So, living in one of those cities (AMS) I have a few takes. I'm not ranting, just expressing my frustration:
1. Cars exists because they are more comfortable. I don't care that biking should better, it's not when it rains sideways, it's cold and windy. Biking sucks. I would pay top money to not be in a bike, not be outside getting drenched, and usually do ubering everywhere to the dismay of Dutch people,
2. Cities designed around biking are uber tied to public transport. I'm a lefty, I think that's great, but it's not, because the first time there are cuts to public service you find yourself living in the middle of nowhere and can only bike, because cars are too expensive to own. This happened in the Netherlands with NS slashing intercity trips, and increasing prices. I had colleagues now that now to live several hours per day in a packed commuter train. I can't see how that's better.
3. Any type of DIY activity becomes a nightmare. Want to rent move a couch? Good luck! Back home, you could load the thing on a nice Volvo and be happy.
4. Electric bikes are effectively not policed because it's the new thing we need to incentivize, and it becomes immediately super dangerous. I know people that had serious injuries because of crashes. Cars are inherently safer, especially modern SUV like volvos or tesla,
5. Accessibility becomes a nightmare, especially if you are in a wheelchair, your commute times are going to skyrocket,
All this "bikes are amazing" just reeks of some bad degrowth ideology. There is a duality between cars are bad and hydrocarbons are bad. Except they are literally the engine of growth, and for some reasons we decided that we should phase out hydrocarbons and replace them with some silly not reliable energy alternative (solar, wind). I can't see how this ends in a different way than how it went in Europe with our energy policy.
Cities are meant to grow and drive the economy, not to be Disneyland parks. If I want to bike I can go to Italy on a seaside town, I don't need to bike 356 days a year.
1. Cars exists because they are more comfortable. I don't care that biking should better, it's not when it rains sideways, it's cold and windy. Biking sucks. I would pay top money to not be in a bike, not be outside getting drenched, and usually do ubering everywhere to the dismay of Dutch people,
2. Cities designed around biking are uber tied to public transport. I'm a lefty, I think that's great, but it's not, because the first time there are cuts to public service you find yourself living in the middle of nowhere and can only bike, because cars are too expensive to own. This happened in the Netherlands with NS slashing intercity trips, and increasing prices. I had colleagues now that now to live several hours per day in a packed commuter train. I can't see how that's better.
3. Any type of DIY activity becomes a nightmare. Want to rent move a couch? Good luck! Back home, you could load the thing on a nice Volvo and be happy.
4. Electric bikes are effectively not policed because it's the new thing we need to incentivize, and it becomes immediately super dangerous. I know people that had serious injuries because of crashes. Cars are inherently safer, especially modern SUV like volvos or tesla,
5. Accessibility becomes a nightmare, especially if you are in a wheelchair, your commute times are going to skyrocket,
All this "bikes are amazing" just reeks of some bad degrowth ideology. There is a duality between cars are bad and hydrocarbons are bad. Except they are literally the engine of growth, and for some reasons we decided that we should phase out hydrocarbons and replace them with some silly not reliable energy alternative (solar, wind). I can't see how this ends in a different way than how it went in Europe with our energy policy.
Cities are meant to grow and drive the economy, not to be Disneyland parks. If I want to bike I can go to Italy on a seaside town, I don't need to bike 356 days a year.