Will Bicycle Theft Increase? - Page 2

On Mon, 17 Feb 2003 05:03:29 -0600, Steve McDonald wrote:

> Suppose the petroleum supply is reduced enough, so that not only the price of gas keeps
> rising, but it becomes hard to buy or completely unavailable at times. Will this result in
> bikes becoming so much in demand, that they will be stolen in greatly increased numbers?
> Will the term, "bike-jacking", become part of our vocabulary?

I don't think so. People will either steal gas (hey, they do this already) and also steal any other
kind of personal property they can lay their felonious little hands on, to sell for money, which
they use to buy all sorts of things: gas, dope, Cameros, Rottweilers, trailer houses and all the
other status tokens of the dead-beat.

Things would really have to go to hell before gas became completely unavailable at any price, which
is what it would take to force most people onto bikes. People are EXTREMELY motivated to not let
this happen. Wars will be fought before willingly giving up the cheap-n-easy transportation that we
Americans have come to expect. Once the gas price rises to a point where most people have to
curtail their driving habits, fingers will begin pointing at 'these people' or 'those people' who
are 'unfairly' refusing to sell us oil at a price we like. Maybe we'll call it 'Economic
Terrorism'. But oh yeah, whatever it takes to keep the oil flowing will be done. I'll also surmise
that most Americans and other net importers of oil will support it, once they understand what the
alternatives are.

> Close to 1,000 bikes are stolen (reported) in my community every year. Only a small
> percentage are recovered and the police provide no solution to this.

I'll take this as a statement of fact and not a critisicm of the police. After all, they can't be
everywhere keeping an eye on your bike. Lock that sucker up! The only other strategy is not to have
anything worth stealing. Relying on police to protect your property from theft is about as naive as
relying on the inherent goodness of your fellow man.

I keep my bikes hanging from hooks in the living room. I'd put my TV out on the porch before I'd put
a bike out there. I have a couple of semi-disposable beater bikes for this purpose, I ride them when
I know I'll have to leave them somewhere exposed to thievery.

> I'd advise those who ride regularly to find an old beater or two now, while they're still
> available, in the $25-$50. category and keep them in reserve. During World War II, when no
> new cars were sold, used cars went for a premium price, if one could even be found. I imagine
> that bicycles were very popular then, and also hard to buy. Do any old-timers remember what
> the bicycle availability and usage was back then?

Absolutely, buy some beaters now while they're cheap- theft discouraging bikes, rain bikes,
loan-to-others bikes, ride while you're other bike is in the shop bikes. If our relationship to
China turns sour there might be some trade restrictions on bikes that bump up prices, especially on
the low end.

As far as stockpiling bikes for the Apocalypse, I suppose there's worse things to do. If we run out
of gas there probably won't be as much reason to ride- no food in the stores, no job to go to. Just
stay at home and work on self-sufficiency things like gardening, and pull a trailer of produce to
market to trade for other things you need that you can't produce yourself. Food will be in short
supply so there's probably not enough calories or spare time for recreational riding. Or perhaps
you'll be drafted to fight in World War III. Picture yourself driving around in a tracked SUV,
fighting to preserve the American way of life

Doug Kennedy

On Tue, 18 Feb 2003 06:35:17 -0600, Steve McDonald wrote:

> As I recommended to others, I have two extra $15. to $25. beater bikes from Goodwill stashed
> in my garage. With a little work, I could turn either of them into a passably good ride.
> Anyone think that I'm foolish or overly pessimistic about the future for doing this?

Foolish, no. Having an extra bike or two is entirely reasonable, for practical day-to-day reasons.

Maybe:

1) you like to collect bikes
2) extra bike when one breaks down
3) loan bikes to friends
4) fix up and sell, make money
5) cheap bike to deter theft

Bikes for "The End of the World as We Know It" is just icing on the cake.

Relying on bikes for transportation will also do two more things for you: improve your fitness,
which should make you healthier, and lower your health costs. Also benefits your financial situation
by saving on transportation costs.

I do think you're pessimistic, I doubt the scenario you're describing (no gas) will happen in our
lifetimes. The less likely a scenario is, the less I'm willing to spend on it.

The real cost of owning beaters is paying for the storage space to keep them. You need a little bit
bigger house or apartment, or rent a storage shed. So they really do cost quite a bit more than the
purchase price reflects. I wouldn't buy bikes JUST for the Apocalypse, but since there's so many
other reasons (see above) might as well go for it.

I'm more concered with other possibilities in the future, for example personal financial ruin due to
big medical bills and/or loss of wages. Bikes are just the ticket to prepare for such a contingency,
with their health-improving and money-saving characteristics (I'm not counting my 'recreational'
bikes, of course

Doug Kennedy

>bigrocketman3@webtv.net (Steve McDonald)

wrote in part:

---personal remarks snipped---

>To individuals who have limited resources, the availability of greater numbers of new bicycles
>wouldn't help them much. If their bikes were stolen, especially if it happened repeatedly, cheap,
>old ones might be all they could afford.

---snip----

Of course they might purchase one of the many stolen bikes you envision and secure it better than
they did the last time. Failing that they could join the ranks of the thieves and just steal a
replacement. That *would* be the logical thing to expect in the scenario you've drawn.

If the demand for bikes doubled,
>all the used ones would get snapped up, regardless of how many of the more expensive new ones were
>for sale. If the demand kept growing, before long, all bikes would sell for more and less affluent
>riders who had their wheels stolen would become pedestrians. Then there's the matter of rising
>shoe prices.

---snip---

It's not a zero sum game. That means two things. First, the demand cannot grow endlessly. We're
talking about basic transportation here, not lusting after a 'dream bike'. That *is* an endless
process. Second, those stolen bikes don't just disappear from the market- they go elsewhere. In
terms of sheer numbers sold that market is dominated not by the more expensive bikes but by the
cheapest bikes out there.

> As I recommended to others, I have two extra $15. to $25. beater bikes from Goodwill stashed in my
> garage. With a little work, I could turn either of them into a passably good ride. Anyone think
> that I'm foolish or overly pessimistic about the future for doing this?

I think your worries are baseless but if you want to buy a couple of beaters to fool with, more
power to you. (No pun intended)

Regards, Bob Hunt

"Harris" <n2ah@spam.sprynet.com> wrote in message
news:XM54a.380511$HG.67805373@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
>
> "Steve McDonald" wrote:
>
> > During World War II, when no new cars were sold, used cars went for a premium price, if one
> > could even be found. I imagine that bicycles were very popular then, and also hard to buy. Do
> > any old-timers remember what the bicycle availability and usage was back then?
>
> Go rent the movie "The Bicycle Thief" (in Italian with english sub-titles) which is set in
> post-war Italy.
>

And after that, rent "The Icicle Thief". Compare and contrast.

"Steve McDonald" <bigrocketman3@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:8288-3E522885-83@storefull-2112...wson.webtv.net...
>
> Yes, you missed everything after my first paragraph, where I made some effort to present my
> reasons for disagreement. But, I'm glad that you've turned our exchange in a friendlier
> direction and I'll work at doing that, myself.
>
> To individuals who have limited resources, the availability of greater numbers of new
> bicycles wouldn't help them much. If their bikes were stolen, especially if it happened
> repeatedly, cheap, old ones might be all they could afford. If the demand for bikes doubled,
> all the used ones would get snapped up, regardless of how many of the more expensive new ones
> were for sale. If the demand kept growing, before long, all bikes would sell for more and
> less affluent riders who had their wheels stolen would become pedestrians.

So you're envisioning a scenario where you (informally, sorta-kinda) *rent* your bike rather than
owning it outright?

Tim.

In article <pan.2003.02.18.18.32.03.316543.1398@kennedy.tzo.com>, Doug Kennedy
<news4@kennedy.tzo.com> writes:

> Things would really have to go to hell before gas became completely unavailable at any price,
> which is what it would take to force most people onto bikes.

I figure in those circumstances, people would just modify their car engines to run on methanol, or
canola oil, or coal dust, or Chanel No. 5 if they have to. Actually, R&D in biofuel is still ongoing
-- I dunno if it's really advancing by much, though.

> People are EXTREMELY motivated to not let this happen.

You can say that again.

This thread kinda reminded me of "The Grapes of Wrath", especially the parts about the mad scramble
for anything on wheels (except bicycles).

cheers, Tom

--
-- Powered by FreeBSD Above address is just a spam midden. I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn
[point] bc [point] ca

cnhyf-1045458000@usenet.etext.org (Paul Southworth) wrote in message
news:<fja4a.32642$A%3.405510@ord-read.news.verio.net>...
> In article <MPG.18bb08569d2d1b51989bbf@news.eastlink.ca>, Chris Phillipo
> <cphillipo@ramsays-online.coim> wrote:
> >In article <1458-3E50C181-300@storefull-2111.public.lawson.webtv.net>, bigrocketman3@webtv.net
> >says...
> >>
> >> Suppose the petroleum supply is reduced enough, so that not only the price of gas keeps
> >> rising, but it becomes hard to buy or completely unavailable at times. Will this result
> >> in bikes becoming so much in demand, that they will be stolen in greatly increased
> >> numbers? Will the term, "bike-jacking", become part of our vocabulary?
> >
> >I think they are already being stolen as fast as they are being purchased, there probably
> >wouldn't even be a worth while market for new bikes in college towns if it weren't for the
> >thieves
>
> Doesn't that sort of assume that stolen bikes are removed from the "market"? I thought they were
> part of the market. You don't mean to tell me those thieves are all collectors...?
>
> --Paul

A local pawn shop owner in Texas, tells me that all the bikes he get's are sold in bulk and shipped
to Mexico.

