LogFAQs > #975657236

Cruciferous posted...

Certain folks out here get in their car to go get their mail literally 60 yards from their front porch. It's super sad.

To be fair, a lot of subdivisions are so designed around cars that even if the mail is only 60 yards away as the crow flies, there are fences, yards, and other obstacles that mean walking there is significantly more circuitous than that, often walking on roads with no sidewalks because everything has been designed around the assumption that everyone will drive everywhere at all times. Sure, some people are just lazy and will make a drive they could easily walk in the same amount of time (on that scale, you spend about so much time getting into the car, pulling out, parking, and getting out that it nullifies most or all of the time savings walking would provide), but thanks to living in an environment where driving is the default because everything has been designed to be hostile to any other mode of transportation, people tend to only ever think about driving places.

Heck, even just psychologically, the norm of only ever travelling from your house to your car to your destination without ever being outside for a meaningful length of time makes people uncomfortable with the idea of just walking around their neighbourhoods. Car-centric infrastructure fundamentally fosters a sense of isolation because you so rarely see people out and about, which in turn fosters a sense of distrust and misanthropy.

Dikitain posted...

But spending 30 minutes walking somewhere when I could drive there in 5? That is 25 minutes I could be spending doing chores, working, playing games, or anything else besides walking.

Give me a way to walk 60-75 mph and I will walk everywhere.

If you're in an environment where you can go 60-75 mph at any point during a 5-minute drive, that environment is a major part of the problem. Car-centric developments connected to other car-centric developments by highways are fundamentally at odds with getting around any other way, thanks to how much space has to be taken up to move large volumes of cars (significantly more than just about any other option, especially for single-occupancy vehicles), the amount of parking space that's needed when nobody can get anywhere without driving (commercial lots with parking minimums are very often comprised of more driveway/parking than actual store), and the danger inherent in trying to mix high-speed car traffic with any other mode. Build around something other than cars, and that 5-minute drive becomes a 10-15-minute walk instead, usually a much more pleasant one because you're walking past actual destinations and not parking lots and drive-thrus.

Cruciferous posted...

why is america so bike unfriendly
i HATE it

Most of it is just a natural consequence of being car-centric. Going back as early as the 1910's-20's, car companies ran a propaganda campaign to shift then narrative from "streets are public places that belong to everyone" to "streets belong to cars and everyone else needs to work around that" (this is where the term and concept of "jaywalking" came from). That narrative has stuck, and it's extremely common for drivers - having spent their entire lives being told that streets are for them and them alone - to resent having their driving be inconvenienced by anyone else using the road. It's made even worse by the ubiquitous fantasy that drivers are the only ones paying for roads and are therefore entitled to every square inch of asphalt in the city.

Of course, the reality is that driving-specific fees and taxes only cover about 10% of road costs in most American cities/suburbs, with the remaining large majority coming from other revenue streams that everyone pays regardless of whether or not they drive. Car-only infrastructure is also by far the least efficient way to move people around if you look at it on a scale beyond "me drive to work with no other cars around," but the auto industry's propaganda has taken very deep root in American society, and those are difficult lies to untangle.

Shrek posted...

bike riders either act like they own the roads and everyone needs to bow down to them, or they act ultra cautious and rarely actually go anywhere

there is no inbetween

There's plenty of in-between, you just don't notice it because we only consider extreme experiences worth remembering. It also doesn't help that "bikes act like they own the roads" often actually just means "bikes are using the road like they're a car and I don't like going a bit slower for a few minutes," which in many circumstances is the only way bikes can actually be safe. Trying to make passing room in a situation where safe passing won't be possible either way just invites unsafe passing. In those cases, they should occupy the full lane to remove the option.

This perception also isn't helped by the fact that not feeling comfortable around cars is by far the biggest reason for people not cycling, which is a pretty understandable reason because gambling your life on the hope that the guy behind you isn't having a bad day isn't altogether appealing. Drivers do act like they own the road on a very regular basis (and will tell you as much if you suggest allocating any fraction of it to something that isn't a car, despite the aforementioned reality that their commute is heavily subsidized by everyone else), so the people that decide to cycle despite not having appropriate infrastructure are the ones bold enough to push back against that attitude. When you're used to feeling like all of this black stuff exists just for you and only you because you're a special little boy, it's to be expected that being told you're not special and you have to share it with other people is going to rub you the wrong way. But you're not particularly special and you do have to share it with other people, so you might want to get used to that.

hockey7318 posted...

Pass them when you can and when you can't just take a big deep breath and wait.

The number of people that blame cyclists for "forcing" them to pass unsafely is really kind of ridiculous. Unless they're like shooting at you or something, nobody ever "forces" you to pass them. If you pass them unsafely, that's a choice you and only you made. Either wait for an opportunity to pass safely or just accept that you don't need to get to the next red light 12 seconds sooner and don't pass.