Sounds like NGOs taking care of what should be the core job of any governmean - ensuring that people are supplied with stuff covering basic needs, like food.
Sounds like NGOs taking care of what should be the core job of any governmean - ensuring that people are supplied with stuff covering basic needs, like food.
If you are riding a bike you aren’t really helping, but maybe you mean bicycle? Bike can also mean motorbike.
So how would you feel it was justified if you were only allowed to drive 10-15 km/h on your bicycle, to help solve the oil crisis? Obviously it would have zero effect, and be completely moronic.
In the exact same way it is moronic to slow down EV traffic to save fuel, it is on the contrary necessary to stimulate people to switch to EV even faster, to save more on fossil fuels.
And how the fuck has it got anything to do with pissing on anyone’s lawn? That’s a completely moronic argument that doesn’t make the least bit of sense.
And how are we not doing that, investing almost all our money to use sustainable energy?
Why do you want to punish the people who actually went in 100% to use renewable energy, instead of putting the limitations on the cars that use fossil fuel?
Go piss in a corner, you apparently want to.
The thing is that when I use a bicycle, I do not put a burden on other people, or the community, or expose others to deadly risks. But you do when you drive a car, and that gives society the right to restrict its use, for example in terms of speed. Even when your car is electric, it exposes others to risk of accidents, particulate matter that causes pulmonary problems, dissuades others from using a bicycle in the city, and so on.
And apart from that, I wouldn’t participate in online discussions where I get the impression that people are trolling. It is interesting how often that happens when the discussion comes to things that might even slightly affect the interests of the car industry or the fossil industry. It is as if these industries know that they cannot win any reasonable and rational discussion, and resort to astroturfing and trolling instead. Just to make you aware of these patterns.
OK, but I explicitly stated that I did not object to limitations based on safety. But that a very different debate.
Also these limitations are for high speed roads and have nothing to do with city traffic.
You are CLEARLY the troll here, arguing besides the point, and being contrarian.