"wafflycat" <w*a*ff£y£cat*@£btco*nn£ect.com> wrote
[snip]
Quoted message said:
This is something I cannot fathom - the assumption that those of us
who cycle and are passionate about it apparently don't drive cars.
Which is a load of tosh. Like many of the regular posters to urc, I
walk, I cycle and I drive. Don't ride a horse though 🙂 I love
being out on my bike. I thoroughly enjoy driving too. Walking isn't
bad either
Well, in inner London you do have a better chance than average of
finding people who do not drive, and even people who never have.
It's the same in Manhattan,of course. There's a certain amount of
incomprehension and hostility towards motorists evident within the
London Cycling Campaign (LCC). There are also people who do not
particularly like bikes, but are in favour of them just because they
don't like cars, and see bikes, no matter how unpleasant and
dangerous they may be, as the only possible substitute.
Mind you, I'm a member of the Barnet branch of the LCC. Barnet is
an outer London borough - the green belt starts at the bottom of my
garden. The Barnet LCC has never done a survey, but it's fairly
obvious that a substantial majority of our members own cars.
The question is, are cars owned by cyclists different from the
average car. I think they might be. I've seen it estimated that
about half the cost of a car is tied up with the status symbol
aspects of it. Since cyclists tend not to look on their cars as
status symbols, they tend not to spend that half of the money, and so
get their motoring at half the price it costs a "real" motorist.
Jeremy Parker