I love bikes and 100% support better bike infrastructure but for anything over a few miles it’s just not practical to ride a bike for most people. Even if I’m physically capable of riding maybe 80 miles, most people aren’t.
If I want to go hiking in the White Mountains in New Hampshire from Boston in Massachusetts I’m not gonna pedal my way there. I’m taking a motorcycle or a car. I’d like to see better public transportation in the form of either trains or busses but realistically I’m not sure that public transportation is viable to such a rural area.
Remember that roads are not naturally-occurring, geological formations. The reason that a car or motorcycle seems practical is that you’re not paying the full cost of driving. In fact, nobody is willing to pay that much, which is why American infrastructure is crumbling.
So people should only travel via naturally occurring geological formations? And if they need to travel hundreds of miles they should only do so on a bicycle or by foot?
No, that was obviously an analogy to point out road infrastructure is expensive compared to rail or cycling infrastructure. And there’s other modes of transport that act as force multipliers to cycling; commuters in the Netherlands can bring their bikes on trains or store them securely at stations. There’s no need to limit yourself to one mode of transport at a time.
Motorcycles are the ideal transportation for large distances in low density areas.
Even the “downtown” of a village of <10k people are much nicer when they’re not 50% parking lot and you can walk down the street without cars blowing by you doing 65.
Motorbikes are even more important in the countryside, where roads aren’t always so good. If a road is washed out or theres been a landslide, bikes can still make it with some delay, and can use a lot more alternative paths. There’s places in the highlands here literally only accessible by bike.
Not sure what you mean by that. If it’s directed at me, I’m reasonably fit and I enjoy cardio. If it’s directed at others, many people are elderly and not capable. Either way, the United States are huge and definitely require transportation that’s not human powered.
![[meme] Anon likes bikes](https://files.ikt.id.au/aqdemc.webp){kind=link}
I love bikes and 100% support better bike infrastructure but for anything over a few miles it’s just not practical to ride a bike for most people. Even if I’m physically capable of riding maybe 80 miles, most people aren’t.
If I want to go hiking in the White Mountains in New Hampshire from Boston in Massachusetts I’m not gonna pedal my way there. I’m taking a motorcycle or a car. I’d like to see better public transportation in the form of either trains or busses but realistically I’m not sure that public transportation is viable to such a rural area.
Remember that roads are not naturally-occurring, geological formations. The reason that a car or motorcycle seems practical is that you’re not paying the full cost of driving. In fact, nobody is willing to pay that much, which is why American infrastructure is crumbling.
So people should only travel via naturally occurring geological formations? And if they need to travel hundreds of miles they should only do so on a bicycle or by foot?
“I like waffles!” “So you hate pancakes?”
No, that was obviously an analogy to point out road infrastructure is expensive compared to rail or cycling infrastructure. And there’s other modes of transport that act as force multipliers to cycling; commuters in the Netherlands can bring their bikes on trains or store them securely at stations. There’s no need to limit yourself to one mode of transport at a time.
Literal skill issue, is what I’m hearing.
I see plenty people biking multiple km, even elderly people. You just need to bike more.
Cars are the ideal transportation for large distances in low density areas. (Edit: motorcycles too)
Big trains are ideal for moving a large amount of people from one city to another, or freight over great distances.
Medium trains are ideal for moving a large amount of people over large distances in the city.
Tramways, buses and bikes are ideal for the last mile and medium distances in the city.
Walking is ideal for moving over small distances.
Motorcycles are the ideal transportation for large distances in low density areas.
Even the “downtown” of a village of <10k people are much nicer when they’re not 50% parking lot and you can walk down the street without cars blowing by you doing 65.
Well, it’s part of the picture for many areas.
In my area, you can’t ride a motorcycle during a third of the year, save rare exceptions.
In all areas, there are other inconveniences. You can’t carry young children, it’s not great for carrying logs, agricultural produce, mulch, etc.
I see people carrying those things every day lol.
I think it’s a concern for many in the countryside.
Motorbikes are even more important in the countryside, where roads aren’t always so good. If a road is washed out or theres been a landslide, bikes can still make it with some delay, and can use a lot more alternative paths. There’s places in the highlands here literally only accessible by bike.
For large elevation changes lifts would be cool too. Get some fkin whatever those wire hanging things are called in NH and CO.
Skill issue.
Not sure what you mean by that. If it’s directed at me, I’m reasonably fit and I enjoy cardio. If it’s directed at others, many people are elderly and not capable. Either way, the United States are huge and definitely require transportation that’s not human powered.