Can you make it to the market on a bike?

[donquijote1954]

On Aug 1, 9:58 pm, [email protected] (Bill Z.) wrote:
> William <[email protected]> writes:
> > On Aug 1, 7:44 pm, [email protected] (Bill Z.) wrote:
> > > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > > > Bill Zaumen wrote:
>
> > > > > Nonesense. You simply have a road with multiple lanes and slower
> > > > > traffic is required to use the rightmost lane. If it is a bike lane,
> > > > > then the rightmost lane is one that motor vehicles cannot use unless
> > > > > preparing for a turn across that lane.
>
> > > > Yeah, right. Put in a painted "bike lane" on the street (or even
> > > > worse, sidewalk), and the brain-dead cagers think that cyclists SHOULD
> > > > NOT be anywhere else.
>
> > > Which is why most drivers don't yell at me for using a left turn lane,
> > > whether or not there is a bike lane. And some actually smile if I
> > > move out of a bike lane to stop at a red light so that right-turning
> > > cars can get by.
>
> > They Smile? What a depressing life one must have if there highlight of
> > the day was a bike made it eaiser for you to make a right turn....
>
> When you have a really nasty bug to track down as part of your 6-figure
> job, any act of kindness is really appreciated. People around here
> are very busy, so anything that helps them get to where they are going
> faster gets a positive reaction.
>
> Also, it is a very liberal community by U.S. standards (although not
> quite as liberal as San Francisco). Here's a picture of our local
> movie theater <http://www.stanfordtheatre.org/stf/>. Click on "This
> Week" to see what we get. You'll be truly amazed.

It must really be liberal because it got such a great theater, not a
conservative place with a mega church and all. They really hate the
arts and bike lanes. I see them driving SUVs...

 

[donquijote1954]

On Aug 1, 9:40 pm, "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman"
<[email protected]> wrote:

> > And what do you
> > expect to have when you go around electing members of a political
> > party (whose name starts with "R") whose official position is that
> > government can't work?
>
> We have been making progress on that front in recent years.
>
> [1] This, in many cases DOES not including exceeding the speed limit,
> which is about the only thing that ever seems to be enforced.
> [2] To a point. Obviously, in a country with a ridiculous level of
> overpopulation such as China, cycling in urban areas is not enjoyable
> unless one likes being part of a slow moving congested mass of people on
> bicycles.

OK, I finally figured you out. We may disagree on the bike lane as
part of the solution, but we totally agree on the absolute need to
retire a bunch of bad drivers, and enforce some rules of the road.

Lane discipline should be a high priority so you don't drivers
overtaking on the right lane at supersonic speeds, right next to the
bicycles. This is addressed too in our Political Platform...

"Our roads, where the Law of the Jungle rules, should be made safer,
say by enforcing passing on the left only."

See http://webspawner.com/users/elections2008

 

[donquijote1954]

On Aug 1, 9:55 pm, "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman"
<[email protected]> wrote:
> "donquijote1954" who? wrote:
> > ...
> > Thank you for explaining so well what I have in mind. Actually that's
> > the idea behind...
>
> >http://www.cafepress.com/burncalories
>
> I think a better solution would be two jerseys [1]. In the morning [2],
> the jersey worn would say in large letters on the back "RIDING TO WORK".
> The afternoon jersey would say "RIDING HOME FROM WORK".
>
> [1] Or a reversible sign for recumbents.
> [2] Reverse for night shift workers.

Yeah, but then you need more like, "RIDING TO THE MARKET," "RIDING TO
HAVE A DATE," etc.

 

[donquijote1954]

On Aug 1, 10:01 pm, "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman"
<[email protected]> wrote:
> "donquijote1954" who? wrote:
> > ...
> > You still avoiding my question: BIKE LANES OR NO BIKE LANES, HOW DO WE
> > BRING BIKE RIDERSHIP FROM THE AMERICAN OR BRITISH LEVE[L]S TO THE DUTCH
> > OR DANISH LEVELS?...
>
> The Danes have almost a 100% tax on new automobiles, high gas taxes, and
> (in the cities) very limited and expensive parking. They also have a
> beautiful cool spring to fall climate, and winters that can be mostly
> handled with proper raingear.
>
> Ride to work even a short distance at a slow pace in much of the U.S.
> during summer and you will be soaked in sweat.

You know some bikes do have an electric motor? We can use some of
those. Where I live is real hot, but doable in the early morning and
late afternoon.

