What American Cities are Missing: Bikes by the Thousands



B

Bolwerk

Guest
George Conklin wrote:
> "Amy Blankenship" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>> "George Conklin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]
>>> "Bolwerk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]

>> ...
>>>>>>> "exploitation of workers"? Ridiculous! It's called capitalism and
>>>>>>> it's
>>>>>>> not exploitative. I sometimes agree with you but your wrong this
>>>>>>> time.
>>>>>> George only likes market forces when they encourage things he likes
>>>>>> anyway...
>>>>> Well doesn't everyone? That's the purpose of market forces... to
>>> encourage
>>>>> "things you like".
>>>> Amy's characterization of George is hilariously apt. He's posted
>>>> endorsing wealth redistribution away from cities. The justification?
>>>> They apparently steal from the hinterlands. Somehow.
>>> Poverty today is concentrated in rural areas. Cities have driven the
>>> price
>>> of food down, down, down.
>>> I suggest you understand the demography of poverty these days, which you
>>> obviously do not.

>> The US government and chains like Wal-Mart drive the food prices down.
>>

>
> The price paid to the farmer is down in all nations, and they don't have
> Wal-Mart to blame. Cities are the problem. Politicians are afraid of urban
> riots in the third world, and as a result poverty ends up being in rural
> areas.


No, national governments are probably to blame. Cities generally don't
farm themselves, and therefore rarely have authority to control such
matters. Maybe there's a rare case of urban areas outvoting rural ones,
but urban areas aren't even the plurality in the United States, much
less the majority.

As for third world cities, they probably often have considerably more
poverty than rural areas.
 
D

donquijote1954

Guest
On May 31, 11:48 am, Bolwerk <[email protected]> wrote:
> Amy Blankenship wrote:
> > "donquijote1954" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected]
> >> If it is 16 times for an SUV vs. car, it must be like 160 times more
> >> deadly in a semi vs. car. Imagine what it would be if semi drivers
> >> were as poorly trained and as careless as SUV drivers. Probably worse
> >> than Iraq.

>
> > Are there a lot of SUV drivers in Iraq?

>
> Hummers :-D


You better not be seeing in one over there. They are the sitting ducks
I hear.
 
D

Dane Buson

Guest
In rec.bicycles.misc Bolwerk <[email protected]> wrote:
> Dane Buson wrote:
>
>> Personally, I'd like it if it required a little more than fogging a
>> mirror and $25 to obtain and keep a license.
>>
>> I think if most drivers ponder it for a moment, they might agree with
>> me. Wouldn't it be nice if the least capable of the drivers simply
>> weren't on the road?

>
> It'd be great, but it's not really practical, sadly. The worst part is
> that the incompetents tend to live in places most dependent on the
> automobile.


In every other 1st world nation it is much much more expensive and
difficult to get a license. If someone can't drive a vehicle safely,
they shouldn't be driving. I have very little sympathy for someone
being dependent on an automobile and not driving it responsibly.

--
Dane Buson - [email protected]
air, n.:
A nutritious substance supplied by a bountiful Providence for the
fattening of the poor.
-- Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"
 
G

george conklin

Guest
"Bolwerk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> George Conklin wrote:
>> "Bolwerk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]
>>> Amy Blankenship wrote:
>>>> "George Conklin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>> news:[email protected]
>>>>> Pushing the labor laws back to those of the third world is not a

>> viable
>>>>> goal. Such work is abusive, and if you pull the pedicab yourself,
>>>>> then
>>>>> you
>>>>> are abusing yourself.
>>> I guess any work that involves physical exertion is "abusive." Like,
>>> say, construction, carpentry...um, farming?
>>>
>>>> George believes that everyone in the US should be free...
>>>> to do things George approves of.
>>> I'm starting to wonder if George knows what George approves of.

>>
>> Pushing third world abuses into the USA is no victory for anyone but this
>> fool.

