I mean, bikes are great for a lot of things and cities should definitely have the infrastructure to support their usage, but let’s not pretend that they can easily replace cars in every use case.
Cars are faster, cover long distances which are just infeasible for bikes, are more comfortable, can be used in bad weather, and are needed for people with disabilities. Granted, all of those use cases should be covered by a good public transport system, but that’s exactly why cars are considered to be the symbol of freedom - not depending on the bus/train schedules, weather, distance etc.
That freedom is an illusion. You’re constantly subject to other people in cars doing things, and what they do is often stupid as shit. You only have that freedom when out on the open road with few other cars around, and you’re probably specifically going out of your way to do that.
It is not a no one should ever use a car, it is one does everyone believe there is no alternative to a car.
And I am very confused why people constantly bring up people with disabilities cannot drive bikes but can drive cars. The most people with disabilities cannot drive cars. You only see people with who have the means to drive a car. The rest is just stuck at home. It is not only having a wheelchair, but sight, hearing, age, epilepsy, mental capacity all those things restrict your ability to drive. Building a car to enable one person is so much less efficient as building infrastructure for all regardless of age, income and diasability.
One more thing to freedom of travel. Imagine having a car. You park it and visit a sight. You are done and have to return to your car. You can in general never just leave. This may apply to a bike too but in comparison public transport or on foot it is a hassle.
You say it yourself: Granted, all of those use cases should be covered by a good public transport system.
I mean, bikes are great for a lot of things and cities should definitely have the infrastructure to support their usage, but let’s not pretend that they can easily replace cars in every use case.
Cars are faster, cover long distances which are just infeasible for bikes, are more comfortable, can be used in bad weather, and are needed for people with disabilities. Granted, all of those use cases should be covered by a good public transport system, but that’s exactly why cars are considered to be the symbol of freedom - not depending on the bus/train schedules, weather, distance etc.
That freedom is an illusion. You’re constantly subject to other people in cars doing things, and what they do is often stupid as shit. You only have that freedom when out on the open road with few other cars around, and you’re probably specifically going out of your way to do that.
It is not a no one should ever use a car, it is one does everyone believe there is no alternative to a car.
And I am very confused why people constantly bring up people with disabilities cannot drive bikes but can drive cars. The most people with disabilities cannot drive cars. You only see people with who have the means to drive a car. The rest is just stuck at home. It is not only having a wheelchair, but sight, hearing, age, epilepsy, mental capacity all those things restrict your ability to drive. Building a car to enable one person is so much less efficient as building infrastructure for all regardless of age, income and diasability.
One more thing to freedom of travel. Imagine having a car. You park it and visit a sight. You are done and have to return to your car. You can in general never just leave. This may apply to a bike too but in comparison public transport or on foot it is a hassle.
You say it yourself: Granted, all of those use cases should be covered by a good public transport system.
There should be no but afterwards.