 

[donquijote1954]

On Aug 1, 10:22 pm, "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman"
<[email protected]> wrote:
> [email protected] aka Joshua Putnam wrote:
>
> > ...
> > Even the limited-access freeway near me has its shoulder open to
> > bicycles -- bikes are allowed on many miles of Interstates, boring and
> > noisy, but safe and direct....
>
> Do the drivers look for cyclists crossing their path when merging and
> exiting?

They only talking on the phone. But then again, we need to retire them.

 

[donquijote1954]

On Aug 2, 12:02 am, "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman"
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Pat who? wrote:
> > ...If you don't like it, go talk to the lawmakers.
>
> That is not a practical suggestion for those of us who can not afford to
> attend $1000/plate fund-raising dinners.
>

That's only the price to get in. To get listened to you need at least
100 times that amount.

 

[Amy Blankenship]

"William" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Aug 1, 2:28 pm, William <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Aug 1, 11:12 am, Pat <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Aug 1, 11:54 am, William <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > > On Aug 1, 10:25 am, Pat <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > > > On Aug 1, 10:43 am, donquijote1954 <[email protected]>
>> > > > wrote:
>>
>> > > > > On Aug 1, 4:00 am, Peter Clinch <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > > > > > Yes, there are some idiots who'll sit behind you and honk at
>> > > > > > you, but
>> > > > > > they won't run you down, because it might scratch the
>> > > > > > paintwork. If you
>> > > > > > push people off into bike lanes as a rule they will be far more
>> > > > > > maligned
>> > > > > > and looked down upon on the instances where they have no choice
>> > > > > > to use
>> > > > > > the roads, if they're typically in a bike lane instead.
>>
>> > > > > > They don't help. We know they don't help as we can see them
>> > > > > > not
>> > > > > > helping. *HAVE YOU GOT THAT YET?*
>>
>> > > > > You still avoiding my question: BIKE LANES OR NO BIKE LANES, HOW
>> > > > > DO WE
>> > > > > BRING BIKE RIDERSHIP FROM THE AMERICAN OR BRITISH LEVES TO THE
>> > > > > DUTCH
>> > > > > OR DANISH LEVELS?
>>
>> > > > You see, you are thinking about the problem from the wrong
>> > > > direction.
>> > > > You are saying "biking is great, what is wrong with everyone else".
>> > > > Instead, you need to examine why other people don't bike and
>> > > > address
>> > > > that.
>>
>> > > > Predominantly, I would think it is the combination of "no time to
>> > > > bike
>> > > > & no place to bike to". Most people won't bike to work if they get
>> > > > sweaty or if they work the night shift, etc. Bike lanes might
>> > > > partially address the "no place to bike to" issue, but not really.
>>
>> > > > For example, I need to run out and get my kid some things for
>> > > > football
>> > > > practice. While we're at it we need to do some back-to-school
>> > > > shopping. Okay, that's simple and the kid is in great shape. I
>> > > > just
>> > > > need to run to the nearest sporting goods store. Fortunately,
>> > > > there's
>> > > > a small mall across the street. This trip is a bit unusually
>> > > > because
>> > > > I do 90% of my shopping at the nest Walmart. So ideally, this is
>> > > > bikeable. But the problem is, the nearest sporting goods store is
>> > > > about 45 miles away. That's about 15 miles past the Walmart. So
>> > > > at
>> > > > 10 mph (because of the hills and the purchases), you're talking at
>> > > > 9
>> > > > hour bike ride.
>>
>> > > I don't blame you, biking works best
>> > > when everything is
>> > > more central and dense like a metro area.
>>
>> > > > So I think your idea has merit, it just needs to be tweeked. The
>> > > > community didn't allow a Walmart because of a DOT right-of-way
>> > > > issue.
>> > > > But maybe if we had more Walmarts, so that they were closer to
>> > > > people,
>> > > > the people could bike to them easier. Plus if they put in
>> > > > SuperCenters with groceries, then more shopping could be done in 1
>> > > > trip.
>>
>> > > > So I guess bike lanes are part of the problem, but having a place
>> > > > to
>> > > > go is the other part. Therefore, maybe you should lobby for more
>> > > > Walmarts -- and have them tied into bikeways -- to encourage
>> > > > shopping
>> > > > by bike.
>>
>> > > Have you no sense of quality Pat? I guess that is implied when your
>> > > from nowhere land.
>>
>> > I don't follow your logic. Of course I am from the middle of
>> > nowhere. That's great. Clean air. Clean water. Mountains in the
>> > background (okay, the Allegany's aren't exactly the Rockies). It is a
>> > nice, simple life. What else to I need. This is a great lifestyle.
>> > What "quality" am I missing? The Kleenex from Walmart is somehow
>> > worst than the Kleenex from the Kleenex Boutique? The $18 Harry
>> > Potter book I bought last week has different words in it than $32
>> > version in your corner bookstore? My backyard swimming pool is
>> > somehow less wet than your municipal one? My fruit-of-the-loom
>> > underwear are somehow less fruity than yours from the mall. Does a
>> > Timex keep different time than a Rolex -- it doesn't really matter to
>> > me, because I don't wear a watch.
>>
>> > You might crave some imported, organic, fresh pasta only made by
>> > virgins on the hillsides of Italy. But regular pasta is fine by me.
>> > You don't need that stuff to live well. You only need it to fill the
>> > hollow spots in your sole. There's nothing wrong with simplicity.
>> > I'm not exactly a monk, but this definitely isn't Madison Ave. But
>> > that's what makes it nice.
>>
>> > On Friday, a friend and I are thinking of throwing a canoe on the
>> > Allegany River and going a few miles, just for the heck of it. That's
>> > excitement around here.
>>
>> > Besides, the Walmarts around here are pretty generous when it comes to
>> > youth sports. We'll hit up each of them during fundraising for each
>> > of the sports. It's not a lot, but they'll throw in $25 to $50 (each)
>> > any time they are asked -- and we ask them quite often. That buys
>> > stuff for the concession stand or for a raffle.
>>
>> > So what about this "quality" thing?
>>
>> Pat, Walmart is McDonalds department stores. In every way. If you wanna
>> call that quality go right ahead. Just keep that bull **** out of the
>> city.
>
> To be more specific, ever notice how a lot of things, not
> ALL things but a lot, are a heck of a lot crappier at walmart as
> apposed to the other extreme like William-sanoma or crate and barrel?
> I'm not saying that every place should be as expensive and *high tech*
> for a lack of a better word as those places are. But ever notice how
> theres a lot of poor people at Walmart? I guess you would'nt since
> thats all you have in nowhere land but here in the cities when people
> have more options then the lowest and crappiest, we tend to shoot for
> the happy medium between excessive and contemptible.

