Bikes versus Cars!
July 10th, 2008 |If a bike has to stop and wait ten seconds for a car, that biker loses ten seconds of travel time. If a car has to stop and wait ten seconds for a bike, the driver loses ten seconds of travel time. The expected loss in distance traveled is much greater for the car, especially in areas where cars are going fast (i.e., the disputed areas when safety is a concern). Furthermore the cars are more likely inhabited by people with a higher value for their time, at least on average if not for every biking blogger.
Mr. Cowen seems to forget that cars have an easily accessible means of acceleration that can very quickly make up for any delay that might be caused by a bicyclists.
There is really no acceptable reason to attempt to deny cyclists the right to use the roadway.
Should driving rules favor cars or cyclists? It seems to me that, so long as the rules of the road are followed by both parties, there is normally no problem. The problems result when the rules are broken and the punishment is always more severe for the cyclist.
12 Responses to “Bikes versus Cars!”
I can’t envision a scenario in which a cyclist would cost a car an extra ten seconds vs. the delay had he been driving, and I cannot envision a scenario where preferring one over the other wouldn’t ruin the roads for both.
Nice thought experiment, but completely unrelated to reality.
Wow I agree with Bike Bubba on something.
“Nice thought experiment, but completely unrealted to reality.”
Yup… the authors arguments are poorly supported. Plus it really is a city by city situation, as on commentator on the article points out. DC has drivers from around the world with a lot of different habits (good and bad). Not the same as Midwest cities (yes we have people from other countries, but not quite as diverse.)
Again, agreeing with the bubble, but also with Smithers. I got T-boned right at the east terminus of the Greenway, long story short, there is about $2k worth of damage and medical bills and I was found at fault, even though there is no stop sign at the intersection where I “failed to yield.”
Still caring what these fucktards think I see.
Quickly adding to that, I am covered through no-fault one way or the other, probably through my wife’s auto insurance (I have none) at at no penalty to her premium (by law), but this is veering offtopic. Also my fault.
denmark is stock piling not only bike lanes, but are potentially capable of building entire bike hiways.
recent intelligence suggests that they may even have a rental bike system already in place, and are training hundreds or even thousands of commuters how to use it.
weapons of mass transportation.
those european assholes.
internet and bikes are like my favorite shit.
fucking denmark.
Bikes vs. Cars! Are you going to start a pool on this too?
…Cuz I’m in!
So I got stopped in Wayzata in my car today because the officer said I didn’t put both feet flat on the floor of my car when I came to a stop.
Driving rules should favor cyclists. Cyclists do not need to take over the road but when it’s safe to do so we should be allowed legally to run stops signs or stop lights.
Here’s why -
Cyclists are not burning precious gas from the limited world resource. Cyclists are not polluting the air for our generation or for the next seven generations. Cyclists are doing their part in helping to keep the total cost of heath care down by keeping fit. We should be thanked for trying to make this world a better place for all of us.
My experience of biking on the roads in LA has been hell. Not just the drivers, but horrible roads. Tiny potholes are actually gigantic to MY tires…not to mention all the glass, rocks, and medical waste that lines the streets. It’s overall bad times… thank god i got my car back.
I didn’t do too bad 12 years back riding in Torrance and Redondo Beach, Mollye. Sure, thorn resistance tubes and a bit of care WHERE you ride are important, but in LA, it’s pretty darned important to know where you are at all times to begin with, no?
Glad you were able to get this one right, pcomeau. :^)
It’s too bad… I really usually like Tyler Cowen, but he’s really showing his ignorance here.
Heck, it’s a flawed argument to bring distance into it at all, since the domain of the agent’s utility is time not distance.
Poor Tyler… I can only assume that if he were in an actual conversation with someone who knew something about bikes, he would eventually agree that the first-best equilibrium involves a LOT more bikes.