One more car going at the flow of traffic isn't an issue. But a single cyclist can severely disturb the flow of traffic, adding not only delays but increasing fuel consumption. The road is there for everyone and road planners must make the lanes big enough to get past each other. But so are the rules of the road and cyclist must be trained better and held accountable. Mandatory training and license plates would go a long way improving safety, including for cyclists.
This is where the hatred for cyclists stems from. You think one more car on the road isn’t an issue because they are able to maintain a certain speed. Where a cyclist holds up traffic for a few seconds because they can’t travel as fast as cars. Would really rather have all cyclists in cars? The more cyclists we have, the more road space there is which means less congestion.
@@PP-cm4re Compare the amount of personkilometers travelled, cyclists don't have much of a share compared to airplanes, trains and cars. And most of those are only for recreational purposes - so when you ride your cycle around the lake for fun, you wouldn't take the car instead. If you truly want to reduce congestion, you built more roads, limit immigration and improve public transport. Also good to separate bicycle traffic from the rest of traffic (but this is very unpopular among the bicycle and "green" community).
Pedestrians and cyclists are not just dangerous to themselves, but others. In my city a truck driver killed a cyclist and it completely ruined his life. A man doing his job has blood on his hands because some idiot was playing in traffic and tried to pass a turning truck. Cyclists don’t belong on streets. And public funds should not be used to diminish public infrastructure for a hobby. What next, special tow ropes for bicycles in hill? The idiocy has no end. Buy a car. Take an Uber. Stop externalizing the risks of your death wish on the public. Cyclists are a moral hazard and a traffic hazard.
You are completely right! A lot of pedestrians have been killed by cars as well, so I guess they don’t belong on the streets too. That’s the perfect world, no bicycles, no pedestrians, just cars, trucks and motorcycles moving about. A perfect image of Paradise.
@@Karonar well fuel tax pays for road maintenance so maybe if bikes paid for there own paths then they wouldnt have everyone hating them for valid reasons
Cyclists should be made to pay insurance, pay road tax, and use compulsory safety gear, they should all be licenced and have tags/number plates on their bikes. And lastly, they should be made accountable for abiding by the law of the road. They are basically a motorcycle, so the same rules should apply.
I ride push bikes and im insured, i dont pay road tax as you call it just like all the EV drivers and the ICE cars in the past which were exempt, my wifes ICE car is exempt, pushing your narrative against only cyclist!!!!!!!!, do you go up to EV drivers and ICE car drivers and spout off to them they should pay it, i guess not, its not the fault of cyclist, Ev and ICE drivers fault they don't pay it it's the government, so instead of making some ill conceived comment you might use one of your 2 brain cells to think logically
That's ridiculous and you know it (or perhaps don't which is okay). Everyone pays tax that goes towards roads already. If you knew just how much damage cars do, then you'd realize that drivers are the ones who aren't paying nearly enough. Cyclists shouldn't pay insurance because there's nothing to really insure. A cyclist can't really do any damage. Cyclists shouldn't have to wear safety gear because cycling isn't actually that dangerous. It's the 4,000+ pound cars that are dangerous to cyclists, which is why they should be separated from car traffic as much as possible. They are incompatible. I don't know what good a license plate would do for a bicycle. Bicycles are not basically a motorcycle, that's ridiculous. There is no motor and anyone of any age can ride one. I do think that some cyclists should be more aware of their surroundings and more courteous, same goes for drivers. It is not safe to weave between traffic or make unpredictable movements. Most people are terrible drivers and shouldn't be trusted to do anything properly, so don't assume they can see you or know what you're going to do without being obvious. However, bikes are lighter, slower, and have fewer blind spots, so cyclists should be more aware and have more time to react than a person in a car. This is why they don't need to stop at stop signs/lights and can break motor vehicle rules. Things like stop lights only exist because of cars, people on bicycles are fairly safe without any traffic signals. See the Netherlands for examples of all of this.