I'm not sure that it's the best argument against Wal-Mart that it gives the
poor a place that they can afford. BTW, hope you're ok.

 

[Pat]

On Aug 2, 12:02 am, "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman"
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Pat who? wrote:
> > ...If you don't like it, go talk to the lawmakers.
>
> That is not a practical suggestion for those of us who can not afford to
> attend $1000/plate fund-raising dinners.
>
> --
> Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
> The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com

Weird. Our State Assemblyman and Senator are both VERY accessible.
I've met with them often on things. You call, make an appointment and
you go see them. If you're in Albany on a trip or whatever, it's
easier to get in because they have so few constituents see them there.

It takes a bit longer to get into see our Congressman, but he does set
up "Town Hall" meetings once-a-year that are well publicized. He
stops makes 6 or 7 stops in the county in the day he is there, so you
never have to go very far to see him. But few people bother to show
up. But he makes the effort. I don't terribly like the guy, but he is
accessible and he tries to get out into the district (which is quite
large).

Our Senators, though, are a bit more distant. Schumer travels the
state pretty regularly. I think you it's pretty easy to get to see
Hillary, too, as long as you travel to Iowa to do it -- but still
under the $1000 ticket threshold.

I did pay to go to an event to see Spitzer, but it was only $60 for
the conference. He's shorter than he looks.

 

[Bill Z.]

[email protected] writes:

> On Aug 2, 2:48 am, [email protected] (Bill Z.) wrote:
> > [email protected] writes:
> > >
> > > My bet is that fewer than 1% of the bike lanes in the US are swept
> > > weekly.
> >
> > Ours our clean of debris - almost: I about a mile along one today
> > and spotted a solitary leaf that must have fallen since the last
> > cleaning.
>
> I'm sure you do live in bike lane paradise, Bill. I'm describing what
> I've seen in the rest of the world, and it isn't like your paradise.

I've ridden a bicycle in San Francisco, including in bike lanes, and
there was not the level of debris you reported, and the bike lanes
I used were simply along the route I was taking (e.g. from the
train station to somewhere near Fisherman's Wharf or the Civic Center.



