Oslo: The Journey to Car Free
#126
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 4,811
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1591 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1,018 Times
in
571 Posts
As I said, human population distribution in a functioning society works itself out pretty well. The countryside doesn't need an influx of city folks and Philly and Chicago would not be improved by greater density.
#127
Prefers Cicero
#129
Prefers Cicero
#131
Prefers Cicero
#132
Sophomoric Member
Consider the opposite. What happens if most of the rural population moves to the city. This tends to happen when rural economies collapse and the results are not pretty. I think in a moderately well functioning society, human population distribution works itself out pretty well.
I'm not saying that rural is better than urban or vice-versa. Just the plain and simple fact that most people choose city living over the country.
Urban population (% of total) | Data
__________________
"Think Outside the Cage"
#133
Sophomoric Member
#134
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Kent Wa.
Posts: 5,332
Bikes: 2005 Gazelle Golfo, 1935 Raleigh Sport, 1970 Robin Hood sport, 1974 Schwinn Continental, 1984 Ross MTB/porteur, 2013 Flying Piegon path racer, 2014 Gazelle Toer Populair T8
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 396 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times
in
7 Posts
It disappointing that the LCF loyal can be just as, if not more intolerant than the LCF detractors.
#135
Prefers Cicero
Are you being intentionally obtuse just to be snide to someone because they don't march exactly in lockstep with your point of view, or do you honestly not understand that sustainability isn't the sole, or primary measure of whats detrimental, or beneficial to individuals, and communities?
It disappointing that the LCF loyal can be just as, if not more intolerant than the LCF detractors.
It disappointing that the LCF loyal can be just as, if not more intolerant than the LCF detractors.
"Sustainability", in the broadest sense is ultimately the largest challenge facing humankind, and everything else is secondary to it - war, politics, population, pollution, economics, space exploration, and so on. Apropos of this thread, It's the main reason Oslo is doing what it's doing. We don't have to talk about it, but you did raise it earlier as something you thought was important for rural and urban communities alike, but then shied away from fleshing that out.
The only reason the discussion even became about rural vs urban is because some posters, especially McBTC, wanted to make the thread about how rural areas are better than urban. You also contributed a bit to the rural vs urban dialectic starting with posts 80 and 85, where you also introduced "sustainability" as an issue. I got into that debate too, in response to his and your posts, but I would have been just as happy to stick to discussing Oslo.
Last edited by cooker; 05-06-17 at 08:26 AM.
#136
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Kent Wa.
Posts: 5,332
Bikes: 2005 Gazelle Golfo, 1935 Raleigh Sport, 1970 Robin Hood sport, 1974 Schwinn Continental, 1984 Ross MTB/porteur, 2013 Flying Piegon path racer, 2014 Gazelle Toer Populair T8
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 396 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times
in
7 Posts
Well I guess that's it right there.
Foolishly I sometimes come here thinking it's possible to share ones point of view about, or suggest alternatives to the goals we have in common, forgetting that it's a with us, or against us environment where our differences are the only thing that matters.
Next time you get frustrated by the LCF detractors, keep in mind the LCF ideologues are just as intolerant and frustrating.
Foolishly I sometimes come here thinking it's possible to share ones point of view about, or suggest alternatives to the goals we have in common, forgetting that it's a with us, or against us environment where our differences are the only thing that matters.
Next time you get frustrated by the LCF detractors, keep in mind the LCF ideologues are just as intolerant and frustrating.
#137
Prefers Cicero
Well I guess that's it right there.
Foolishly I sometimes come here thinking it's possible to share ones point of view about, or suggest alternatives to the goals we have in common, forgetting that it's a with us, or against us environment where our differences are the only thing that matters.
Next time you get frustrated by the LCF detractors, keep in mind the LCF ideologues are just as intolerant and frustrating.
Foolishly I sometimes come here thinking it's possible to share ones point of view about, or suggest alternatives to the goals we have in common, forgetting that it's a with us, or against us environment where our differences are the only thing that matters.
Next time you get frustrated by the LCF detractors, keep in mind the LCF ideologues are just as intolerant and frustrating.
#138
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Kent Wa.
Posts: 5,332
Bikes: 2005 Gazelle Golfo, 1935 Raleigh Sport, 1970 Robin Hood sport, 1974 Schwinn Continental, 1984 Ross MTB/porteur, 2013 Flying Piegon path racer, 2014 Gazelle Toer Populair T8
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 396 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times
in
7 Posts
That point is, work to improve what people want and have, rather than trying to change what people want and have, because it's more productive to work with people than against them.
#139
Senior Member
True, true and being up front. It makes no sense to dedicate a sub-forum to --e.g., 'sustainability' but that happens here because LCF is 'Commuting' with an attitude that has nothing to do with bikes and the love of cycling. First and foremost the LCF movement is anti-car and not pro-bike to any greater degree than it is pro-walking. LCF as we see it playing out here on Bike Forums is nothing more than an enviro-whacko urban fetish.
Last edited by McBTC; 05-06-17 at 12:45 PM.
#140
Prefers Cicero
True, true and being up front. It makes no sense to dedicate a sub-forum to --e.g., 'sustainability' but that happens here because LCF is 'Commuting' with an attitude that has nothing to do with bikes and the love of cycling. First and foremost the LCF movement is anti-car and not pro-bike to any greater degree than it is pro-walking. LCF as we see it playing out here on Bike Forums is nothing more than an enviro-whacko urban fetish.
Last edited by cooker; 05-06-17 at 02:18 PM.
