>>1794057You base your entire argument on a wrong assumption. Not everyone is willing or able to ride a bike.
Thus, you cannot substitute a parking lot for 7-15 bikes. It's the same bullshit argument that evangelists of car sharing use.
>revenue from bike salesFar lower than from the automobile industry. You know that and it's frequently used by /n/igs.
>subsidizedYou cite a book or blog. Does the author cite studies or statistics? If not, it's worthless.
I can tell you how it is in Germany, here road/car tax alone translates to a net positive of over 1 Mrd. EUR for the state. Here, cyclists are leeches who on top of that think the road that they do NOT pay for is theirs.
Also what
>>1794061 said. You already benefit from roads. Guess how the last mile of goods including your groceries is delivered.
Functional roads are a necessity, bike lanes are not.
