That's it, I am no longer defending Cyclists!
Discussion
yonex said:
My first bike when I started with a club was £200 Spesh Alex, I also raced it. It needed new tyres, £20 each or so. Shorts and top from the club £80, shoes and pedals £70.
Very serious money for a summers worth of riding.
Do you enjoy cycling?Very serious money for a summers worth of riding.
Do you earn more than the average U.K. salary?
Do you have space to easily store a bike and the associated kit?
Do you have the means to transport your bike to a recreational event?
The answer to most of those questions is typically going to be positive for a cyclist. The real question is how do you plan to get those who answer negatively to the majority to adopt cycling?
This is the element that many religious types struggle to comprehend. The premis that not everyone shares their enjoyment or belief in something.
The data from the Boris Bike scheme really does highlight what many cyclists strongly desire to not see or accept.
swerni said:
Got anything to back you're assumptions, if so please feel free to post them?
Hate to throw some facts in the mix, but ...
https://www.cyclinguk.org/resources/cycling-uk-cyc...
I think the thing is, it's a perception rather than a reality. When we go cycling, my wife always goes on about how my mountain bike is much nicer than hers - even though, after buying on sale, with cycle to work, it cost me £19 a month. Whereas she has to have a £38 a month phone because her friends have one, and mine costs me £9 a month now it's over 2 years old... People are happy spending £££ keeping up with what everyone else has got, but spend £ on something different and suddenly you're flash...Hate to throw some facts in the mix, but ...
https://www.cyclinguk.org/resources/cycling-uk-cyc...
DonkeyApple said:
Do you enjoy cycling?
Do you earn more than the average U.K. salary?
Do you have space to easily store a bike and the associated kit?
Do you have the means to transport your bike to a recreational event?
The answer to most of those questions is typically going to be positive for a cyclist. The real question is how do you plan to get those who answer negatively to the majority to adopt cycling?
This is the element that many religious types struggle to comprehend. The premis that not everyone shares their enjoyment or belief in something.
The data from the Boris Bike scheme really does highlight what many cyclists strongly desire to not see or accept.
Do you earn more than the average U.K. salary?
Do you have space to easily store a bike and the associated kit?
Do you have the means to transport your bike to a recreational event?
The answer to most of those questions is typically going to be positive for a cyclist. The real question is how do you plan to get those who answer negatively to the majority to adopt cycling?
This is the element that many religious types struggle to comprehend. The premis that not everyone shares their enjoyment or belief in something.
The data from the Boris Bike scheme really does highlight what many cyclists strongly desire to not see or accept.
- Is £300 a lot of money?
- Can you store a bike a pair of shoes, bike, shirt and gloves in most places?
- Can I ride to an event within 30 miles?
swerni said:
Got anything to back your assumptions, if so please feel free to post them?
Hate to throw some facts in the mix, but ...
https://www.cyclinguk.org/resources/cycling-uk-cyc...
Yup. Poor people don’t cycle in the U.K. You know it. I know it and the recent hooha regarding diversity in London regards cycling supports it further. It’s a hobby for the affluent, like yourself, yonex, myself et al. Hate to throw some facts in the mix, but ...
https://www.cyclinguk.org/resources/cycling-uk-cyc...
Edited by swerni on Sunday 22 July 18:52
DonkeyApple said:
Yup. Poor people don’t cycle in the U.K. You know it. I know it and the recent hooha regarding diversity in London regards cycling supports it further. It’s a hobby for the affluent, like yourself, yonex, myself et al.
Don't agree. It can be expensive, for sure, but to get into it, really it just isn't that expensive. yonex said:
- Is £300 a lot of money?
- Can you store a bike a pair of shoes, bike, shirt and gloves in most places?
- Can I ride to an event within 30 miles?
Even if it is a question of won’t, rather than can’t and we just can’t really tell what that split is in reality, how would you propose getting millions of the poorest people, the masses, onto push bikes? Just creating a network hasn’t and won’t cut it. You’d have to tax and fire people. Do you really think that is ethical? Do you honestly think that in this modern world that we live in that cycling is the solution? If you tax the masses out of their cars other solutions will develop to solve that problem. It won’t be bicycles.
In London, every single day, the vast majority of people wake up every morning and chose to walk, bus or tube, even drive! and pay for the privilege rather than get on a bike. That speaks volumes. And even those who make the choice to cycle are mostly those who live along the lower Thames flood plain. Embankment may be full of wealthy, white men on bikes but they are few and far between on the roads up hill to the north.
This is the key point, only those who want to ride a bike do so and only those who can afford it as a hobby do so. It is just a hobby. Wealthy people putting expensive bikes into second cars and driving out to nice places to enjoy their hobby. A hobby or sport is not a transport solution. It’s not an environmental solution. It’s not the future. It’s just a hobby. And you cannot, in a civilised society, force people to take part in hobbies.
swerni said:
Let's face it, none of us represents the norm in the same way London doesn't.