>
> > > I just returned from a vacation in a city famous for lots of bike
> > > lanes. On one of my previous trips there, I had a conversation with
> > > one of the bike advocates that helped get them installed. When I
> > > mentioned the debris, he claimed it was no problem - that a wonderful
> > > system was in place to report debris and get almost immediate
> > > sweeping.
> >
> > > Right. Despite that "system," I was definitely dodging broken glass
> > > and other trash when riding in those lanes. As usual, when riding in
> > > the parts of the city without lanes, I had no such trouble.
> >
> > Typical Krygowski post, and not to be believed - this guy spins
> > everything he posts. Note the failure to name the city or provide
> > any other relevant information, nor precisely where in this alleged
> > city he rode.
>
> Portland, Oregon and its surrounding suburbs. The city itself wasn't
> bad for bike lane trash, but it was also perfectly fine riding where
> there were no bike lanes. The suburbs had plenty of trash in the bike
> lanes, including trash of the tire-slashing variety.

Given that the U.S. norm is clean suburbs and neglected cities, I really
have to wonder about your claim. My guess is that you went out of your
way to find a poorly maintained bike lane - it would fit your past
behavior.

BTW, if there is trash in the bike lane, you aren't required to use it.

> Those bike lanes might not have trash if a street & lane sweeping had
> just occurred, but there is no question that they are glass storage
> lanes for more than a week at a time.

And you've never seen glass on a road?



> The first time my family and I rode in from the east, a few years
> ago, the amount of glass in the bike lanes was astonishing. (Maybe
> some Portland residents can tell us the suburban street sweeping
> schedule.)


>
> > > Zaumen, like other bike lane advocates, claims to live with ideal bike
> > > lanes: well designed, well maintained, and very beneficial. All I can
> > > say is that there are many, many bike lanes that do not meet the first
> > > two criteria; and even those that do generally seem useless to me.
> >
> > More lies from Krygowski (his speciality) - I don't go around asking
> > for bike lanes (which is what a bike-lane advocate does).
>
> "Advocate (n.): a person who pleads for a cause or propounds an
> idea."

Which I'm not doing. Stating that something is not a problem is not
pleading a cause or propounding an idea (which does not mean in this
context merely stating an opinion or a fact). The actual "advocate" of
course is Krygowksi and a few others with a thing up their you know what
about bike lanes.

> If you haven't been doing that, you'd better keep an eye on your evil
> twin. He's got your computer password again.

Krygowski of course is lying as usual. It is at most once in a blue
moon that he posts anything without enough spin to make Karl Rove
spin in his future grave.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB

 

[Bill Z.]

"Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <[email protected]> writes:

>
> ALL "bicycle lanes" are "separate but equal" facilities; therefore
> their deficiencies are inherent and do not depend on the quality of
> the particular implementation.

Are you on drugs or something? Cars are allowed in bike lanes (to
merge in before turning across them and they are part of a road).
I've yet to see anyone disparage an HOV lane as a '"separate but equal"
facility' (a code phrase for what is really an inferior faciility).

Cut the rhetoric. If you have any point, you should be able to
show some deficiency in the Caltrans design standards, not in some
figment of your imagination.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB

 

[Bill Z.]

"Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <[email protected]> writes:

> Bill Zaumen wrote:
> > Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman writes:
> >
> >> Bill Zaumen wrote:
> >>> ...
> >>> When you have a really nasty bug to track down as part of your 6-figure
> >>> job, any act of kindness is really appreciated. ...
> >>
> >> I hear there are a lot of highly intelligent, computer software and
> >> hardware design capable people in India willing to work for a high
> >> four figure or low five figure (U.S. dollar) annual income.
> > There are some things you can't outsource to India. Working on an OS
> > is one of them, particularly when new hardware is involved (and India
> > is mostly doing software, not hardware).
>
> For now.

No, for a very long time to come, as long as the U.S. has a
substantial technical edge, and if India and China catch up, their
incomes will become comparable to ours.

Also, infrastructure is important - when you are running chip
simulations that need the largest machines you can get your hands on
and that have to run for a day or more (maybe a lot more), you can't
get by in a place where there are regular power failures on a weekly
or daily basis.

> > Some of the hardware design
> > done in Silicon Valley requires a huge capital investment in server
> > farms for chip verification. That is not available in India or China
> > right now,
> ^^^^^^^^^
>
> Exactly.

except it is for as long as those countries are not at the top of the
heap in the high-tech world.

> > which may be why we have so many people from India or
> > China living here and getting U.S.-level salaries.
>
> Expanded guest worker program, perhaps?

We need every smart person we can get, but you'd have to work in
the area to know why.