1) Cyclists already pay their share when it comes to funding roads, that's called the tax system. In fact cyclists actually subsidize drivers. Drivers don't actually pay for all the infrastructure that they need. Very little of car expenses actually go into the roads. General taxes are what fund roads not gas taxes. NotJustBikes has a quote where he says "You want cyclists to pay their fair share? Okay, start calculating their refund checks." Cyclists save cities lots of money by not wearing down the roads, reducing congestion, improving air quality and noise levels; and these tax savings mean lower taxes for everyone, including you. 2) There is a reason that bicycle licensing isn't a thing, it makes no sense to implement it. Cities have tried this in the past, it went away for a reason. The cost of building and maintaining a database of bicycles just would not be financially worth doing for the almost nonexistent amount of danger that cyclists pose on others. Our pockets are finite, we cannot just slap bureaucracy onto everything and call it a day. Paperwork and databases cost money to maintain and people on bicycles pose virtually no threat to other people so it makes zero sense to license and register bicycles. 3) Cyclists shouldn't have to follow the roads as strictly as motorists do because again, cyclist pose almost no threat to anyone else but themselves, so a cyclist running a red light is only likely to get themselves hurt not anyone else. The amount of energy a 200 lbs person on a 20 lbs bicycle travelling 15 mph possesses is significantly less than someone in a 4,000 lbs motor vehicle travelling 35 mph. Also bicycles are hard to get moving from a stop, so allowing cyclists to keep rolling when it is safe to proceed saves time for drivers too. Also one bicycle on the road is one less car on the road and people just LOVE to complain about traffic. You are not stuck in traffic, you ARE traffic. Allowing cyclists to roll through stop signs when it is safe to do so not only saves time for drivers but it is actually safer for the person on a bike too as they can spend less time in an intersection. 4) Bicycles are absolutely NOT motorcycles, nowhere close actually. Ebikes, maybe; but manual bicycles are more fast pedestrian than motorcycle. As long as a cyclist is riding responsibly then who cares if they break a few written rules, so long as they're not being a nuisance to others, in fact someone using a bicycle for transportation is saving you as a driver time cuz they removed one car's worth of traffic from the roads. Same goes for ebike riders. With power comes responsibility. As long as someone on an ebike is riding responsibly then who cares if they break a few small rules? These micro-mobility devices are doing a good job reducing traffic which is something that drivers love to complain about. Someone on a bicycle poses virtually no threat to anyone.
@@MichaelSheaAudio Most taxes come from the sale of mineral oil products or electricity. Therefore cyclists contribute very little to the infrastructure. Cyclists use food as fuel, so maybe the taxes have to be raised to 100% of something to compensate :). Or just have a mandatory license plate that has to be paid for.
Thank you cyclist and pedestrians
Well, just watch videos about the Dutch cycle infrastructure and/or visit the Netherlands to look how it works here...
Real
Is that an A.I thumbnail?
Yes it is 🙂
One more car going at the flow of traffic isn't an issue.
But a single cyclist can severely disturb the flow of traffic, adding not only delays but increasing fuel consumption.
The road is there for everyone and road planners must make the lanes big enough to get past each other.
But so are the rules of the road and cyclist must be trained better and held accountable. Mandatory training and license plates would go a long way improving safety, including for cyclists.
Maybe you should examine your statement more. 😅
wow, if a cyclist can disturb car traffic that much, I wonder what other cars can do
This is where the hatred for cyclists stems from. You think one more car on the road isn’t an issue because they are able to maintain a certain speed. Where a cyclist holds up traffic for a few seconds because they can’t travel as fast as cars. Would really rather have all cyclists in cars?
The more cyclists we have, the more road space there is which means less congestion.
@@PP-cm4re Compare the amount of personkilometers travelled, cyclists don't have much of a share compared to airplanes, trains and cars.
And most of those are only for recreational purposes - so when you ride your cycle around the lake for fun, you wouldn't take the car instead.
If you truly want to reduce congestion, you built more roads, limit immigration and improve public transport.
Also good to separate bicycle traffic from the rest of traffic (but this is very unpopular among the bicycle and "green" community).
What if it was more than one car?
Pedestrians and cyclists are not just dangerous to themselves, but others. In my city a truck driver killed a cyclist and it completely ruined his life. A man doing his job has blood on his hands because some idiot was playing in traffic and tried to pass a turning truck. Cyclists don’t belong on streets. And public funds should not be used to diminish public infrastructure for a hobby. What next, special tow ropes for bicycles in hill? The idiocy has no end. Buy a car. Take an Uber. Stop externalizing the risks of your death wish on the public. Cyclists are a moral hazard and a traffic hazard.
You are completely right! A lot of pedestrians have been killed by cars as well, so I guess they don’t belong on the streets too. That’s the perfect world, no bicycles, no pedestrians, just cars, trucks and motorcycles moving about. A perfect image of Paradise.
many times ive been in big traffic jam then get to the front and realise its some loser bike rider causing the entire problem.
Yeah, I bet it was definitely the cyclist that caused the traffic jam and not the volume of the cars. 🙂
@@urbandenizenmobility The traffic jam was only behind the bike after the bike completely clear on the same road. So yes it was all because of 1 bike.
Of course it is. 😉
@@pantsgaming759 imagine giving the biker the fault for the bad infrastructure 🤣
@@Karonar well fuel tax pays for road maintenance so maybe if bikes paid for there own paths then they wouldnt have everyone hating them for valid reasons
Cyclists should be made to pay insurance, pay road tax, and use compulsory safety gear, they should all be licenced and have tags/number plates on their bikes. And lastly, they should be made accountable for abiding by the law of the road. They are basically a motorcycle, so the same rules should apply.