Indeed. But we do go out into wider society and move among the ‘normals’. They are not cycling to Bluewater or Westfield, they are not leaving Thamesmead on bikes to work in their droves, they are not remotely considering a bike as any form of solution. The only time they ever think bike is to try and run one of them off the road or have a stroke because someone in a bike has dared to cross a red light and get ahead of them. And we can forget London and look at most towns and cities in the U.K. and see the exact same scenario, bikes only being used where the topography is flat and then only by affluent, educated, white men. The picture doesn’t change when the accents change.
DonkeyApple said:
You’ve kind of dodged the core question there.
Even if it is a question of won’t, rather than can’t and we just can’t really tell what that split is in reality, how would you propose getting millions of the poorest people, the masses, onto push bikes? Just creating a network hasn’t and won’t cut it. You’d have to tax and fire people. Do you really think that is ethical? Do you honestly think that in this modern world that we live in that cycling is the solution? If you tax the masses out of their cars other solutions will develop to solve that problem. It won’t be bicycles.
In London, every single day, the vast majority of people wake up every morning and chose to walk, bus or tube, even drive! and pay for the privilege rather than get on a bike. That speaks volumes. And even those who make the choice to cycle are mostly those who live along the lower Thames flood plain. Embankment may be full of wealthy, white men on bikes but they are few and far between on the roads up hill to the north.
This is the key point, only those who want to ride a bike do so and only those who can afford it as a hobby do so. It is just a hobby. Wealthy people putting expensive bikes into second cars and driving out to nice places to enjoy their hobby. A hobby or sport is not a transport solution. It’s not an environmental solution. It’s not the future. It’s just a hobby. And you cannot, in a civilised society, force people to take part in hobbies.
But my first bike was not a lot of money. It was in races with bikes that cost 10-15 times as much, IIRC it was top 5 that day, it's all about the nut that holds the handlebars Even if it is a question of won’t, rather than can’t and we just can’t really tell what that split is in reality, how would you propose getting millions of the poorest people, the masses, onto push bikes? Just creating a network hasn’t and won’t cut it. You’d have to tax and fire people. Do you really think that is ethical? Do you honestly think that in this modern world that we live in that cycling is the solution? If you tax the masses out of their cars other solutions will develop to solve that problem. It won’t be bicycles.
In London, every single day, the vast majority of people wake up every morning and chose to walk, bus or tube, even drive! and pay for the privilege rather than get on a bike. That speaks volumes. And even those who make the choice to cycle are mostly those who live along the lower Thames flood plain. Embankment may be full of wealthy, white men on bikes but they are few and far between on the roads up hill to the north.
This is the key point, only those who want to ride a bike do so and only those who can afford it as a hobby do so. It is just a hobby. Wealthy people putting expensive bikes into second cars and driving out to nice places to enjoy their hobby. A hobby or sport is not a transport solution. It’s not an environmental solution. It’s not the future. It’s just a hobby. And you cannot, in a civilised society, force people to take part in hobbies.
You have a point, but, I see one old guy in fluro gear each day. He's been on my commute for years and is obviously riding to work in all weathers and prolly works on the roads. He's been through three mountain bikes in the last 5 years.
swerni said:
You are fundamentally wrong.
The vast majority of cyclist don't have expensive bikes, but feel free to post any alternative data.
The vast majority of cyclists don't find the need to put their bike in a second car, they wheel it out the front door and ride it.
Bike are smalll things so saying "storage" is a factor is rediculous.
So far all you've posted is your opinion,which is fine, but without anything to back it up, that's all it is.
I'd also say anecdotally it's reasonably accurate though.The vast majority of cyclist don't have expensive bikes, but feel free to post any alternative data.
The vast majority of cyclists don't find the need to put their bike in a second car, they wheel it out the front door and ride it.
Bike are smalll things so saying "storage" is a factor is rediculous.
So far all you've posted is your opinion,which is fine, but without anything to back it up, that's all it is.
Define "expensive". In my little work team of 4 (very normal, not very rich) people, one guy has several K's worth of carbon road bike (and a hipster fixey), one has a £1000 MTB that is used when camping to ride from the caravan to the showers and back, one has just spent well over a grand on bike bits for his kids and one has a classic Raleigh Banana (?). I would say they are all expensive and only one of us is in any way serious about bikes or the filthy, drug-fuelled, cheat-ridden "sport" in general - but we would all be at least 4 figs down if we had to replace them. Yes you could pick up a ratty BMX with 1 brake for £25 at a car boot sale, but not for serious "leisure" riding. Even the commuter bikes out the back of the office are all half decent.
Storage is certainly a factor for many people. Dude with the carbon thing lives in a 2nd floor flat, he hates keeping his bike in the store-room downstairs, and is paranoid about leaving it anywhere. The less affluent, in dodgy estates where the shed doors are all broken,or the back gardens are pretty much shared, a bike won't last 5 minutes without being pinched. I work opposite a train station in a city and the number of bikes, mopeds etc I see getting/trying to be stolen is mental.
