Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by CoreDumpling 4786 days ago
True story: I moved from southern California to Holland in no small part because of how amenable the country is to cycling.

People like to think that cycling is popular here naturally because the country is flat and densely populated. However, it's easy to forget that during the postwar boom years, a major shift toward cars happened and it took a concerted effort of willful resistance and politically non-expedient measures to bring back the bike paths (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuBdf9jYj7o). Clearly, 1897 was not the last chance the Dutch had to fix their transit system, and with the groundwork they've laid over the years, it now costs only €30 per person in funding annually! (http://www.aviewfromthecyclepath.com/2010/05/487-million-eur...)

Yet I see very little chance of this happening in California, not because cyclists lack a voice, but because we need to create more disincentives to driving. This obviously is a political no-go considering that motorists are by far the majority demographic. It's saddening, though, that there is so much willful ignorance (or apathy) with regard to how we've externalized the true cost of driving, whether it's in the form of:

- damage to the environment

- subsidy to cheap gas prices by the DoD budget (and body count) for controlling the world's oil flow

- casualties from motor vehicle accidents

- health problems resulting from sedentary lifestyles

- zoning rules that require abundant free parking to be available in communities.

We'd probably have to see gas hit $10/gallon and parking lots charge $50/day before Americans start to reconsider. (These prices are actually quite typical in European cities.)

Oddly enough, I think it's good that the Great Recession has caused a lot of Americans to reconsider their car expenses and choose to scale back their lifestyles in ways that are more healthy, safe, and environmentally friendly. I hope this trend (not the recession, of course) continues and if America can set an example of moving away from a car culture, it will do far more good around the world to discourage the growing middle class in China, India, and other developing countries from adopting the same wasteful practices.

In the meantime, though, I'll piggyback on the 40-year head start on bicycle infrastructure in the Netherlands. If I sound bitter, it's my sore legs from yesterday's 70km ride talking ;)

4 comments

Respectfully, I think your analysis is overly simplistic. You ignored the elephant in the room: the geography of the US.

Cycling makes a ton of sense if you live in and around an urban area---particularly when most of your interactions with other people are in that same small area. Despite my love for driving, if I fit that mold, I'd happily adopt cycling as my main mode of transportation. But there are a couple of very common scenarios in the US that maybe aren't so common in other countries:

* Living in a suburb/rural area that is more than a half-hour drive from your place of work (in no traffic). There's a high price to pay in terms of time that cycling would entail.

* Traveling throughout the US. And I don't just mean across the country where trains or buses are appropriate---I mean visiting your friend several towns over. For instance, my friend that I frequently visit is about 30 minutes away by car but is about 100 minutes away by bicycle (back-roads, no traffic, data from Google Maps). Similarly for my parents.

I think both of these scenarios strongly militate toward owning a car in favor of a bicycle. I also think tons of people in the US fit this mold---certainly more so than smaller countries with a much denser overall population. Most of the people in the US live in cities---but the overall population density of the US is much lower than most other countries, which suggests that even if you live in or around a city, you have a much higher chance of having connections with people who live in more suburban or rural areas (than similar folks in denser countries). When that happens, a car is typically the most sensible form of transportation.

Of course, it's certainly plausible that we could own cars that we rarely use but cycle to work every day, for example. But I think that's a more complex dynamic and I don't think I have the tools to properly analyze it.

I also find your enthusiasm for passing laws to legislate your cost/benefit analysis on everyone else to be deeply disturbing, but I'll leave that one be.

> Living in a suburb/rural area that is more than a half-hour drive from your place of work (in no traffic).

That this situation is so common is a symptom of the fact that our cities and towns have been designed around driving. The geography of the US is a comparatively small factor, since (as you mention) most people here live in cities or suburbs.

> When that happens, a car is typically the most sensible form of transportation.

For these sorts of occasional needs, car sharing services work well.

> I also find your enthusiasm for passing laws to legislate your cost/benefit analysis on everyone else to be deeply disturbing, but I'll leave that one be.

This assumes that the status quo doesn't already constitute legislating one group's cost/benefit analysis on everyone else.

> That this situation is so common is a symptom of the fact that our cities and towns have been designed around driving.

I live outside Boston. Which was most certainly not designed for driving. And yet, my analysis holds there too.

> The geography of the US is a comparatively small factor, since (as you mention) most people here live in cities or suburbs.

I think you've taken what I said out of context. I went on to qualify that by saying those people, due to the lower overall population density, have a decent chance of knowing people in suburbs/rural areas that they visit.

> For these sorts of occasional needs, car sharing services work well.

In urban areas, yes. In suburb/rural areas, no. My friend had a similar dilemma, and her solution was to rent a car. Plausible, but is of varying pain depending upon use cases. Her use case was "I need a car infrequently but for long stretches of time."

> This assumes that the status quo doesn't already constitute legislating one group's cost/benefit analysis on everyone else.

No it doesn't. I said nothing about the status quo. I didn't even argue in favor of the status quo.

Do you acknowledge that geography plays a big role in the viability of cycling as a primary mode of transportation? From your response, I can only assume that you don't. If my assumption is right, then I suggest we focus the conversation on that.

Your also assuming an ether or situation if you drive less having a cheaper car seems more reasonable. I bought a 30k car back when I spent 2 hours a day in it, now that I drive ~2 hours a week and kind of wish I had bought a Honda civic instead.
> Your also assuming an ether or situation if you drive less having a cheaper car seems more reasonable.

Where did I assume that? This isn't about whether you have a $30K car or a Civic, just that you have a car...

I moved from Mountain View to Portland for basically the same reason. While Portland isn't anywhere near Dutch levels of biking, the city government takes it seriously enough that I hope it will be nice by the time my daughter is old enough to not drive.

I agree with your assessment that we "need to create more disincentives to driving" and that is the part that is getting the most resistance.

I think the best arguments we can make are selfish ones. Safety, and the damage cars do to communities by taking humans off the streets. Health. Cost.

As a parent who grew up in Suburbia, I think the best thing that I can do for my child is to move to an urban bike-friendly city, because the number one cause of deaths by far for teenagers in the US is motor vehicle crashes.

"In 2010, seven teens ages 16 to 19 died every day from motor vehicle injuries." - http://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/teen_drivers/teendrive...

In 2012 we took a long road trip through the most bike friendly cities in the US, and settled on Portland. Our first choice was actually Vancouver, BC but its hard for American citizens to emigrate there unless you have a sponsor.

We considered staying in Atlanta and fighting for the type of changes it needs to become a real livable city, but ultimately we decided that it wasn't worth risking our lives and that our energy could be much better spent cultivating the critical mass needed to reach a tipping point in Portland's low-car lifestyle.

I visited Amasterdam (from Chicago) in November of last year, and fell in love with the cycling-centric environment in Hollad. How difficult is it to pick up and move to Holland from the US?
Interestingly the US has a special treaty with the Netherlands for starting a business called the DAFT (Dutch-American Friendship Treaty)[1] that gives Americans preferential treatment compared to other non-EU nationals. I have no idea about the other legal hurdles.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DAFT_(treaty)