Sunday, December 12, 2010

Best bike lane post EVER!!!

From Restless:

Biking in NYC has zero environmental benefit, and adds bikes without subtracting cars because nearly all riders come off mass transit, not out of cars. And "nimble" is right -- bikers typically ignore vehicle traffic rules and behave like high speed pedestrians.

It's tiring to hear bike zealots constantly present themselves as environmental saviors and the allies of pedestrians when they are neither. Their self-serving campaign depends on the idyllic vision of a motor-free world -- reinforced by controlled events like Summer Streets -- and on building props that suggest orderly behavior -- "Bike stop lights! Just like in Europe, where they probably stop at those lights!" All you have to do is walk any distance in NYC to see that those things have nothing to do with the daily reality here.

If they really want to do something that benefits anyone but themselves, why don't they take their campaign to the suburbs, where they might really get drivers out of cars, and where there are no pedestrians in their way.

OH MY GOD I LOVE THIS GUY!!!! The Daily News had an editorial that didn't flat out say Sadik-Khan was nuts, but called her out for not even knowing how many cyclists there were in the City:

This revealing exchange between Bronx Councilman James Vacca and Sadik-Khan summed up what she had produced at the hearing by way of hard information:

Vacca: "You said you've seen a 63% increase in bicycling. How many bicyclists do you estimate use city streets every day?

Sadik-Khan: I can get back to you on that.

Vacca: Are we talking 200,000?

Sadik-Khan: I will get back to you.

Vacca: You don't have any approximation?

Sadik-Khan: I will get back to you on the number.

Vacca: I would think DOT would have an approximate number since you are laying out all these networks.

Sadik-Khan: I don't have the number on me.

Vacca: I'm saying I would think that question is one you could answer now."

Darn right, along with many others.


Anonymous said...

The News didn't have to. They let herspeak for herself.

Anonymous said...


All Bicycles that travel on NYC streets should be licensed.

Riders must also be required to carry the appropriate collision and liability insurance.

Revenue would be generated by the city from the operators who use those special bike lanes.

Safety would be enhanced due to the requirement for greater accountability by the riders.

Part of the resulting financial windfall should be directed to the creation of new rail mass transit extensions into Eastern Queens.

A regional planning study that came out last year noted that the most cars entering Manhattan came from that part of the city.

These areas are drastically underserved by our subway system and are to far away for bicycle travel into Manhattan.

These extension initiatives were first proposed by Transit Chief David Yunich in the late 1960's but never acted upon.

Licensing bicycles will generate more revenue.


georgetheatheist said...

Long Live the Internal Combustion Engine!

The reason the environmentalists hate the automobile is because it is the personification of freedom. Freedom to go wherever you want, whenever you want to. In a comfortable manner - not freezing or sweating your dick or tits off on an antediluvian bicycle. ("See the USA in your Chevrolet.") They want you to give up this freedom and herd you into mass collectivized transit. There you can sit next to urine bedrecked vagrants and all other kinds of human tubercular and venereal diseased garbage and vermin.

Long Live the Automobile! You'll have to kill me and then pry my steering wheel off my cold stiffened fingers.

I drive. I am an American.

Anonymous said...

Bravo George!

Anonymous said...

In the accompanying photo to this article the bike nut is out of his lane and running a red light I love it.

Velvethead said...

This one is for you, George.

Sing it, Dinah!

Time's Up said...

"Biking in NYC has zero environmental benefit, and adds bikes without subtracting cars because nearly all riders come off mass transit, not out of cars"

This statement collapses under its own weight. If "nearly" all riders instead would take mass transit, then there are some who would drive. Which means there IS a benefit.

And where is the data to backup this "nearly all" claim anyway?

Because I don't have to go very far to refute this nonsense - I have two main options in getting to the gym in the morning - by bike or by car. I bike. If I didn't bike, I'd be driving. This isn't rocket science. Maybe I'm the only person among thousands who fits into this strange category.

But please people, keep up the anti-bike fervor. It's really entertaining and hilarious.

Velvethead said...

Hey, Time's Up.
Please be sure to wear your Mao Tse Tung outfit next time you saddle up!

