Electric bicycle rider taken off roads for one year

which doesn't solve congestion.
But you'll make it worse by using space for bike lanes, if you want to solve congestion the best way is for buses to be full. If we start getting people use bike lanes then they'll need to have bike tax to cover the maintenance + building of them.
 
But you'll make it worse by using space for bike lanes, if you want to solve congestion the best way is for buses to be full. If we start getting people use bike lanes then they'll need to have bike tax to cover the maintenance + building of them.
no.
 
Anything better than just "no" to add? That doesn't really support your argument.
it should be obviuse,
buses are not viable outside of city centers and never will be. it can take hours and multiple changes to even go 10miles.
even in cities, they are very expensive and unreliable and the cause of many traffic jams.
bike lanes need minimal maintenance and can be maintained through other taxes, just like most things. there is no reason or need to tax. like you suggest.

there's also plenty of paths that they can simply throw dual usage on, i occasionally walk back to my parents and out of the 15miles of pavements, 13miles of that is rarely used by anyone. there is no reason that 13 miles could not be dual use.
 
Last edited:
But you'll make it worse by using space for bike lanes, if you want to solve congestion the best way is for buses to be full. If we start getting people use bike lanes then they'll need to have bike tax to cover the maintenance + building of them.

Roads are funded through general taxation so I don't see why cycle lanes can't be funded the same way.

In 1937 the direct relationship that existed between the tax and government expenditure on public roads was cut, the proceeds being treated as general taxation.[20]
 
I don’t know why you keep going on about horses. I’m not sure I’ve ever seen a horse even at a trot on the road. You certainly wouldn’t get one up to a gallop, and very few horses can hit 40mph anyway. I doubt their hooves would be up to galloping on tarmac for one thing.

You may as well argue that there’s no speed limits for people. I can run down the pavement at 40mph! I’m a menace!

You've never seen a horse trot on the road?! Our group regularly trots along the road, it's not that uncommon. The ****** are seen regularly cantering their horses down the road near the local caravan park.

People are pedestrians, horses are vehicles weighing upto a ton, so no that's completely incomparable.
 
You've never seen a horse trot on the road?! Our group regularly trots along the road, it's not that uncommon. The ****** are seen regularly cantering their horses down the road near the local caravan park.

People are pedestrians, horses are vehicles weighing upto a ton, so no that's completely incomparable.
Ok, maybe I have seen them trotting now you mention it. Nevertheless, I’ve definitely never seen a horse galloping on the road and I doubt it would be terribly happy to do so, so I think the problem is self limiting.
 
But you'll make it worse by using space for bike lanes, if you want to solve congestion the best way is for buses to be full. If we start getting people use bike lanes then they'll need to have bike tax to cover the maintenance + building of them.

But if you have more bike lanes and actually encourage bike and e-bike use instead of demonising it, then you have less people in cars and less need for road space. Do you think places like the Netherlands were just created with bike lanes already? No. They reallocated roads away from cars, made cycling appealing and now everyone does it. You can't just buld more roads for cars to clog up and then go "welp, no one is cycling so lets not even try".
 
I'm now on a down tube pack and crank drive:-

RFb2zlD.jpg

That chain looks a tad short.
 
Mechanical doping.

My brother in law has got a £6000 road bike and kept coming out with stuff like that so I challenged him to ride up Blurton bank (not far but a good test) on his bike and then ride up on my two bikes.
With both my bikes on full assist his lightweight bike was easier to pedal up the bank therefore making him a cheat for buying such an expensive bike.
If I could afford a bike like his I wouldn't need motors.
 
My brother in law has got a £6000 road bike and kept coming out with stuff like that so I challenged him to ride up Blurton bank (not far but a good test) on his bike and then ride up on my two bikes.
With both my bikes on full assist his lightweight bike was easier to pedal up the bank therefore making him a cheat for buying such an expensive bike.
If I could afford a bike like his I wouldn't need motors.

Hmm, my Strava KoM's around the Trough of Bowland would suggest otherwise ;-)
 
My brother in law has got a £6000 road bike and kept coming out with stuff like that so I challenged him to ride up Blurton bank (not far but a good test) on his bike and then ride up on my two bikes.
With both my bikes on full assist his lightweight bike was easier to pedal up the bank therefore making him a cheat for buying such an expensive bike.
If I could afford a bike like his I wouldn't need motors.
Shock that a heavier bike is slower up hill :D
 
Wow, you can't read, unbelievable.
Go back and read again.
You said his lightweight bike was easier to pedal up a hill than your powered bikes on full assist.
Basically, the assist provided by your bikes isn’t enough to overcome the extra weight. [I’m assuming here that his bike weighs less than your bikes?]

You then said, if you could afford a bike like his (lighter) then you wouldn’t need motors (heavy)

If so then what I posted above makes perfect sense - yes? :p
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom