• @kemsat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    27
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    Yeah, but bicycles don’t have the same profit margins as cars

    Edit: just gonna add that I was being snarky with this comment. I’m for walkable cities with quality public transportation infrastructure.

    • @BastingChemina@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      187 days ago

      Bikes really are a downward spiral. First people don’t need to spend 20% of your annual salary into their car so they have all this extra money that they can use.

      Worse! Since they are now traveling through their city in open air rather in a glass and steel prison they might start noticing local businesses and spend their money there rather than the billionaire’s owned giant box store.

      And now that they arrive home on their bike they will stay to notice their neighbors, maybe even say hi and start building local communities. It’s also much easier to build a local community when you don’t have deadly machines that you need to avoid passing in front of your house all the time.

    • @dogs0n@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      67 days ago

      Might be less of a difference than we would think since every shared car would presumably become multiple bikes.

      Eg: Family of 4 that have 1 car, turns into 4 bikes?

      Of course big oil wouldn’t like that very much. Screw you big oil, you are a turd.

      • @chramies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        47 days ago

        Around here families of four probably have at least two cars. I didn’t realise what ‘car-dependency’ looked like until I moved out of London. People tell me, “You don’t have transport,” but I walk, I have a bike, I get the bus or the train.