>
> You have a funny notion of what "third world abuse" is. I would think it
> amounts more to something like working your fingers raw in a sweat shop
> for 17 hours a day, seven days a week.
>
> I don't know for sure, but if I was to venture a guess, I'd say pedicab
> operation is probably better pay than burger flipping, and healthier.


Except it is not healthy. It is abusive of the body. It wears out the
body in about 5 years. That is why pedicabs are being banned by those who
know what is going on in nations where they have them.
 
G

george conklin

Guest
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> I'm wondering at what point George thinks bicycling with cargo becomes
> abuse.
>
> When I go bicycle touring with 50 lbs of gear in panniers, is that
> "third world abuse"?
>
> When I go shopping with a trailer and ride home with 200 lbs of
> household supplies, is that "third world abuse"?
>
> When I load my kids up for a ride on our tandem/trailer combo, and lug
> around 100+ lbs of passengers for the fun of it, is that is that "third
> world abuse"?
>
> Or is it only "third world abuse" if I were to carry passengers for
> $10/hour plus tips, with benefits, subject to OSHA regulations, while
> covered by unemployment and workers' compensation insurance?


Pedicabs are being discouraged and banned because those who do that kind
of work basically wear themselves out in about 5 years. It is highly
abusive. Going to the store every now and then is not the same thing, but
as you know, exercise freaks end up with bad knees, bad feet, arthritis and
artifical joints. You will too.
 
S

Stephen Sprunk

Guest
"Dane Buson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> In every other 1st world nation it is much much more expensive and
> difficult to get a license. If someone can't drive a vehicle safely,
> they shouldn't be driving. I have very little sympathy for someone
> being dependent on an automobile and not driving it responsibly.


Most, if not all, states have various laws that allow for revocation of a
license under various conditions. However, there is no periodic testing and
it's based on various crimes one commits, like reckless driving or DWI, and
typically one gets the license back automatically after a period of time.
In a sense, it's left to the insurance companies -- if someone will insure
you, after considering your driving record, you're assumed to be competent.
This could definitely be improved.

Still, revoking licenses doesn't do much good. Something like 25% of
drivers here are unlicensed, and they're only caught if they happen to
commit some other crime like speeding. This is, unfortunately, the primary
way that illegal aliens are caught here: they get stopped for speeding (or
get in an accident and are too injured to run), arrested because they don't
have a license, and deported if INS can prove they aren't in the country
legally. OTOH, if someone is a decent driver, they can go for years without
a license and nobody will ever know. As a response, the cops now pull
people over who _aren't_ speeding, claiming that's a sign of DWI. The logic
of assuming people who _aren't_ committing a crime are criminals is amazing.

S

--
Stephen Sprunk "Those people who think they know everything
CCIE #3723 are a great annoyance to those of us who do."
K5SSS --Isaac Asimov


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
 
A

Amy Blankenship

Guest
"Dane Buson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> In rec.bicycles.misc Bolwerk <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Dane Buson wrote:
>>
>>> Personally, I'd like it if it required a little more than fogging a
>>> mirror and $25 to obtain and keep a license.
>>>
>>> I think if most drivers ponder it for a moment, they might agree with
>>> me. Wouldn't it be nice if the least capable of the drivers simply
>>> weren't on the road?

>>
>> It'd be great, but it's not really practical, sadly. The worst part is
>> that the incompetents tend to live in places most dependent on the
>> automobile.

>
> In every other 1st world nation it is much much more expensive and
> difficult to get a license. If someone can't drive a vehicle safely,
> they shouldn't be driving. I have very little sympathy for someone
> being dependent on an automobile and not driving it responsibly.


In every other first world nation, it is feasible to live without owning a
car.
 
A

Amy Blankenship

Guest
"george conklin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
>
> "Bolwerk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>> George Conklin wrote:
>>> "Bolwerk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]
>>>> Amy Blankenship wrote:


>> I don't know for sure, but if I was to venture a guess, I'd say pedicab
>> operation is probably better pay than burger flipping, and healthier.

>
> Except it is not healthy. It is abusive of the body. It wears out the
> body in about 5 years. That is why pedicabs are being banned by those who
> know what is going on in nations where they have them.


