Those bicycle builders big mistake! - Page 3

Jim Adney wrote:
>
> On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 02:47:44 +0000 Garrison Hilliard <garrison@efn.org> wrote:
>
<snip>
>
> This ignores the fact that the bicycle is a major source of pragmatic transportation for people
> and goods for a majority of the people of the world. It is only in the 1st world countries where
> the bicycle is seen as only a recreational product.
>
<snip>

Most of the world, and most of Europe, consider a bicycle serious transportation. Only the US,
Canada, and a few European countries do not treat bicycles as serious vehicles.

In rec.bicycles.misc Mike Schwab <MASchwab@wamusa.com> wrote:

: Jim Adney wrote:
:>
:> On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 02:47:44 +0000 Garrison Hilliard <garrison@efn.org> wrote:

:> This ignores the fact that the bicycle is a major source of pragmatic transportation for people
:> and goods for a majority of the people of the world. It is only in the 1st world countries where
:> the bicycle is seen as only a recreational product.

: Most of the world, and most of Europe, consider a bicycle serious transportation. Only the US,
: Canada, and a few European countries do not treat bicycles as serious vehicles.

Not sure how serious the bicycle is in the third world... consider say Africa. If everything is in
walking distance, you don't need it. It might be just a specialty item for the rich. The roads might
be too bad for cycling. And often the local power elites are so fond of cars they build the roads
for them, not bicycles.

Traffic planners also seem to assume the bike is something people ride leisurely for recreation, not
something that is supposed to provide fast transportation.

--
Risto Varanka | http://www.helsinki.fi/~rvaranka/ risto.varanka@helsinki.fi