Login
You're viewing the discuss.systems public feed.
  • Oct 4, 2026, 4:25 PM

    @Mara Someone here (California, US) was arguing against bicycle infrastructure because it took space from cars, and did not remove any cars from the road. The basic argument was “How dare you spend ‘my’ tax dollars on something that does not directly benefit ‘me’”. The selfishness is stunning.

    💬 2🔄 2⭐ 14

Replies

  • Oct 4, 2026, 4:32 PM

    @gordotango The costs of all of our tax-paid bicycle infrastructure are actually offset multiple times over by the benefits of having a healthy population due to biking being so popular. Effectively, the costs of our bicycle infrastructure is negative. ✨

    💬 1🔄 4⭐ 29
  • Oct 4, 2026, 4:39 PM

    @Mara Yes. And I actually responded to him that I use my bicycle around town more when it is safer. I replace about 10 trips a week with my bicycle, and rarely use a car around town. We also have horrific pedestrian infrastructure.

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 3
  • Oct 4, 2026, 6:19 PM

    @gordotango @Mara

    But it DOES remove cars from the road. As does transit. People fighting for cars are fighting a losing battle as climate change will force the issue soon.

    💬 0🔄 2⭐ 4