Remember the days of Wide World of Sports. Jim McKay covering some ping pong tourney in PEKING!. There would always be that video shot of the minnions riding about the central square in their MTT garb.
It's role reversal time!
Grey goes with everything in all seasons.

Anonymous said...

I've been a long-time reader of Queens Crap, and I just wanted to chime in about all this snarky bike-hate, and share my perspective.

I don't know why other people ride a bike, but I ride because it's a pretty amazing, efficient and most of all fun way to get around. Ever since I started riding a few years ago, I've lost weight and just feel healthier. Plus, I don't need to deal (most days) with a potentially stressful and crushing subway commute (thanks Albany!).

I seriously don't get all the vitriol against bicycling. Yes, there are quite a few jerks on bikes, but then again there are quick a few jerks on foot and in cars! And jerks in cars are the most dangerous to me because they're piloting 1-3 tons of steel!

To my mind, it's one of the most efficient ways to get around for a lot of people, and could be for even more. I'm not trying to force anybody to ride, but I feel we should give people that option, if they so desire it. And for it to be an option, it has to be made safe (which incidentally makes the street safer for drivers and pedestrians too). And all these great improvements that have been done to our streets (yes, some of them need tweaking) have been made SO cheaply. I think I heard the other day it was like $8 million, most of that picked up by the Feds. Seems like a super-efficient use of my tax dollars!

So, that's all of I have to say. Thanks!

Queens Crapper said...

So we're putting in miles and miles of bike lanes so people can get exercise? No, this is aimed at commuters. THAT is what Restless is getting at. and you could probably also get to the gym by bus or train. Notice they aren't putting bike lanes in nabes where there's crappy public transit. Maybe you can cite the stats that show how much the environment has improved since Sadik-Khan started this agenda.

Anonymous said...

Fewer people on mass transit means higher fares and taxes. How do more people on bikes instead of on buses or trains benefit us?

Anonymous said...

I agree, adult bike riders should have they're bike registered. It would also create revenue. On thanksgiving I actually had a biker crash into the rear of my car, causing enough damage to cost me $300.
He was under the influence and refused to take responsibility for his actions. He ran away leaving the bike behind. Also there wasn't a bike lane on the street I was on.

Time's Up said...

"I seriously don't get all the vitriol against bicycling."

Don't worry anon, it's not you. It's them.

But you do raise a good question. I'd guess many who reflexively hate bikers are out-of-shape and probably couldn't ride one if they tried. They're thus insecure. And as we all know, insecure people say and do some of the nastiest things. Just my guess.

I love these debates though, b/c they're always preposterously framed as one side vs. another.

Well to my ignorant brethren, here's something that's gonna make your heads explode - I ride my bike, I take mass transit often, I own a car and drive it around, AND I walk miles and miles! Can you believe that shit? And I'm a real person and everything!

Time said...

"you could probably also get to the gym by bus or train."

Ahh, I see you're still obsessed with me, my friend. If you're always going to respond to my apparently thought-provoking comments, you can at least address me by my screen name Mr. QC. But I love you no matter what.

Now allow me to clarify: I go to the gym when it's dark out in the a.m. when the majority of us are fast asleep. No subway goes there, and I couldn't even fathom taking a bus there at that time, IF one exists.

So, I have two realistic options: I can drive like a pussy, or I can brave the cold and use my own strength to get me there. I choose the latter. As a result of my choice, the air is a teeny bit cleaner for all of us; the demand for gas does not rise; and there's one more parking spot available.

And y'all don't even have to thank me.

Time's Up said...

Oh, that last comment was mine. Sorry.

Queens Crapper said...

The point is not whether or not bikers are assholes. The point is should money dedicated to transportation be spent on an impractical mode of transit or for something that will benefit a whole lot more people? The City should be sending more money to the MTA, not throwing it down the tubes on bike lanes and pedestrian plazas.

But go ahead thinking it's an "us vs. them" argument. You entertain me.

Queens Crapper said...

Once again, no bus or train goes there, so there won't be a bike lane put in there. Bike lanes are what this is about, not your gym. Remember?

Anonymous said...

Time's Up also failed to provide the stats you requested, Crapper.

Anonymous said...

Hmm, since when does debating someone mean you are "obsessed" with them?

Anonymous said...

