>>1908864>>1908868I think your guys' perspective stems from the overwhelming majority of cities who do half-attempts of dotted cycling infrastructure. Or worse, paint on the sidewalk or the gutter which just serves as a "fuck you, get off the road" legality.
I've had a similar experience in Zagreb, Croatia. No single meter of up-to-code bike lane, mostly just slippery paint on the sidewalk where a single pedestrian and cyclist struggle to pass by each other. I still ride my commute and errands mostly vehicularly and I'm having a blast. I was enjoying the 'prestige' of being such a cyclist just because of how rare it was for anyone to ride like me.
But then I went to Rotterdam for a month for uni and still struggle to express how much it changed my opinion on this. Bike infrastructure is not anti-cyclist, my city is anti-cyclist. Because my city is, at best, doing non-attempts for political points on single streets at a time, without repaving anything or compromising any space cars take up.
>>1908988>It's leftist ideology that we shou-Complete and functional cycling infrastructure is the most economically efficient way for a city to ease it's traffic and congestion. Both cheaper for the taxpayer and the individual. Therefore cycling infrastructure is fiscally conservative.
See? I can interject my cancer political ideology where it doesn't belong too!