Let's ban all professional sports, then, and anything else where anyone is
doing anything strenuous. Let's let everyone die from heart disease
instead.
 
A

Amy Blankenship

Guest
"Dane Buson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> In rec.bicycles.misc Amy Blankenship <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>> "Dane Buson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> In rec.bicycles.misc Bolwerk <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> It'd be great, but it's not really practical, sadly. The worst part is
>>>> that the incompetents tend to live in places most dependent on the
>>>> automobile.
>>>
>>> In every other 1st world nation it is much much more expensive and
>>> difficult to get a license. If someone can't drive a vehicle safely,
>>> they shouldn't be driving. I have very little sympathy for someone
>>> being dependent on an automobile and not driving it responsibly.

>>
>> In every other first world nation, it is feasible to live without owning
>> a
>> car.

>
> How much of that is cause and how much of that is effect? I rather
> think that if people find it harder to have a license, we'll see more
> people arranging their lives to live without cars.


I doubt it. We'd have to start changing the way we build things. I would
have to plant a much bigger garden and be way more serious about it than I
am if I wanted to survive without a car. Many people I know would probably
starve if they did not have one.
 
J

Joe the Aroma

Guest
"Amy Blankenship" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
>
> "Dane Buson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>> In rec.bicycles.misc Amy Blankenship <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>> "Dane Buson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>> In rec.bicycles.misc Bolwerk <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> It'd be great, but it's not really practical, sadly. The worst part
>>>>> is
>>>>> that the incompetents tend to live in places most dependent on the
>>>>> automobile.
>>>>
>>>> In every other 1st world nation it is much much more expensive and
>>>> difficult to get a license. If someone can't drive a vehicle safely,
>>>> they shouldn't be driving. I have very little sympathy for someone
>>>> being dependent on an automobile and not driving it responsibly.
>>>
>>> In every other first world nation, it is feasible to live without owning
>>> a
>>> car.

>>
>> How much of that is cause and how much of that is effect? I rather
>> think that if people find it harder to have a license, we'll see more
>> people arranging their lives to live without cars.

>
> I doubt it. We'd have to start changing the way we build things. I would
> have to plant a much bigger garden and be way more serious about it than I
> am if I wanted to survive without a car. Many people I know would
> probably starve if they did not have one.


I live in Allston, MA. I could survive without a car if I wanted to, but I
honestly like my car and I like driving.
 
J

Joe the Aroma

Guest
"Amy Blankenship" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:2YE7i.9346$dy1.323[email protected]

> In every other first world nation, it is feasible to live without owning a
> car.


It's feasible here too, it just makes you uncool. Personally, I love my car.
 
P

Pat

Guest
On May 31, 5:10 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
<[email protected]> wrote:
> "Dane Buson" <[email protected]een.edu> wrote in message
>
> news:[email protected]
>
>
>
> > In rec.bicycles.misc Amy Blankenship <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >> "Dane Buson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >>> In rec.bicycles.misc Bolwerk <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> >>>> It'd be great, but it's not really practical, sadly. The worst part is
> >>>> that the incompetents tend to live in places most dependent on the
> >>>> automobile.

>
> >>> In every other 1st world nation it is much much more expensive and
> >>> difficult to get a license. If someone can't drive a vehicle safely,
> >>> they shouldn't be driving. I have very little sympathy for someone
> >>> being dependent on an automobile and not driving it responsibly.

>
> >> In every other first world nation, it is feasible to live without owning
> >> a
> >> car.

>
> > How much of that is cause and how much of that is effect? I rather
> > think that if people find it harder to have a license, we'll see more
> > people arranging their lives to live without cars.

>
> I doubt it. We'd have to start changing the way we build things. I would
> have to plant a much bigger garden and be way more serious about it than I
> am if I wanted to survive without a car. Many people I know would probably
> starve if they did not have one.