--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB

 

[Bill Z.]

"Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <[email protected]> writes:

> Bill Zaumen wrote:
> >> Does Bill Zaumem actually ride a bike in the real world and pay
> >> attention to what happens, or does he just argue on Usenet?
> > I live in a town that sweeps its bike lanes and has both before and
> > after 2001. If you aren't going to maintain a facility, you probably
> > shouldn't put it in, but where I live, these things are maintained.
>
> Is this town some upscale Silly Cone Valley community or similar?
> Where I live, the potholes are big enough to rip a 185/60R14 tire
> off a rim - think they have money for sweeping the "bicycle lane"?

I posted a URL for one of our movie theaters in town. Take a look at
it and figure it out for yourself.

> Also, where I live the bicycle lane is mostly used to pass other motor
> vehicles on the right, while driving 20 to 40 mph over the speed limit.

I've been passed while driving by a speeding vehicle that decided to
use a bike lane to get by, even though there was no on-coming traffic
and the road was completely straight. You can always find some idiot
on the road who is competely irresponsible. What else is new? It
simply has nothing to do with bike lanes - they'll do something
incredibly stupid regardless.


--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB

 

[Pat]

On Aug 1, 5:49 pm, William <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Aug 1, 2:28 pm, William <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Aug 1, 11:12 am, Pat <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 1, 11:54 am, William <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > On Aug 1, 10:25 am, Pat <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Aug 1, 10:43 am, donquijote1954 <[email protected]>
> > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Aug 1, 4:00 am, Peter Clinch <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Yes, there are some idiots who'll sit behind you and honk at you, but
> > > > > > > they won't run you down, because it might scratch the paintwork. If you
> > > > > > > push people off into bike lanes as a rule they will be far more maligned
> > > > > > > and looked down upon on the instances where they have no choice to use
> > > > > > > the roads, if they're typically in a bike lane instead.
>
> > > > > > > They don't help. We know they don't help as we can see them not
> > > > > > > helping. *HAVE YOU GOT THAT YET?*
>
> > > > > > You still avoiding my question: BIKE LANES OR NO BIKE LANES, HOW DO WE
> > > > > > BRING BIKE RIDERSHIP FROM THE AMERICAN OR BRITISH LEVES TO THE DUTCH
> > > > > > OR DANISH LEVELS?
>
> > > > > You see, you are thinking about the problem from the wrong direction.
> > > > > You are saying "biking is great, what is wrong with everyone else".
> > > > > Instead, you need to examine why other people don't bike and address
> > > > > that.
>
> > > > > Predominantly, I would think it is the combination of "no time to bike
> > > > > & no place to bike to". Most people won't bike to work if they get
> > > > > sweaty or if they work the night shift, etc. Bike lanes might
> > > > > partially address the "no place to bike to" issue, but not really.
>
> > > > > For example, I need to run out and get my kid some things for football
> > > > > practice. While we're at it we need to do some back-to-school
> > > > > shopping. Okay, that's simple and the kid is in great shape. I just
> > > > > need to run to the nearest sporting goods store. Fortunately, there's
> > > > > a small mall across the street. This trip is a bit unusually because
> > > > > I do 90% of my shopping at the nest Walmart. So ideally, this is
> > > > > bikeable. But the problem is, the nearest sporting goods store is
> > > > > about 45 miles away. That's about 15 miles past the Walmart. So at
> > > > > 10 mph (because of the hills and the purchases), you're talking at 9
> > > > > hour bike ride.
>
> > > > I don't blame you, biking works best
> > > > when everything is
> > > > more central and dense like a metro area.
>
> > > > > So I think your idea has merit, it just needs to be tweeked. The
> > > > > community didn't allow a Walmart because of a DOT right-of-way issue.
> > > > > But maybe if we had more Walmarts, so that they were closer to people,
> > > > > the people could bike to them easier. Plus if they put in
> > > > > SuperCenters with groceries, then more shopping could be done in 1
> > > > > trip.
>
> > > > > So I guess bike lanes are part of the problem, but having a place to
> > > > > go is the other part. Therefore, maybe you should lobby for more
> > > > > Walmarts -- and have them tied into bikeways -- to encourage shopping
> > > > > by bike.
>
> > > > Have you no sense of quality Pat? I guess that is implied when your
> > > > from nowhere land.
>