DonkeyApple said:
cycling in the U.K. is for the affluent. It is a hobby that requires quite high expenditure. Bike, kit, transport, storage. It is exactly why you have such a narrow economic demographic perusing it as a pastime
This, if not a poor attempt at sarcasm, might be one of the stupidest things I've ever read.My brand new road bike cost less than 500 pounds, and should last me multiple years, meaning that it should net out around 100-and-something quid a year. All the while I'll be not a money on petrol, gym memberships etc., so it should work out close to cost neutral.
As for the specialised "kit", I spent 40 pounds on a helmet and some gloves. The expensive "storage"? My garden.
What a wally.
funkyrobot said:
This thread just keeps giving.
Cyclists are all financially elite white people and have more money than anyone else. They only cycle as a hobby and that is just done to annoy other road users.
They should stand on West Marsh Road at knocking off time if they think cycling is for the elite Cyclists are all financially elite white people and have more money than anyone else. They only cycle as a hobby and that is just done to annoy other road users.
C70R said:
This, if not a poor attempt at sarcasm, might be one of the stupidest things I've ever read.
My brand new road bike cost less than 500 pounds, and should last me multiple years, meaning that it should net out around 100-and-something quid a year. All the while I'll be not a money on petrol, gym memberships etc., so it should work out close to cost neutral.
As for the specialised "kit", I spent 40 pounds on a helmet and some gloves. The expensive "storage"? My garden.
What a wally.
I’m not sure that you comprehend the finances of those less fiscally fortunate than yourself, the masses. You’re failure lies in recognising which side of the fence you are on. My brand new road bike cost less than 500 pounds, and should last me multiple years, meaning that it should net out around 100-and-something quid a year. All the while I'll be not a money on petrol, gym memberships etc., so it should work out close to cost neutral.
As for the specialised "kit", I spent 40 pounds on a helmet and some gloves. The expensive "storage"? My garden.
What a wally.
Next time you are out on your bike, just look at all your fellow riders on either your commute or your fun day out. You can only discuss this issue properly once you stop living in denial. And you certainly won’t begin to understand why many cyclists get grief from many motorists until you open your eyes to the true reality.
swerni said:
Got anything to back your assumptions, if so please feel free to post them?
Hate to throw some facts in the mix, but ...
https://www.cyclinguk.org/resources/cycling-uk-cyc...
Interesting site. Seem to present the raw figures and put their own spin on them which is fair enough.Hate to throw some facts in the mix, but ...
https://www.cyclinguk.org/resources/cycling-uk-cyc...
Edited by swerni on Sunday 22 July 18:52
In England a massive 4% of people commute on a bike.
And in 2016 (last figures available) sales of bikes dropped 20% compared to to the average of the previous 5 years.
Fuels my hunch that peak bike may have come and gone.
yonex said:
DonkeyApple said:
Yup. Poor people don’t cycle in the U.K. You know it. I know it and the recent hooha regarding diversity in London regards cycling supports it further. It’s a hobby for the affluent, like yourself, yonex, myself et al.
Don't agree. It can be expensive, for sure, but to get into it, really it just isn't that expensive. DonkeyApple said:
C70R said:
This, if not a poor attempt at sarcasm, might be one of the stupidest things I've ever read.
My brand new road bike cost less than 500 pounds, and should last me multiple years, meaning that it should net out around 100-and-something quid a year. All the while I'll be not a money on petrol, gym memberships etc., so it should work out close to cost neutral.
As for the specialised "kit", I spent 40 pounds on a helmet and some gloves. The expensive "storage"? My garden.
What a wally.
I’m not sure that you comprehend the finances of those less fiscally fortunate than yourself, the masses. You’re failure lies in recognising which side of the fence you are on. My brand new road bike cost less than 500 pounds, and should last me multiple years, meaning that it should net out around 100-and-something quid a year. All the while I'll be not a money on petrol, gym memberships etc., so it should work out close to cost neutral.
As for the specialised "kit", I spent 40 pounds on a helmet and some gloves. The expensive "storage"? My garden.
What a wally.
Next time you are out on your bike, just look at all your fellow riders on either your commute or your fun day out. You can only discuss this issue properly once you stop living in denial. And you certainly won’t begin to understand why many cyclists get grief from many motorists until you open your eyes to the true reality.
I cycle commute 3 days a week in London, and have done on-and-off for almost 6 years. I can confidently tell you that there's nothing "elite" about the people I share the cycle lanes and roads with. If anything, my meagre expenditure is relatively high compared with a lot of people that I see.
You're talking cr*p, based on no actual evidence, so please do everyone a favour and pipe down.
WinstonWolf said:
funkyrobot said:
This thread just keeps giving.
Cyclists are all financially elite white people and have more money than anyone else. They only cycle as a hobby and that is just done to annoy other road users.
They should stand on West Marsh Road at knocking off time if they think cycling is for the elite Cyclists are all financially elite white people and have more money than anyone else. They only cycle as a hobby and that is just done to annoy other road users.
Or spend a few hours in the town centre.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff