Liveable communities take away my rights

[shootingstar]

Got into an argument with another person in a different internet forum.

His basic schtick was:

He didn't want his tax dollars spent on designing or changing his community to make it more liveable. Meaning he didn't want money spent on cycling infrastructure, more transit which the latter he never uses.

This is what he said to me :

I know your plan. Provide (cycling) and mass transit free benefits. Then remove parking spaces. Its damn hard to have a car... if there is no place to put it. This is done with the full wisdom and knowledge that if government subsidies poverty... they create it. Soon the percentage of the population that can even afford cars... or the freedom to travel about will dwindle.

Then whatever the powers-that-be decide should be the price to move about.. will be the price. In your plan for the good people of Canada... in thirty years they will need a cycling license, another license for the bicycle, a toll ticket for the government provided paths and lanes, and a bicycle parking permit.

Restrictive social class governments that seek to limit the abilities, imaginations, and freedom of expression and movements of its people has always created refugees. We will welcome your refugees. Thank god... America has Detroit.

Basically government intervention, planning and legislation just sucks for him. That cycling to him = poverty/less monied folks

[Crankin]

I guess that guy hasn't seen how much most cycling gear costs...
But of course, it would be hard for someone who is so car-centric to understand why a person would choose to ride a bike to work, or want a liveable community.

[zoom-zoom]

Ahhh...yes, thank god for Detroit. 'Cause they sure didn't cost the American public any money.

What a tool.

[lauraelmore1033]

Ask him to cite specific examples where creating great cycling infrastructure has created poverty. i'm pretty sure it is the opposite. I think living in a culture where big industry is subsidised (as it bloody well is in the us!) creates a population indentured to those industries (like car manufacturers).

[NbyNW]

IMHO, I'm not sure if it's possible to have a rational conversation with this person, much less a reasoned argument.

[shootingstar]

A few months ago, I was appalled during an orientation session for new employees (I work for a municipal govn't), the most senior ranking government manager who welcomed us, after asking how many people took local transit (bus, light rail), said that we "had to balance use of our money" and not focus so much about transit.

He justified his remarks, by saying he took transit himself 1-2 times per week. Then he said as a car driver, he didn't want all his tax dollars for transit.

Over 40% of the new employees in that room that he welcomed, took transit daily to get to work. There was approx. 30 employees in the room. (The city has 14,000 employees on the payroll. Yea, freakin' huge employer.)

While yes, one has to balance city budget-spending priorities, the context of even making such remarks by him (earning the highest salary of all bureaucrats in the city), it felt like a slap in the face for us in the room.

[Irulan]

good luck changing his mind...

[Trek420]

good luck changing his mind...

You found my favorite!

I'm not sure how the highest high mucky-muck of my current employer feels about cycling/mass transit. I do know how my co-workers and even some middle to upper level management feel about my riding.

When I ride or walk to work some are interested in active commuting for fitness or even to save money. I forget where I read, maybe here on TE that the average person saves $7,000 by going car free, or down to one car if a multiple vehicle family or just "car light".

I agree with NbyNW that it's not possible to have a rational conversation sometimes. Choose your battles. You have the right:

To be the first generation of kids who'll die younger than their parents due in large part to poor health/nutrition.

To have health care costs being the largest cause of bankruptcy.*

To waste days, weeks, months ... years of my life commuting to work, stuck in traffic.

To waste " " looking for parking.

For small, local businesses (which may benefit most by livable communities) which actually generate the most jobs to be squeezed out by mega box stores who may benefit most by traditionally suburban/freeway style of planning. Look at this plan here in the Bay Area:

http://www.contracostatimes.com/news...nclick_check=1

"O'Brien said ... the trail -- which would cut through five BART stations -- would run by some of the most densely and underrepresented areas in the county. He said an economic benefit could be felt by the countless small businesses near the corridor, as well as larger retails centers like Bayfair Mall in San Leandro. Additionally, O'Brien points out, the trail could improve pedestrian and bicycle access to other transit hubs, including Amtrak or AC Transit connections."

I've shared my bike lane with motorized wheelchairs, people using walkers. We need to remember that bikeable/walkable communities are accessible communities and work with them.

*woops, I forgot. You're Canadian and don't have to pay for health care

[Koronin]

IMO, it depends on how the design and layout are. There is a town about an hour and a half from where I live that redid one of it's main roads to add a cycling lane. Great on the surface, but horrible in how they did it. They have angled street parking. They put the cycling lane between the lane of traffic (for vehicles) and the parking spots. Everyone felt the cycling lane should have been between the parking spots and the sidewalk as it would have been less danegerous for the cyclists. (This is a beach city that has many inexperienced vacationers renting bikes).

[crazycanuck]

Shootingstar, do you need some journals to support your argument? Cities is a good one.
Tell him to read Jane Jacobs

I think another one would be the healthy cities program by the Australian Heart foundation..

I'm off swimming but i'll think of a few more.

[lph]

The man obviously has no idea of the fact that his "rights" come with a price, a price that may be a bit too high and is often paid by other people. With great power comes great responsibility, isn't that the phrase?*

But people have always complained when the world moved forward. When women got the right to vote, when the slaves were freed, you bet there was someone griping about how this was personally unfair to them.

You could tell the guy that he's welcome to travel as much and as far as he wants, as long as he's not poisoning our common atmosphere or endangering anyone by his speed and mass. Tell him you know someone with a really nice recumbent for sale

I'm not violently anti-car, honest, but it should be fairly obvious that a car-based society has many drawbacks and that encouraging people to cycle more can only be a good thing.

*and where do I have it from anyway? Probably LOTR

[withm]

I suppose that if a family saved $7,000/year by going car-light/free, than much of that $7,000 might be spent in local mom & pop stores that were accessible by bicycle.

[PamNY]

Shootingstar, show him what the EU plans. Wonder what he will think?

[Trek420]

Shootingstar, show him what the EU plans. Wonder what he will think?

Surprisingly long list of communities already doing the car-free thang

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_car-free_places

I suppose that if a family saved $7,000/year by going car-light/free, than much of that $7,000 might be spent in local mom & pop stores that were accessible by bicycle.

They could spend it at Walmart for all I know. It's a $7k raise. Do what with it what you will

A coworker just bought a house in Tracy, a tough, crowded, hour-long commute from our mutual office. She felt she could not afford a home closer. You kidding? In this market? Anywho add the miles, wear tear on the car, time ... it's almost like buying another house.

I think most people whether they drive or bike would like to do at least some errands by foot or on a bike. Most people want liveable communities even if they drive often.

[marni]

and then there is the obvious point that I as a homeowner with a working husband with whom I share a car, pay exactly the same homeowners fees (which pay for local roads),police and fire support, taxes, both state and federal (of which a portion pays for roads and infrastructure) and gasoline taxes for the one car we do use, which also help pay for roads and infrastructure.

This point seems to just sail over the heads of those who object to me sharing the road. I don't pay any less homeowner fees,state and federal taxes for using one less car than other people, although I do pay less gasoline tax. On the other hand I will probably last longer than most of them at least from a healthy life style point of view.