You should travel to The Netherlands or Japan, it would definitely be a wonderful experience for you and your family. 🙂
I ride push bikes and im insured, i dont pay road tax as you call it just like all the EV drivers and the ICE cars in the past which were exempt, my wifes ICE car is exempt, pushing your narrative against only cyclist!!!!!!!!, do you go up to EV drivers and ICE car drivers and spout off to them they should pay it, i guess not, its not the fault of cyclist, Ev and ICE drivers fault they don't pay it it's the government, so instead of making some ill conceived comment you might use one of your 2 brain cells to think logically
That's ridiculous and you know it (or perhaps don't which is okay). Everyone pays tax that goes towards roads already. If you knew just how much damage cars do, then you'd realize that drivers are the ones who aren't paying nearly enough. Cyclists shouldn't pay insurance because there's nothing to really insure. A cyclist can't really do any damage. Cyclists shouldn't have to wear safety gear because cycling isn't actually that dangerous. It's the 4,000+ pound cars that are dangerous to cyclists, which is why they should be separated from car traffic as much as possible. They are incompatible. I don't know what good a license plate would do for a bicycle. Bicycles are not basically a motorcycle, that's ridiculous. There is no motor and anyone of any age can ride one. I do think that some cyclists should be more aware of their surroundings and more courteous, same goes for drivers. It is not safe to weave between traffic or make unpredictable movements. Most people are terrible drivers and shouldn't be trusted to do anything properly, so don't assume they can see you or know what you're going to do without being obvious. However, bikes are lighter, slower, and have fewer blind spots, so cyclists should be more aware and have more time to react than a person in a car. This is why they don't need to stop at stop signs/lights and can break motor vehicle rules. Things like stop lights only exist because of cars, people on bicycles are fairly safe without any traffic signals. See the Netherlands for examples of all of this.
1) Cyclists already pay their share when it comes to funding roads, that's called the tax system. In fact cyclists actually subsidize drivers. Drivers don't actually pay for all the infrastructure that they need. Very little of car expenses actually go into the roads. General taxes are what fund roads not gas taxes. NotJustBikes has a quote where he says "You want cyclists to pay their fair share? Okay, start calculating their refund checks." Cyclists save cities lots of money by not wearing down the roads, reducing congestion, improving air quality and noise levels; and these tax savings mean lower taxes for everyone, including you.
2) There is a reason that bicycle licensing isn't a thing, it makes no sense to implement it. Cities have tried this in the past, it went away for a reason. The cost of building and maintaining a database of bicycles just would not be financially worth doing for the almost nonexistent amount of danger that cyclists pose on others. Our pockets are finite, we cannot just slap bureaucracy onto everything and call it a day. Paperwork and databases cost money to maintain and people on bicycles pose virtually no threat to other people so it makes zero sense to license and register bicycles.
3) Cyclists shouldn't have to follow the roads as strictly as motorists do because again, cyclist pose almost no threat to anyone else but themselves, so a cyclist running a red light is only likely to get themselves hurt not anyone else. The amount of energy a 200 lbs person on a 20 lbs bicycle travelling 15 mph possesses is significantly less than someone in a 4,000 lbs motor vehicle travelling 35 mph. Also bicycles are hard to get moving from a stop, so allowing cyclists to keep rolling when it is safe to proceed saves time for drivers too. Also one bicycle on the road is one less car on the road and people just LOVE to complain about traffic. You are not stuck in traffic, you ARE traffic. Allowing cyclists to roll through stop signs when it is safe to do so not only saves time for drivers but it is actually safer for the person on a bike too as they can spend less time in an intersection.
4) Bicycles are absolutely NOT motorcycles, nowhere close actually. Ebikes, maybe; but manual bicycles are more fast pedestrian than motorcycle. As long as a cyclist is riding responsibly then who cares if they break a few written rules, so long as they're not being a nuisance to others, in fact someone using a bicycle for transportation is saving you as a driver time cuz they removed one car's worth of traffic from the roads. Same goes for ebike riders. With power comes responsibility. As long as someone on an ebike is riding responsibly then who cares if they break a few small rules? These micro-mobility devices are doing a good job reducing traffic which is something that drivers love to complain about. Someone on a bicycle poses virtually no threat to anyone.
@@MichaelSheaAudio Most taxes come from the sale of mineral oil products or electricity. Therefore cyclists contribute very little to the infrastructure.
Cyclists use food as fuel, so maybe the taxes have to be raised to 100% of something to compensate :).
Or just have a mandatory license plate that has to be paid for.