> > > I don't follow your logic. Of course I am from the middle of
> > > nowhere. That's great. Clean air. Clean water. Mountains in the
> > > background (okay, the Allegany's aren't exactly the Rockies). It is a
> > > nice, simple life. What else to I need. This is a great lifestyle.
> > > What "quality" am I missing? The Kleenex from Walmart is somehow
> > > worst than the Kleenex from the Kleenex Boutique? The $18 Harry
> > > Potter book I bought last week has different words in it than $32
> > > version in your corner bookstore? My backyard swimming pool is
> > > somehow less wet than your municipal one? My fruit-of-the-loom
> > > underwear are somehow less fruity than yours from the mall. Does a
> > > Timex keep different time than a Rolex -- it doesn't really matter to
> > > me, because I don't wear a watch.
>
> > > You might crave some imported, organic, fresh pasta only made by
> > > virgins on the hillsides of Italy. But regular pasta is fine by me.
> > > You don't need that stuff to live well. You only need it to fill the
> > > hollow spots in your sole. There's nothing wrong with simplicity.
> > > I'm not exactly a monk, but this definitely isn't Madison Ave. But
> > > that's what makes it nice.
>
> > > On Friday, a friend and I are thinking of throwing a canoe on the
> > > Allegany River and going a few miles, just for the heck of it. That's
> > > excitement around here.
>
> > > Besides, the Walmarts around here are pretty generous when it comes to
> > > youth sports. We'll hit up each of them during fundraising for each
> > > of the sports. It's not a lot, but they'll throw in $25 to $50 (each)
> > > any time they are asked -- and we ask them quite often. That buys
> > > stuff for the concession stand or for a raffle.
>
> > > So what about this "quality" thing?
>
> > Pat, Walmart is McDonalds department stores. In every way. If you wanna
> > call that quality go right ahead. Just keep that bull **** out of the
> > city.
>
> To be more specific, ever notice how a lot of things, not
> ALL things but a lot, are a heck of a lot crappier at walmart as
> apposed to the other extreme like William-sanoma or crate and barrel?
> I'm not saying that every place should be as expensive and *high tech*
> for a lack of a better word as those places are. But ever notice how
> theres a lot of poor people at Walmart? I guess you would'nt since
> thats all you have in nowhere land but here in the cities when people
> have more options then the lowest and crappiest, we tend to shoot for
> the happy medium between excessive and contemptible.
>
> I prove via internet: http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?product_id=2403033
>
> Wal*Mart:Lowest Common Denominator
> Look at this cool set of pots and pans and the mounted rack. Only
> 34.32!!!
> But in reality,look at cheap and thin the metal on the cooking
> utensils and the pots is. Don't expect those to get through a
> thanksgiving dinner....
>
> Kohls: A Happy Mediumhttp://www.kohls.com/products/product_page_vanilla0.jsp?PRODUCT%3C%3E...
> A good medium, not to bad it gets the job done. 170$ is pretty
> reasonable, closer on the low end of things but again it will get the
> job done.
>
> William-Sonoma: When brains collide with class and stlye Bet you don't
> have one of these at "The Rez" do you Pat?http://www.williams-sonoma.com/products/sku9639873/index.cfm?pkey=cck...
> 600 dollars and just for the pots. Yea I would say this would out live
> the competition in ever way by a large margin. Still, nothing to there
> 1,400$$$ one. ttp://www.williams-sonoma.com/products/sku8991465/index.cfm?pkey=cckwseti
> Hey, you get what ya pay for!
>
> Now, cheap prices may seem all good, but why not just pay a little
> extra for the one that will last?
> (Ahem* because your either poor or have no options or you just have no
> sense of quality)
>
> Now Pat, you may be saying to yourself that those other sets of pots
> are expensive only for more profit, but if that was true, do you
> REALLY think William-Sonoma would still be around?

Umm, eh eh, shhh, but go look again. For Walmart, you compared the
price of the pot RACK to the cost of the pots in the other stores.

Second, I've hear of Kohls but have no idea what they sell. Sorry.
I've never hear of William-whatever and there probably isn't one with
a few hundred miles of here. Sounds like one of those too-much-money
and too-little-brains stores for people who have a cook do their
cooking for them.

$1200 for pots is ridiculous. Anyway, you wouldn't believe the stuff
I use. On the rare occasion that I need to buy cookware, I swing by a
restaurant supply store in Buffalo and get what I need. Strictly
utilization, but great quality. You can beat on the stuff with no
damage. My teflon frying pan, which I use all the time, is probably
over 5 years old and the teflon is still perfect. Oh, and the stuff
is pretty cheap.