Jack Dingler

"Jack Dingler" <jdingler4@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:21bb06de.0302191120.70a8d155@posting.google.com...

> A local pawn shop owner in Texas, tells me that all the bikes he get's are sold in bulk and
> shipped to Mexico.

Lots of bikes make it to container ships and head for other countries. I remember a bust in Texas a
few years back where they found a couple of containers filled with stolen bikes.

-Buck

I always wondered where stolen bikes went. I figured that it must be organized crime, I don't see
many street hoodlums or pawn shops selling slightly used high end bikes.

"Buck" <j u n k m a i l @ g a l a x y c o r p . c o m> wrote in message
news:faR4a.7516$DV.339620@twister.austin.rr.com...
> "Jack Dingler" <jdingler4@attbi.com> wrote in message
> news:21bb06de.0302191120.70a8d155@posting.google.com...
>
> > A local pawn shop owner in Texas, tells me that all the bikes he get's are sold in bulk and
> > shipped to Mexico.
>
> Lots of bikes make it to container ships and head for other countries. I remember a bust in Texas
> a few years back where they found a couple of containers filled with stolen bikes.
>
> -Buck

A shortage of gas could simply increase the demand for bikes, thus raising their prices, thus
incenting manufacturers to produce more, thus increasing supply, thus bringing prices back down. As
gasoline is not used to produce bikes (directly) the endeavors of driving and bicycle manufacturing
do not compete for the same resource. Therefore a shortage of one thing (gas) will not prohibit the
increased supply of the other (bikes).

"Steve McDonald" <bigrocketman3@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:1458-3E50C181-300@storefull-211...wson.webtv.net...
>
> Suppose the petroleum supply is reduced enough, so that not only the price of gas keeps
> rising, but it becomes hard to buy or completely unavailable at times. Will this result in
> bikes becoming so much in demand, that they will be stolen in greatly increased numbers?
> Will the term, "bike-jacking", become part of our vocabulary?
>
> Close to 1,000 bikes are stolen (reported) in my community every year. Only a small
> percentage are recovered and the police provide no solution to this.
>
> I'd advise those who ride regularly to find an old beater or two now, while they're still
> available, in the $25-$50. category and keep them in reserve. During World War II, when no
> new cars were sold, used cars went for a premium price, if one could even be found. I imagine
> that bicycles were very popular then, and also hard to buy. Do any old-timers remember what
> the bicycle availability and usage was back then?
>
> Steve McDonald

tomk2003@hotmail.com (Tom Keats) wrote in message news:<03h03b.ln1.ln@bud.garden.local>...
> In article <pan.2003.02.18.18.32.03.316543.1398@kennedy.tzo.com>, Doug Kennedy
> <news4@kennedy.tzo.com> writes:
>
> > Things would really have to go to hell before gas became completely unavailable at any price,
> > which is what it would take to force most people onto bikes.

Fuel will always be available at some price, somewhere. That doesn't mean people will have access,
enough cash, the right contacts, etc...

The current high prices are due to Venezuela, being down 3.4 million barrels a day in production.
They've come back up the last week or so, another 1 million barrels and that has increased supply
some. But it will take months for that increase to hit US pumps. The US has also contracted an
additional 500,000 barrels a day from Iraq to help offset the shortage.

Since the year 2000 oil production has essentially levelled off for the first time in a century.
This event is really unparralled. The 1990s was probably the last chance for the world to do
serious work to find alternatives. In a few years, worldwide oil production is expected to begin
falling, forever.

http://hubbertpeak.com

> I figure in those circumstances, people would just modify their car engines to run on methanol, or
> canola oil, or coal dust, or Chanel No. 5 if they have to. Actually, R&D in biofuel is still
> ongoing -- I dunno if it's really advancing by much, though.

Biodiesel has been around for decades. It's pretty mature now. We could probably produce enough to
keep the farmers going and provide some for military jeeps, but unless people can learn to stop
eating, it won't be a widespread commercial product. Only so much sunlight can be converted to oil
in a season.

