I find it amusing that my liberal city puts so much tax money into amenities that serve, overwhelmingly, its white male population.Thus ends Law Professor Ann Althouse's blog post, "Madison, where the powerful bike lobby pushes for policies that will get 20% of workers commuting by bike...". She then goes on to note that "... bicycle commuting dropped to only 4.69% in 2011. The previous year it was 6.03%." The post can be found here.
Frankly, I am dubious about statistics on bicycle use that go to the second decimal point. The Wall Street Journal article upon which the blog post is based just adds to my sense that the numbers are given with an accuracy unwarranted.
The bicycle is being pushed in Lowell and we even now have Sharrows♠ and bike lanes. I hope that we are not going to expend a lot of taxpayer money to benefit solely
white Caucasian males and those who emulate them. On the other hand, it might help that population group grow healthier and at the same time it might reduce carbon emissions into our collective atmosphere, so isn't it helping everybody, and might it not be a good investment?
That said, is 20% using bicycles a reasonable goal for commuters in Madison, Wisconsin? Would it be here in Lowell, even if we considered that riding to the train by bike counted?
Regards — Cliff
♠ Sharrows is a compression of two words, Share Arrows, and says that auto and truck and motorcycle drivers are legally bound to share the rode with bicycle riders.
-1 S2 T2 10