My tea pot is from K-Mart and is probably going on 10 years old. It's
Revereware. Great stuff.

What you have to understand about rural areas is the simplicity of the
place. If you wanted $1200 pots, you wouldn't live here. You can get
almost anything you want at Walmart. You just want different things.

Here's a better comparision for you:
http://www.kohls.com/products/produ...LDER<>folder_id=436514383&bmUID=1186080661287
http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?product_id=5673563
But I suppose the ones from Walmart are somehow inherently inferior..

 

[donquijote1954]

On Aug 2, 3:24 am, Ace <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 08:14:13 +0100, Peter Clinch
>
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >donquijote1954 wrote:
>
> >> Letting bikes loose out on the roads can be dangerous. Better channel
> >> them through bike lanes.
>
> >Bike lanes don't have a better safety track record than the roads.
>
> >Go tohttp://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/infrastructure.htmland actually do
> >some reading around the subject.
>
> Alternatively, you could just stop feeding the troll. It's fairly
> clear that he's not listening, and I doubt that anyone will seriously
> take any notice of him, as he's such an obvious monomaniac.

Bike lanes and thus people riding bikes and saving gas is such
monomaniacal idea. Reasonable people just drive a country to war and
get more oil. They all want to be like Napoleon. Isn't that a clinical
case?

 

[donquijote1954]

On Aug 2, 5:08 am, Tony Raven <[email protected]> wrote:
> Ace wrote:
>
> > Alternatively, you could just stop feeding the troll. It's fairly
> > clear that he's not listening, and I doubt that anyone will seriously
> > take any notice of him, as he's such an obvious monomaniac.
>
> Its also fairly obvious he won't be around for long before he gets
> killed by one of the many thousands of cyclicidal SUV drivers in his
> neighbourhood ;-)

A real possibility for me, like that of you getting killed by
terrorists. Well, they are both terrorists, right?

 

[donquijote1954]

On Aug 2, 5:27 am, Mike Clark <[email protected]> wrote:
> In message <[email protected]>
> donquijote1954 <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Aug 1, 1:13 pm, Mike Clark <[email protected]> wrote:
> [snip]
> > > In contrast to the 'idea' of ever more separate lanes being good for
> > > improved safety there is the contradictory data that shows that in
> > > places where you remove all the lane markings, signs and junction
> > > priorities you often get a measurable increase in safety.
>
> > Should we erase the car lanes too? I think we could have bike lanes
> > and still enforce those breaking the law, so they can pay for more
> > bike lanes. Are you parked in the bike lane? You got a fine for 100
> > bucks...
>
> Yes the data is based on situations where all the lane markings and
> junction priorities, traffic lights etc are removed. Basically people
> stop driving as if they have a known priority and instead start looking
> out for and avoiding other road users.

OK, either lanes for all or lanes for none. When do we start that
campaign?

 

[donquijote1954]

On Aug 2, 5:28 am, Tony Raven <[email protected]> wrote:
> Ace wrote:
> > On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 10:08:26 +0100, Tony Raven <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
>
> >> Ace wrote:
> >>> Alternatively, you could just stop feeding the troll. It's fairly
> >>> clear that he's not listening, and I doubt that anyone will seriously
> >>> take any notice of him, as he's such an obvious monomaniac.
>
> >> Its also fairly obvious he won't be around for long before he gets
> >> killed by one of the many thousands of cyclicidal SUV drivers in his
> >> neighbourhood ;-)
>
> > That'd be a shame.
>
> Or an exaggeration.

Well, *I* exaggerated. My risk of getting killed by road terrorism is
greater, much greater, than you getting killed by the other type of
terrorism.

I saw a bumper sticker today that here is quite revolutionary: SLOWER
TRAFFIC KEEP TO THE RIGHT... AVOID ROAD RAGE! That must be a communist
attempt at bringing regulation to our roads. We want to zigzag if we
please, and drive our SUVs while on the phone if we want, so we can
remain a free nation!

Rage is part of life in the jungle, and the strong shall survive.
Hallelujah!

 

[donquijote1954]

On Aug 2, 2:21 pm, [email protected] (Bill Z.) wrote:
> "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" <[email protected]> writes:
>
>
>
> > ALL "bicycle lanes" are "separate but equal" facilities; therefore
> > their deficiencies are inherent and do not depend on the quality of
> > the particular implementation.
>
> Are you on drugs or something? Cars are allowed in bike lanes (to
> merge in before turning across them and they are part of a road).
> I've yet to see anyone disparage an HOV lane as a '"separate but equal"
> facility' (a code phrase for what is really an inferior faciility).
>
> Cut the rhetoric. If you have any point, you should be able to
> show some deficiency in the Caltrans design standards, not in some
> figment of your imagination.

Besides, if "separate but equal" is the law of the land in many areas,
particularly applied to those who live beyond walled communities, I
don't see why it should apply to bikes and SUVs. They do NOT mix, just
as lions and monkeys.

 

[Wayne Pein]

Bill Z. wrote:

> Wayne Pein <[email protected]> writes:

>>
>>The comparison is therefore a 16' lane vs. a 12' lane with 4' bike lane.
>>
>>16' lane:
>>- bicyclist chooses lateral position based on speed and other
>>operational and physical context. It can be 4', 5', 6' from the edge
>>under typical conditions or further under atypical conditions such as
>>a stopped delivery vehicle or very high bicyclist speed.
>
>
> .... which is just what you do in the bike lane case - when riding
> at less than the normal speed of traffic you will be nominally
> 14 feet from the adjacent traffic-lane's stripe, which puts you
> a couple of feet inside the bike lane.

YOU may ride 2' from edge of pavement, and others may ride 2' from edge
of pavement, but it is not good practice. I don't ride 2' from edge of
pavement.


If you are less than 12 feet
> from that lane divider (which puts you just outside the bike lane)
> you should be going as fast as traffic unless avoiding some specific
> hazard (which the bike lane rules allow).

Not me. I typically ride 4' from edge of pavement no matter what my
speed is.


>
>
>>Bicyclist can pass to left of stopped vehicle without changing
>>lanes. - bicyclists are ordinary slow moving vehicle
>>operators. Bicyclist has superior right to occupy that lane space
>>since he was there prior to overtaking motorists. - bicyclist
>>within the lane engenders caution in passing motorists. - bicyclist
>>traveled way is kept debris free by tire and wind blast from motor
>>vehicles.
>
>
> The California Vehicle Code forbids lateral movement on a roadway
> unless such a movement can be made with reasonable safety. If you
> were going slower than traffic and then decide to move left, you
> do not have squatters rights, lane stripe or not.

I don't care about the CVC.


>
>
>>- bicyclists are "special." Bicyclist has less right to use the "motor
>>vehicle lane" either by law or by motorist coercion.
>
>
> Nonesense.


Sorry. It's true.


>
>>- bicyclist behind bike lane stripe and out of "motor vehicle lane"
>>means that motorists need not be cautious.
>
>
> That is also wrong. A driver has a responsibility to operate a
> vehicle safely. Even drivers who don't care generally don't want
> their fenders dinged needlessly.

So? Motorists pass bicyclists faster and closer when a bike lane is
present. They need not exhibit any caution when passing.


>
>
>>- presence of bike lane can encourage higher motor speeds whether
>>bicyclists are present or not.
>
>
> Bike lanes actually have the opposite effect - motorist speed tends
> to increase the wider a lane is.

Sorry. You are wrong again.


>
>
>>The bike lane acts as a paved shoulder and buffer from roadside
>>elements, well channelizes vehicles, and places them in a favorable
>>position for optimal lines of sight. - bike lane collects debris.
>
>
> Not true either, unless the adjacent traffic lane is very wide.> Drivers nominally guide on the lane stripe, staying a couple of
> feet inside. Whether you have a bike lane stripe or not, the
> area 12 to 16 feet from the "traffic" lane stripe will be kept
> clean. However, as a bike lane, a local jurisdiction that installed
> the bike lane then has an obligation to keep it clean, but there
> is no such obligation for a shoulder (which is not intended for
> vehicular travel).


Yea, jurisdictions on Bike Lane Fantasy Island keep bike lanes as clean
as the normal lane.

Wayne
>
>

 

[Wayne Pein]

Bill Z. wrote:

> Wayne Pein <[email protected]> writes:
>
>
>>Bill Z. wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Adding a bike lane does not change the rules of the road.
>>
>>
>>Of course it does! There are mandatory bike lane laws. Two lanes
>>become 4 lanes, the bike lane being a substandard width lane.
>
>
> A bike lane is not a substandard width lane,

Yea, all lanes are 4' wide.

Are you for real?

but in any case the
> rules of the road do not change. The legislature does not magically
> go into session and change the laws just because someone entered a
> bike lane while riding a bicycle, or even because someone put in a
> bike lane in their town.

More Fantasy Island Bike Lane lore.

Wayne