"So, I have two realistic options: I can drive like a pussy, or I can brave the cold and use my own strength to get me there. I choose the latter. As a result of my choice, the air is a teeny bit cleaner for all of us; the demand for gas does not rise; and there's one more parking spot available."

You really believe that? You're not a pussy. You're a douche-bag.

Velvethead said...

Robert Moses, you are sorely missed.

Anonymous said...

You really believe that? You're not a pussy. You're a douche-bag.

Sunday, December 12, 2010

Ah yes theres that name calling and absolute grade school mentality that gives this blog a bad reputation.

Some people use the option to bike sometimes, drive, and take public transit. And George your black and white simple thinking hurling little communist manifesto dirges is hilarious. No one wants to take your car away. It's your business if you want to spend that much on a car with gas, insurance, and everything else.

Remember it was Standard oil with GM who removed street cars with their lobby because they couldnt stand the thought of sharing with trolleys, and other trains that were in many cities in the 40's and 50's.

Also according to the World Resources Institute, in 1992 auto related subsidies such as road construction, tax deductions, and military expenditures to keep gasoline prices low added up to 300 billion a year which is equal to an additional 2 dollar a gallon of gas tax.
And so without these subsidies we can only guess the huge amounts gas etc would cost.

Velvethead said...

Try on these new slogans:
"Built Schwinn Tough"
or how about
"Huffy, the Heartbeat of America"

Anonymous said...

"Ah yes theres that name calling and absolute grade school mentality that gives this blog a bad reputation."

This blog has an excellent reputation among those that count - the media and civic leaders. Who the hell cares what pols and flaming liberals think besides other pols and flaming liberals?

MyTruth said...

Get rid of the bike lanes. Period. Bike lanes give riders and drivers a false sense of security, and just make everybody crazy. Bike registration just might be a good idea: might make a dent in the bike-theft statistics. BTW, I ride my bike 'cause it's faster than the bus - here in Staten Island if you claim you're doing it for health you're delusional: most drivers here don't believe bikes and pedestrians share the same time-space continuum with them...

Velevthead said...

Liberalism is a mental disorder.
Affliction with it includes the loss of a sense of humor.

Queens Crapper said...

No they are impractical because 1/2 the time it's raining or there is snow on the ground, black ice, wet leaves, etc. It's also impractical because people generally don't have places to store their bike or shower once they get to work. No one wants to sit at their desk all sweaty, or sit next to someone who is. Pollution has only gotten worse since the bike-crazed commissioner started putting lanes everywhere. And to top it all off, taking people off mass transit hurts the MTA budget.

So no, there is no need for the city to invest in bike lanes.

Anonymous said...

Why not? over a million dollars per dog run, half a mill for Bocce Courts built between a grass feild with no walking path to it , another $250,00 for the path, why not money on bike lanes.

Oh yes I now pay over $7500 in Real Estate Taxes, plus sewer and water , on top of Con Ed rates going up every three months.


Anonymous said...

I agree with Anyonymous #1!

Peter said...

God knows, I love QC, but you fail to note the rest of the dialogue between Sadik-Khanh and Vacca.

“We don’t have the number of cars in the street, either,” Ms. Sadik-Khan replied.

Mr. Vacca responded: “Maybe we should have those numbers, too.

Also, what's the feeling here?

Cars today have:
a) not enough lanes of traffic
b) just enough
c) too many

How about bikes?

Cry me a river.

Time's Up said...

"But go ahead thinking it's an 'us vs. them' argument. You entertain me."

Holy shit QC! I never thought you were dense, but I'm starting to wonder. That I entertain you is evident by your predictable, rapid-fire replies to my occasional comments. But are you deliberately distorting my points just to provoke me, or do you really not understand?

Re-read my post please. The point is I AM CALLING-OUT those who frame it as "us vs. them." That's why I mentioned the fact that (surprise!) people often have more than one means of getting around. It just seems that the few who do one thing exclusively tend to have the most vitriol.

And the gym part is a direct refutation to the genius author who pulled out of his ass the "fact" that everyone who uses a bike would otherwise be using mass transit. Good lord!

Believe it or not, I actually do agree with some of your points. But me saying ditto like some of your followers wouldn't be entertaining, would it?

Hey, you know Stephen Colbert's a character, right?

Time's Up said...

