[sokoloff]

Bicycles compete with other modes of transport in varying degrees.

Critically, bicycles have very close to the same random route ability as cars. They’re excluded from most limited-access highways but otherwise can go directly to a place 2 miles away by traveling approximately 2 miles and without significant waiting times for the user. Contrast that with public transit that might need to go 5+ miles and involve a transfer, multiple waits, and walking on both ends to cover that same 2 mile journey.

It was practically possible for me to cycle to my old office. It was comically impractical (though technically possible) to use a combination of multiple buses and multiple subway lines to get there. For that commute (and I think many other journeys), bikes are competing with cars not public transit.

[archi42]

I think "it depends". For someone living in the same city as you, but having both their apartment and place of work connected by a more feasible public transport route, a bike competes with public transport.

For me it augments it: Taking public transport is not pleasant (10 miles at 40m travel time), but I could go to the train station by bike, take the train and then cycle to work (<20m). Only reason I'm not doing that that I have to carry the bike up the stairs (10m height difference) and instead do wfh. By car it's 15 to 20m depending on traffic.

[sokoloff]

I completely agree, thus the contrast of my first sentence in GP with the first sentence in GGP.