Don't sweat it. All of the anti-car and ride-a-bike people live in
cities where it might be feasible to like without a car. They are
very ego-centric and forget that people live in rural areas. Live
without a car? Not likely. It's 20 miles to the nearest Walmart.
Oops, did I say Walmart. Sorry. Here, we have two small grocery
stores that are on the Reservation, but no clothing stores or anything
like that. Plus no public transporation except 1 inter-city bus per
day and the Nation's bus service for the Elders. Someday they'll
recognize that people still live in the boonies.
 
A

Amy Blankenship

Guest
"Pat" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> On May 31, 5:10 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> "Dane Buson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>
>> news:[email protected]
>>
>>
>>
>> > In rec.bicycles.misc Amy Blankenship
>> > <[email protected]>
>> > wrote:
>> >> "Dane Buson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >>> In rec.bicycles.misc Bolwerk <[email protected]> wrote:

>>
>> >>>> It'd be great, but it's not really practical, sadly. The worst part
>> >>>> is
>> >>>> that the incompetents tend to live in places most dependent on the
>> >>>> automobile.

>>
>> >>> In every other 1st world nation it is much much more expensive and
>> >>> difficult to get a license. If someone can't drive a vehicle safely,
>> >>> they shouldn't be driving. I have very little sympathy for someone
>> >>> being dependent on an automobile and not driving it responsibly.

>>
>> >> In every other first world nation, it is feasible to live without
>> >> owning
>> >> a
>> >> car.

>>
>> > How much of that is cause and how much of that is effect? I rather
>> > think that if people find it harder to have a license, we'll see more
>> > people arranging their lives to live without cars.

>>
>> I doubt it. We'd have to start changing the way we build things. I
>> would
>> have to plant a much bigger garden and be way more serious about it than
>> I
>> am if I wanted to survive without a car. Many people I know would
>> probably
>> starve if they did not have one.

>
> Don't sweat it. All of the anti-car and ride-a-bike people live in
> cities where it might be feasible to like without a car. They are
> very ego-centric and forget that people live in rural areas. Live
> without a car? Not likely. It's 20 miles to the nearest Walmart.
> Oops, did I say Walmart. Sorry. Here, we have two small grocery
> stores that are on the Reservation, but no clothing stores or anything
> like that. Plus no public transporation except 1 inter-city bus per
> day and the Nation's bus service for the Elders. Someday they'll
> recognize that people still live in the boonies.


There are plenty of urban and suburban areas where it is also not safe to
ride a bike.
 

Guest
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...

> Pedicabs are being discouraged and banned because those who do that kind
> of work basically wear themselves out in about 5 years.


Not true of any of the pedicab operators I've known, but for the sake of
argument, we can pretend they're all statistical outliers.

> It is highly
> abusive.


It's easier on the body than drywall installation, ditch digging, or
meat packing, judging by disability rates.

> Going to the store every now and then is not the same thing, but
> as you know, exercise freaks end up with bad knees, bad feet, arthritis and
> artifical joints. You will too.


Could be. I've only been at it 30-some years, who knows what the future
will bring.

On the other hand, people around the world manage to cycle for work and
pleasure well into their 70s and beyond.

--
[email protected] is Joshua Putnam
<http://www.phred.org/~josh/>
Updated Infrared Photography Gallery:
<http://www.phred.org/~josh/photo/ir.html>
 
C

Clark F Morris

Guest
On Thu, 31 May 2007 13:58:13 -0500, "Amy Blankenship"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
>"Dane Buson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]
>> In rec.bicycles.misc Bolwerk <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Dane Buson wrote:
>>>
>>>> Personally, I'd like it if it required a little more than fogging a
>>>> mirror and $25 to obtain and keep a license.
>>>>
>>>> I think if most drivers ponder it for a moment, they might agree with
>>>> me. Wouldn't it be nice if the least capable of the drivers simply
>>>> weren't on the road?
>>>
>>> It'd be great, but it's not really practical, sadly. The worst part is
>>> that the incompetents tend to live in places most dependent on the
>>> automobile.

>>
>> In every other 1st world nation it is much much more expensive and
>> difficult to get a license. If someone can't drive a vehicle safely,
>> they shouldn't be driving. I have very little sympathy for someone
>> being dependent on an automobile and not driving it responsibly.

>
>In every other first world nation, it is feasible to live without owning a
>car.

Probably not in the more remote rural areas and probably not in new
sprawled suburban areas.
>
 
B

Bill

Guest
Clark F Morris wrote:
> On Thu, 31 May 2007 13:58:13 -0500, "Amy Blankenship"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> "Dane Buson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]
>>> In rec.bicycles.misc Bolwerk <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Dane Buson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Personally, I'd like it if it required a little more than fogging a
>>>>> mirror and $25 to obtain and keep a license.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think if most drivers ponder it for a moment, they might agree with
>>>>> me. Wouldn't it be nice if the least capable of the drivers simply
>>>>> weren't on the road?
>>>> It'd be great, but it's not really practical, sadly. The worst part is
>>>> that the incompetents tend to live in places most dependent on the
>>>> automobile.
>>> In every other 1st world nation it is much much more expensive and
>>> difficult to get a license. If someone can't drive a vehicle safely,
>>> they shouldn't be driving. I have very little sympathy for someone
>>> being dependent on an automobile and not driving it responsibly.

>> In every other first world nation, it is feasible to live without owning a
>> car.

> Probably not in the more remote rural areas and probably not in new
> sprawled suburban areas.


I hate the cross posting but agree on the nature of rural living. My 2
LBS even are over 6 miles through hairy traffic and I moved to a small
town to get away from the traffic. As for shopping, it can't be done on
a bike unless the items are very small and local. This is due to the
American way of sprawl, and I can't fix it by becoming a target. The
bridges I have to cross have to be done one the sidewalk on one (Freeway
and 65 MPH) and the other is not big enough to haul even a small bicycle
trailer. When I need to buy a new A/C unit or refrigerator (big
appliance) good luck with a bike. Home improvement supplies are another
big item. Electronics for my computer involves a 45 mile trip each way
to Sacramento or pay twice as much for a very limited selection.
We don't all live in big cities and don't want to be forced into it.
Some of us actually have to go to business meetings and those are beyond
bicycle range. The other factor is how are the suits going to take
someone serious when they show up on a bicycle? I like to ride but in my
business I have to put on a professional face. That's the way life works
unless you are a city office drone.
Sorry, but a reality check is needed by some of the bike fanatics.
I try to drive my most economical car (35 MPG) on these trips but won't
spend more than it is worth to buy a hybrid (yet, at least).
Bill (realistic) Baka
 
B

Bill

Guest
Pat wrote:
> On May 31, 5:10 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> "Dane Buson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>
>> news:[email protected]
>>
>>
>>
>>> In rec.bicycles.misc Amy Blankenship <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>> "Dane Buson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>> In rec.bicycles.misc Bolwerk <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> It'd be great, but it's not really practical, sadly. The worst part is
>>>>>> that the incompetents tend to live in places most dependent on the
>>>>>> automobile.
>>>>> In every other 1st world nation it is much much more expensive and
>>>>> difficult to get a license. If someone can't drive a vehicle safely,
>>>>> they shouldn't be driving. I have very little sympathy for someone
>>>>> being dependent on an automobile and not driving it responsibly.
>>>> In every other first world nation, it is feasible to live without owning
>>>> a
>>>> car.
>>> How much of that is cause and how much of that is effect? I rather
>>> think that if people find it harder to have a license, we'll see more
>>> people arranging their lives to live without cars.

>> I doubt it. We'd have to start changing the way we build things. I would
>> have to plant a much bigger garden and be way more serious about it than I
>> am if I wanted to survive without a car. Many people I know would probably
>> starve if they did not have one.