"Time's Up also failed to provide the stats you requested, Crapper."

My friend, I barely have five minutes to read this site and make my occasional comment. Are you like QC's hype man or something?

Perhaps this will help - A car has emissions; a bike has none. Multiply that difference twice a day, five days a week. Now pretend thousands of other people do the same thing. Will the air be more or less polluted as a result?


Anonymous said...

Velevthead said...

Liberalism is a mental disorder.
Affliction with it includes the loss of a sense of humor.

Monday, December 13, 2010

You mean all those great right wing hypocritical comedians like Dennis Miller who likes Christie as well as Pawlenty, and Drew Carry? And how about those really funny unstable ones that threaten guests backstage like Bill O Rielly did to Jeremy Glick and many others.

No thanks. I'll take Colbert, Stewart, Carlin, Lewis Black, and a few other Liberal comedians with critical well rounded minds able to criticize both sides and the ones in between.
Yes Carlin has passed I know.

Oh Bill is funny.

And no bike lanes are not impractical if bikers and cars obey the road laws not running lights because It's warm here eight or nine months a year.
It may snow four times this year possibly?

Queens Crapper said...

"My friend, I barely have five minutes to read this site and make my occasional comment."

Yet you think I'm obsessed with you and make rapid-fire replies. Since there are no timestamps on comments, how would you know how quickly I answered you?

You stay out of your car and ride your bike. And someone else says holy shit it's too cold to bike and climbs in their car. Net zero gain/loss in pollution factor. Is that so hard to grasp?

You realize Santa Claus is not real, right?

Anonymous said...

"It's warm here eight or nine months a year."

And it rains for many days 12 months a year.

Anonymous said...

as the number of paralyzed pedestrians hit by bikers and the number of paralyzed bikers hit by cars in n.y.c. increase, the mayor will have to ban all bike riding in Manhattan,as a start.

the law suit payouts by the city will become astronomical.

why do we not read about any of these bike related injuries and fatalities?

Anonymous said...

"You realize Santa Claus is not real, right?"

Now you've gone too far! I'm done with this site!

Anonymous said...

Bike lanes are a good thing for recreational use, not to commute on Madison Ave etc. As it is now on certain Avenues, a motorist is distracted by the various lane rules, buses only, fire only and no turns on certain blocks, only on others 3 blocks ahead etc. So a bike lane thrown into this mix is a safe one for the rider or the motorists? Better to build bike lanes on the most quietest of avenues or stretches on the far east or west sides towards the rivers.

Peter said...

"why do we not read about any of these bike related injuries and fatalities?"

Because there are very few. An accident involving a cyclist and pedestrian doesn't involve the energy or mass that tends to result in severe injury. Compare that to a pedestrian / auto accident, where the body of the pedestrian is impacted by a couple thousand pounds moving at speed.

Like some of the other posters here, I use all 4 modes of transport: walk, bike, public, and personal car. Each one has its place.

I completely support bike lanes, and I'd gladly pay $200 year to register and insure my bike. I'd also gladly take a licensing exam that permits me to bike on public streets (not sidewalks!!).

That said, I completely agree that more money should be spent on public transit, and I'd LOVE to see a commuter tax combined with congestion pricing. I think it's the only fair way to finance public transit for everyone else.

...and to the people who complain about property taxes and how there's no subway in Douglaston: Move closer to where you work and GET OUT OF YOUR CAR!! You have a choice - nobody's forcing you to live where you do.

Anonymous said...

re:PETER... is there a reason why the Dept. of Transportation employees do not ride bikes in the city traffic , but drive safely in a tax payer automobile?

who pays for the private parking of D.O.T. N.Y.C. cars and employee's cars at 40-29 27th street in L.I.C.?

you seemed to skip over the fact that bikers may be getting paralyzed when being struck by, or striking a, car or truck in Manhattan streets?

i suggest you research the spine injured treated at the N.Y.U. RUSK INSTITUTE at First Avenue and 34th street. most are paralyzed from bike/auto-truck accidents. their mode of transportation is now in wheel chairs.

Anonymous said...

Ship the bicyclists back to their rich Connecticut and New Jersey suburbs where they came from. And let them take their illegal lobbying with them and use our taxes for necessary things here like police and firefighters.

Then we won't have a problem here.