Listen now by clicking here: [audio:http://traffic.libsyn.com/spokesmen/The_Spokesmen_77.mp3]
Panelists:
Topics Included:
- US National Bike Summit
- Inhofe Boxer highway bill and mandatory sidepath provision for Federal lands
- Chicago Bike Share – Tainted Selection Process?
- New UCI Rules for 2012
- Spring Classics
- South-by-Southwest Cycling Report
- US National Bike Summit (reprise)
How to Listen:
$398 – Wow! http://www.walmart.com/ip/eZip-Trailz-Electric-Bicycle/11988713
I’m proud of my BionX assisted commuter bike. It allows me to ride to work everyday up and down the hills carrying my large laptop and lunch. https://d3j5vwomefv46c.cloudfront.net/photos/large/518880717.jpg?key=25601920&Expires=1332864975&Key-Pair-Id=APKAIYVGSUJFNRFZBBTA&Signature=durBO1ulf7JfhVgzfwMOjf2r6K-pIYaykMv12rub5bHxM2B74hdfUPugmdDc4KW09wV8MW-vPJTxsGciHC10ZGvn2w0fTZRqr3o4BcVI1vo1ZTaeE5C4AGiWzrrSSvLVAZKdiqv7Czy7lFKvzz6MlHulKuO4aaQ~TicfntDK1Y0_
Just wanted to chime in on Byron’s point about bikeshare being “subsidized by the gummit” (to paraphrase). Look, government subsidizes all sorts of public infrastructure. And when that public infrastructure has such positive externalities (reduced congestion, health effects, etc…) it’s just silly to ask, “Why should the government pay for this?”
Highways don’t “make money”; garbage collection (usually) doesn’t “make money”; municipal swimming pools don’t “make money”.
To his larger point about whether “gummit involvement” is going to poison bikeshare, I’d say it’s quite possible in conservative municipalities. But those municipalities are just fine with government roads–they only get upset when it’s something that they perceive is for “others”. Liberal areas of the country will likely adopt bikeshare enthusiastically (as they’ve done), conservative areas will decry the end of the world…then quietly adopt bikeshare in a decade or so.