>
> Don't sweat it. All of the anti-car and ride-a-bike people live in
> cities where it might be feasible to like without a car. They are
> very ego-centric and forget that people live in rural areas. Live
> without a car? Not likely. It's 20 miles to the nearest Walmart.
> Oops, did I say Walmart. Sorry. Here, we have two small grocery
> stores that are on the Reservation, but no clothing stores or anything
> like that. Plus no public transporation except 1 inter-city bus per
> day and the Nation's bus service for the Elders. Someday they'll
> recognize that people still live in the boonies.
>

Well said. City dwellers are a rather biased lot.
Bill Baka
 
G

george conklin

Guest
"Bill" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Pat wrote:
>> On May 31, 5:10 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> "Dane Buson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>
>>> news:[email protected]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> In rec.bicycles.misc Amy Blankenship
>>>> <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> "Dane Buson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>>> In rec.bicycles.misc Bolwerk <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>> It'd be great, but it's not really practical, sadly. The worst part
>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>> that the incompetents tend to live in places most dependent on the
>>>>>>> automobile.
>>>>>> In every other 1st world nation it is much much more expensive and
>>>>>> difficult to get a license. If someone can't drive a vehicle safely,
>>>>>> they shouldn't be driving. I have very little sympathy for someone
>>>>>> being dependent on an automobile and not driving it responsibly.
>>>>> In every other first world nation, it is feasible to live without
>>>>> owning
>>>>> a
>>>>> car.
>>>> How much of that is cause and how much of that is effect? I rather
>>>> think that if people find it harder to have a license, we'll see more
>>>> people arranging their lives to live without cars.
>>> I doubt it. We'd have to start changing the way we build things. I
>>> would
>>> have to plant a much bigger garden and be way more serious about it than
>>> I
>>> am if I wanted to survive without a car. Many people I know would
>>> probably
>>> starve if they did not have one.

>>
>> Don't sweat it. All of the anti-car and ride-a-bike people live in
>> cities where it might be feasible to like without a car. They are
>> very ego-centric and forget that people live in rural areas. Live
>> without a car? Not likely. It's 20 miles to the nearest Walmart.
>> Oops, did I say Walmart. Sorry. Here, we have two small grocery
>> stores that are on the Reservation, but no clothing stores or anything
>> like that. Plus no public transporation except 1 inter-city bus per
>> day and the Nation's bus service for the Elders. Someday they'll
>> recognize that people still live in the boonies.
>>

> Well said. City dwellers are a rather biased lot.
> Bill Baka


But then they would say, "Raise taxes and provide 'affordable' bus
transit to the Reservation."
 
G

george conklin

Guest
"Bill" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Clark F Morris wrote:
>> On Thu, 31 May 2007 13:58:13 -0500, "Amy Blankenship"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> "Dane Buson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]
>>>> In rec.bicycles.misc Bolwerk <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> Dane Buson wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Personally, I'd like it if it required a little more than fogging a
>>>>>> mirror and $25 to obtain and keep a license.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think if most drivers ponder it for a moment, they might agree with
>>>>>> me. Wouldn't it be nice if the least capable of the drivers simply
>>>>>> weren't on the road?
>>>>> It'd be great, but it's not really practical, sadly. The worst part
>>>>> is
>>>>> that the incompetents tend to live in places most dependent on the
>>>>> automobile.
>>>> In every other 1st world nation it is much much more expensive and
>>>> difficult to get a license. If someone can't drive a vehicle safely,
>>>> they shouldn't be driving. I have very little sympathy for someone
>>>> being dependent on an automobile and not driving it responsibly.
>>> In every other first world nation, it is feasible to live without owning
>>> a car.

>> Probably not in the more remote rural areas and probably not in new
>> sprawled suburban areas.

>
> I hate the cross posting but agree on the nature of rural living. My 2 LBS
> even are over 6 miles through hairy traffic and I moved to a small town to
> get away from the traffic. As for shopping, it can't be done on a bike
> unless the items are very small and local. This is due to the American way
> of sprawl, and I can't fix it by becoming a target.


Cities have always "sprawled" Even Queen Elizabeth I was against London
growing. The term itself shows a strong anti-urban bias.