#141
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Kent Wa.
Posts: 5,332
Bikes: 2005 Gazelle Golfo, 1935 Raleigh Sport, 1970 Robin Hood sport, 1974 Schwinn Continental, 1984 Ross MTB/porteur, 2013 Flying Piegon path racer, 2014 Gazelle Toer Populair T8
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 396 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times
in
7 Posts
True, true and being up front. It makes no sense to dedicate a sub-forum to --e.g., 'sustainability' but that happens here because LCF is 'Commuting' with an attitude that has nothing to do with bikes and the love of cycling. First and foremost the LCF movement is anti-car and not pro-bike to any greater degree than it is pro-walking. LCF as we see it playing out here on Bike Forums is nothing more than an enviro-whacko urban fetish.
Just because LCF isn't viable or desirable for everyone, It doesn't mean it's invalid or unworthy of accommodation. On the same token, those who need or choose to drive aren't a problem that needs to be solved in of it's self.
If both sides would quit passing judgment on, and fretting that the other is somehow taking advantage, maybe something positive could happen.
Its ridiculous to suggest the only answer is to choose between doing nothing to improve how we live, or resorting to harebrained utopian schemes.
Empathy, and respect.
#142
Senior Member
LCF doesn't have to be us against them regardless of who you identify with.
Just because LCF isn't viable or desirable for everyone, It doesn't mean it's invalid or unworthy of accommodation. On the same token, those who need or choose to drive aren't a problem that needs to be solved in of it's self.
If both sides would quit passing judgment on, and fretting that the other is somehow taking advantage, maybe something positive could happen.
Its ridiculous to suggest the only answer is to choose between doing nothing to improve how we live, or resorting to harebrained utopian schemes.
Empathy, and respect.
Just because LCF isn't viable or desirable for everyone, It doesn't mean it's invalid or unworthy of accommodation. On the same token, those who need or choose to drive aren't a problem that needs to be solved in of it's self.
If both sides would quit passing judgment on, and fretting that the other is somehow taking advantage, maybe something positive could happen.
Its ridiculous to suggest the only answer is to choose between doing nothing to improve how we live, or resorting to harebrained utopian schemes.
Empathy, and respect.
#143
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Kent Wa.
Posts: 5,332
Bikes: 2005 Gazelle Golfo, 1935 Raleigh Sport, 1970 Robin Hood sport, 1974 Schwinn Continental, 1984 Ross MTB/porteur, 2013 Flying Piegon path racer, 2014 Gazelle Toer Populair T8
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 396 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times
in
7 Posts
Sounds reasonable and anyone on Bike Forums outside of the LCF politicos love bikes and the sport of cycling so ostensibly most everyone shares something in common and can be expected to get along. However, underlying the LCF movement is the dogmatic belief that individual ownership of a car is destroying the globe. It's all pretty hypocritical because a New Yorker who takes a cab gets a pass-- makes no sense. If you like the open spaces, LEF (Living Elevator Free) makes more sense than LCF.
I hate it when people refer to cycling as a "sport". To some it is, but to many like myself cycling is transportation, recreation, and a hobby, not a "sport".
#144
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Mississauga/Toronto, Ontario canada
Posts: 8,721
Bikes: I have 3 singlespeed/fixed gear bikes
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4227 Post(s)
Liked 2,488 Times
in
1,286 Posts
Driving cars and eating meat doesn't contribute to climate change....And it isn't necessary for a person to give up cars, give up eating meat, give up beer, quit working and contributing to economy, give up all their possessions and join the "cult of global warming alarmism".... in order to live a sustainable lifestyle...
#145
Senior Member
Not as the Olympic committee sees it:
Cycling has been contested at every Summer Olympic Games since the birth of the modern Olympic movement at the 1896 Summer Olympics, at which a road race and five track events were held. Mountain bike racing entered the Olympic programme in Atlanta, GA. 1996... ~wiki
#146
Senior Member
Driving cars and eating meat doesn't contribute to climate change....And it isn't necessary for a person to give up cars, give up eating meat, give up beer, quit working and contributing to economy, give up all their possessions and join the "cult of global warming alarmism".... in order to live a sustainable lifestyle...
#147
Prefers Cicero
Al Gore believes you can live in a mansion with an electric bill the size of a small African nation, fly in private jets and still save the globe if you are a lifetime Leftist government bureaucrat, blame American car companies and big oil for the world's problems and plant a couple of trees. Aren't all US senators chauffeured to work?
#148
Senior Member
Sounds reasonable and anyone on Bike Forums outside of the LCF politicos love bikes and the sport of cycling so ostensibly most everyone shares something in common and can be expected to get along. However, underlying the LCF movement is the dogmatic belief that individual ownership of a car is destroying the globe. It's all pretty hypocritical because a New Yorker who takes a cab gets a pass-- makes no sense. If you like the open spaces, LEF (Living Elevator Free) makes more sense than LCF.
#149
Senior Member
Driving cars and eating meat doesn't contribute to climate change....And it isn't necessary for a person to give up cars, give up eating meat, give up beer, quit working and contributing to economy, give up all their possessions and join the "cult of global warming alarmism".... in order to live a sustainable lifestyle...
#150
Prefers Cicero
Driving cars and eating meat doesn't contribute to climate change....And it isn't necessary for a person to give up cars, give up eating meat, give up beer, quit working and contributing to economy, give up all their possessions and join the "cult of global warming alarmism".... in order to live a sustainable lifestyle...