could realistically go to 110° F (that’s about 40~45° C for me) in summer but here bus and tram have AC and there is water fountains (decorative and drinkable) everywhere + the city try to maintain vegetation despite heat waves. So even if it’s hot outside, felt air temperature is actually way cooler.
I’ll admit this is very dependent of where you live, the climate around you, water availability and other things, but certainly it’s doable in some places of the US. For others places, in between accomodations can be found. Walkable cities are not a black and white sets of solution there’s levels, hierarchical implementations, etc
The first step and the mindset is already wrong, focusing on moving traffic instead of removing traffic. So yeah, of course it wouldn’t work. Houston failed at it doesn’t mean other city would fail too.
People can’t travel 30 miles from their home to the office entirely using public transit. Walkable cities and light rail are Last-mile. Heck - throw in high-speed for the majority of the transit and you still have a huge first-mile problem, which is by far the hardest to solve.
The reasons modern cities are designed around cars is because cars are flexible. Add a street for a new row of houses and every single one of those points is connected to every end point in a single step. No new scheduling, routing, or transit lines required. Problem solved with a little asphalt.
It’s an easy solution, and backing out of it is very, very difficult because it must be replaced with a complicated, expensive solution that’s less-convenient for most users.
I’m not anti-transit at all, but people around here seem to believe that a city can be fixed with the power of wishes and fairy dust just because another city that covers 1/10th the area and was developed hundreds of years before auto-centric decelopment ago managed to do it.
People can’t travel 30 miles from their home to the office entirely using public transit.
Does ALL Americans travel 30 miles for work?
Walkable cities and light rail are Last-mile. Heck - throw in high-speed for the majority of the transit and you still have a huge first-mile problem, which is by far the hardest to solve.
The reasons modern cities are designed around cars is because cars are flexible.
So does all those micromobile.
Add a street for a new row of houses and every single one of those points is connected to every end point in a single step. No new scheduling, routing, or transit lines required
That’s what called lazy design, and that’s why american and all the people from car dependent city are so miserable about their daily commuting.
Problem solved with a little asphalt.
Our definition of “little” might be a bit different.
It’s an easy solution
And a costly one. Maintaining road for car is far more expensive than for public transport because of the amount of people each mode of transport carry.
backing out of it is very, very difficult
It’s difficult because it’s written into stupid law by stupid politician. That’s what i called lacking political will.
because it must be replaced with a complicated, expensive solution that’s less-convenient for most users.
It’s not even about replacing one for another, it’s about providing a good, viable option, and not a half done one then call it a day, to people who want to use such infrastructure.
I’m not anti-transit at all, but people around here seem to believe that a city can be fixed with the power of wishes and fairy dust just because another city that covers 1/10th the area and was developed hundreds of years before auto-centric decelopment ago managed to do it.
Nobody think that, that’s just strawman argument. You know why people around here don’t take you seriously? Because you never pay attention to what their stand are. There’s a reason carbrain is a popular term with urbanist/pro-strong town because car people just can’t seems to wrap their head around on the concept of giving people the option for viable alternative transport. Literally every car brain i met seems to believe everyone is living on some edge case hence car should be the only transport, they never seems to think edge case is just that, edge case.
Even Belfast only allows access to the city centre for vehicles doing deliveries. It’s not uncommon to see one, but I mean a single one generally in the centre of a capital city
They are asking a question regarding something they do not understand.
It is a true statement that roads are used to transport goods and services.
They then simply ask who in the video is carrying goods and products into stores/homes, and how workers move goods from ports to the stores.
They don’t know how a system like this works when it comes to, for example, stocking a grocery store, because they have not worked or lived in a place with infrastructure like this.
It’s just ad hominem and poor practice to call someone blind when they aren’t familiar with something, particularly when they seem interested in how it works, and works contrary to convincing people of the cause.
If someone has worked with punch cards to program a computer all their life, and someone showed them software written the python programming language and they said:
“But the punch card is so that the computer can read in bytes to know what to do, in this text I don’t see any bytes, there’s nothing telling the computer if this is little endian or big endian, it all looks like a book. How does the text tell the computer what to do?”
Then my response would NOT be “Well the list comprehension here is yielding a range of numbers which are sent to the print function, and this class is acting as a signal handler. Aside from punch card brained, you’re also blind”.
My response would be a very happy opportunity to explain to them the benefits of a modern programming language versus punch cards, and how it works in comparison.
Unless this is a person known to be explicitly anti-bike and pro-car, it is bad to be this critical of them and works in no one’s favor.
It is a true statement that roads are used to transport goods and services.
They then simply ask who in the video is carrying goods and products into stores/homes, and how workers move goods from ports to the stores.
It’s a very simplistic and reductive view of roads, though, in response to a post that specifically mentions another function of roads, namely, facilitating people’s travels as individuals for their own purposes. It’s like you telling someone you like using lemmy because you’ve found communities you enjoy participating in and individuals you like talking to, and they go, “But the internet is for commerce, the buying and selling of goods! Who is selling and who is buying in these instances?”
Your example is overly charitable, in my opinion. Not everyone is being malicious with these sorts of questions, but the person is ignoring some pretty clear context explaining other uses of roads to go attach a strawman. At the very least, it seems like a bad faith argument.
I’m skeptical of all that - surely they understand that roads carry more than just goods and services. It’s such a basic part of society that you’d have to be from another planet to be confused about that and build a whole argument based on it.
You can stack at least 3 crates on the back of the bike if you have a bag carrier, 2 otherwise. Then 1 or 2 on the bar between your legs, and 1 on the steering bar, or 2 if you also have a bag carrier there.
Ebike recommended if they’re full, but it’s way doable when bringing them back to the store.
I live in the very non flat south East of the Netherlands. We still do everything on bike. Groceries, mail, like 4 children while carrying groceries and being on the phone.
A perk of belonging to my city’s bike advocacy group is that you can rent this for no additional charge:
64″ aluminum truss-frame trailer; easily carry a 4×8 sheet of plywood, eight bags of groceries, or whatever else you can fit on it up to 300 lbs; holds 4 plastic tote boxes before stacking
My dad has a solid bike trailer. It’s not as big as your group’s one, but he can do about a WinCo shopping cart worth in it. That’s plenty for the vast majority of their household needs.
Trying to persuade the (amazingly) only contractors on the entire planet that think they need a tiny-penis truck because they occasionally need to pick up some wood from Howm Deeepo to ride a bike is like trying to get blood from a stone
When I used to be on twitter and in response to idiotic comments like that, I would post the video of the guy cycling with a fridge on his back, one of someone moving a piano, several tradesmen that quit their vans to use cargo bikes, the pedal cab company in London (proper cargo bikes not the shitty tourist things) and the mother of 6 from Portland that had a cargo bike to take them all to school.
You’re a fucking idiot if you think roads were only built for the transportation of goods & services as they were superceded by canals then by railways.
It was a massive step backwards in inefficiency in an orchestrated move by vehicle manufacturers that freight was shifted back to roads.
And the guys (yes, more than one) carrying fridges on their shoulders while cycling, have more fucking balls than you’ll ever dream of having.
Add comment