> > People are EXTREMELY motivated to not let this happen.
>
> You can say that again.
>
> This thread kinda reminded me of "The Grapes of Wrath", especially the parts about the mad
> scramble for anything on wheels (except bicycles).
>
>
> cheers, Tom

Jack (Getting his bicycle back in order) Dingler

"Tom Keats" <tomk2003@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:03h03b.ln1.ln@bud.garden.local...

> In article
<pan.2003.02.18.18.32.03.316543.1398@kennedy.tzo.com>,
> Doug Kennedy <news4@kennedy.tzo.com> writes:
>
> > Things would really have to go to hell before gas became
completely
> > unavailable at any price, which is what it would take to
force most people
> > onto bikes.
>
> I figure in those circumstances, people would just modify
their
> car engines to run on methanol, or canola oil, or coal
dust, or
> Chanel No. 5 if they have to.

We once ran a Lamborghini on hi-test booze from a corner liquor store, after running out of gas. It
ran poorly but it did run, well enough to get to a gas station. True story, I swear.

> Actually, R&D in biofuel is still ongoing -- I dunno if it's really advancing by much,
though.

Biodiesel has been pretty well R'ed and D'ed. It's just more expensive to produce. That's not
necessarily a show-stopper for all time, but it is in the current economy. You can buy it in the US
for about $4 a gallon, but that doesn't include road taxes or normal distribution costs.

A few farmers around here use it to run their tractors and stuff. They can make it themselves in
small quanities for about half the cost of buying petro diesel. Large scale commercial production is
another story, though.

Matt O.

"Jack Dingler" <jdingler4@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:21bb06de.0302191120.70a8d155@posting.google.com...

> A local pawn shop owner in Texas, tells me that all the
bikes he get's
> are sold in bulk and shipped to Mexico.

I wonder how many are stolen in bulk and shipped to Mexico! Cars sure are...

Matt O.

"KBH" <kbh9@hollasch.com> wrote in message news:4ZU4a.165940$2H6.3163@sccrnsc04...

> A shortage of gas could simply increase the demand for
bikes, thus raising
> their prices, thus incenting manufacturers to produce
more, thus increasing
> supply, thus bringing prices back down. As gasoline is
not used to produce
> bikes (directly) the endeavors of driving and bicycle
manufacturing do not
> compete for the same resource. Therefore a shortage of
one thing (gas) will
> not prohibit the increased supply of the other (bikes).

Well, according to a friend who worked there, Supergo saw a big spike in sales when CA really got
tough on auto insurance enforcement a few years ago. Apparently, a lot of people decided all of a
sudden that it wasn't worth the risk getting caught driving without insurance, so they bought bikes
and rode instead. Public transport saw a spike in ridership at the same time.

This is sort of analagous because it has to do with a sudden increase in the cost of driving.

Matt O.

Making bio-diesel is low tech, that I doubt that economies of scale produce significant
cost savings.

A farmer can make the stuff from materials, that come right off the farm.

Because of the simplicity, it's also one of the few artificial fuels that have an easy to calculate
Energy Returned On Energy Invested. Figures from memory put it at 5:1.

No way it's going to replace our 750,000,000 barrels of oil / year cosumption habit though.

I see no alternative but for the US to get used to cycling.

Jack Dingler

"Matt O'Toole" <matt@deltanet.com> wrote in message
news:<FOi5a.18517$0L3.7107483@news2.news.adelphia.net>...
> "Tom Keats" <tomk2003@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:03h03b.ln1.ln@bud.garden.local...
>
> > In article
> <pan.2003.02.18.18.32.03.316543.1398@kennedy.tzo.com>,
> > Doug Kennedy <news4@kennedy.tzo.com> writes:
> >
> > > Things would really have to go to hell before gas became
> completely
> > > unavailable at any price, which is what it would take to
> force most people
> > > onto bikes.
> >
> > I figure in those circumstances, people would just modify
> their
> > car engines to run on methanol, or canola oil, or coal
> dust, or
> > Chanel No. 5 if they have to.
>
> We once ran a Lamborghini on hi-test booze from a corner liquor store, after running out of gas.
> It ran poorly but it did run, well enough to get to a gas station. True story, I swear.
>
> > Actually, R&D in biofuel is still ongoing -- I dunno if it's really advancing by much,
> though.
>
> Biodiesel has been pretty well R'ed and D'ed. It's just more expensive to produce. That's not
> necessarily a show-stopper for all time, but it is in the current economy. You can buy it in the
> US for about $4 a gallon, but that doesn't include road taxes or normal distribution costs.
>
> A few farmers around here use it to run their tractors and stuff. They can make it themselves in
> small quanities for about half the cost of buying petro diesel. Large scale commercial production
> is another story, though.
>
> Matt O.