I’m pretty sure it’s safe to assume that many of you reading this are long time viewers of the Youtube channels Not Just Bikes, Climate Town and probably Adam Something. All three of these channels have mentioned in their videos that car companies lobbied governments and pressured urban planners to create infrastructure suited for cars. So if car companies can throw money at politicians to get legislation passed that suit their needs why can’t bike companies counteract by playing at their own game? Hell, shoe companies could ‘counter-lobby’ as well. Nike, Adidas, New Balance, etc. would benefit greatly from walkable and bikeable cities. So why don’t bike companies like Trek, GT and Tern lobby governments to make cities more bikable? They could ask for subsidies so they can open official shops in city centers and with it the promise of employment. I’m pretty there are flaw this approach so I would like to know your thoughts on the matter. Thanks in advance!

  • Maria Elena
    link
    fedilink
    4011 months ago

    @SpiceDealer my guess is the bike companies don’t have as much profit for lobbying, but I like the direction of this. I’d love to see a grassroots movement demanding infrastructure for active travel.

    • @rockSlayer
      link
      English
      411 months ago

      I certainly don’t. It’s just as possible for us to make the same mistakes with bike infrastructure as we did with car infrastructure. The purpose of all types of traffic should be getting people from where they are to where they want to go, but these “bike superhighways” are the same bullshit we’re fighting against with cars.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        711 months ago

        Out of curiosity, what are bike-highways like where you are? The most I’ve seen are bike streets where cars need to yield to bikes, or one way streets that work for bikes both ways

        • @rockSlayer
          link
          English
          311 months ago

          There aren’t any bike highways near me at the moment, though some cities are starting to design bike highways the same way they made highways for cars. I want cities to thoughtfully design their bike infrastructure, instead of designing infrastructure to benefit lobbyists.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            311 months ago

            That’s fair. I am also completely in favour of well thought out bike infrastructure solutions. Bike lanes just for the sake of bike ways with no connection to people’s lives and usage patterns will do us no favours

      • @SpiceDealerOP
        link
        English
        211 months ago

        But we should eliminate the worst forms of transit, shouldn’t we?

        • @rockSlayer
          link
          English
          511 months ago

          Absolutely. But we also need to do thoughtful planning in rolling out our next forms of infrastructure

      • Maria Elena
        link
        fedilink
        111 months ago

        @rockSlayer why do you assume “active travel” is only bikes? what about walkable communities? what if I like to roller skate? why can’t we collaborate in each community on how we want to get around and what the rules are?

        • @rockSlayer
          link
          English
          111 months ago

          Why are you assuming that I don’t want mixed use travel? This conversation is specifically about bikes, and I was pointing out a specific design trend that’s appearing in cities that is antithetical to the point of reducing car travel.

          • Maria Elena
            link
            fedilink
            111 months ago

            @rockSlayer I see later in the thread that you’ve talked about thoughtful infrastructure, which I starred. Unfortunately, that wasn’t in my notifications, which is what I replied to.