"Welcome to London" where thieves cut through bike racks; Local Conservative group claims LTNs "target the vulnerable"; Multiple abandons from huge Bessèges crash; Is Giulio Ciccone the messiah or a very naughty boy? + more on the live blog

IanMSpencer wrote:

They let Johnson onto the Parliamentary estate. The bar for sartorial elegance is extremely low.

That's a fair point.

For the record, I am quite capable of cycling without getting sweaty, and wearing something other than lycra.

For a different example, Dean Windass and Bryan Hughes didn't seem too worried.  

Steve K wrote:

Only 46% of households in Haringey have a car..

And they are all poor because they have a car.

"In all cases, candidates who fail to secure at least one-eighth (12.5%) of the valid votes in their constituencies will have their deposit forfeited."  (Wikipedia)

2019 General Election:

James Newhall  Conservative  5,446   11.6%

brooksby wrote:

Hang on - so, are Tottenham Conservatives implying that cyclists are wealthy?

Some might be, but many are not.  The same as motorists, really...

the ones in lycra with 5k bikes are wealthy (even though 5k is still cheaper than even basic cars)

mostly the people needing LTNs are not these people

Eh. I think it depends if they drive too. If they don't drive, someone with a top-spec lust-worthy Italian brand bike as well as a beater commuter will probably have spent less than even the average used price for a car in the UK. If someone buying a second-hand Dacia isn't considered wealthy, then how can we apply the term to someone spending less money on their "vehicle"?

And just to pre-empt the obvious response of "the car is essential travel, the bike is purely for leisure":

1. The most common purpose for a car journey (according to the transport survey) is "leisure",
2. Some people will commute on their "nice" bike, weather permitting.

Definitely.  If you can run a clunker of a car you could easily run a fine-looking bike.  At the lower end * you can easily get a good second hand bike for a couple of hundred.  Heck you can get a new bike (in any of several categories - even "practical") for less than a grand.  Your running costs will be tiny compared to a car even if you do no maintenance except taking it to the bike shop when it's unhappy.

People totally don't get the economics though because bicycles are seen as a completely different category of thing - not "transport".  Even by people who have never carried a fridge in their car and for whom the vast majority of their car journeys are one or at most two person trips of a couple of miles in an urban environment.

Notjustbikes has an excellent segment of the great value of a bike vis-a-vis a car in his video on cargo bikes as an unbeatable urban transport solution.

* It's laughable when policiticans express concern about the (driving) welfare of poor folks.  It's not just the Conservatives; realistically none of them care - except worrying about how much they might cost the health, welfare and crime budgets.  None of the poorest section of the population are going to get awkward questions raised in the national media,  keep their national parties running or send them to sports events or nice dinners.

Maybe there's a local Tory definition that sets a minimum level of poverty in these areas. If you fall below that, you simply don't count?

For example.

You only own a single car and have trouble affording private school fees = poor.

You own no cars and have trouble affording the gas bill = you are not worth worrying about.

You live in a residential street, like breathing clean air and the ability to walk and cycle in your neighbourhood = elite (but the wrong kind)

Exactly: the 'super rich tax dodging yummy mummy avocado enthusiast' is, IMO, far more likely to be driving a so-called Chelsea Tractor.

Would they require two bolt cleats or three?

Castelli could turn that in to a Gabba'd version for poor weather conditions surely.

Clem Fandango wrote:

Would they require two bolt cleats or three?

Castelli could turn that in to a Gabba'd version for poor weather conditions surely.

Two bolts as they're more a mountain biking thing

But I don't want to wear a nice dress...

(I did for Comic Relief back when I was in high school in the late eighties - my gf's idea - and it didn't go down well...).

brooksby wrote:

But I don't want to wear a nice dress...

 

(I did for Comic Relief back when I was in high school in the late eighties - my gf's idea - and it didn't go down well...).

Too bad - if the Greens take over then that's just something you'll have to get used to.

Looks like they're making headway in Bristol, now the largest party: https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/greens-win-bristol-election-race-8106783

brooksby wrote:

But I don't want to wear a nice dress...

 

(I did for Comic Relief back when I was in high school in the late eighties - my gf's idea - and it didn't go down well...).

It's not supposed to be so short you can see your peaches.

Well I suppose we've all done things we've come to regret. Many years ago I thought it would be a good idea to pose in the nude for a magazine. I'm still banned from WH Smith.

brooksby wrote:

(I did for Comic Relief back when I was in high school in the late eighties - my gf's idea - and it didn't go down well...).

Bit rude to refer to your girlfriend as "it."

MattKelland wrote:

brooksby wrote:

(I did for Comic Relief back when I was in high school in the late eighties - my gf's idea - and it didn't go down well...).

Bit rude to refer to your girlfriend as "it."

She was wearing trousers, a tailcoat, and a top hat.

brooksby wrote:

MattKelland wrote:

Bit rude to refer to your girlfriend as "it."

She was wearing trousers, a tailcoat, and a top hat.

hawkinspeter wrote:

I'm worried about a tweet shown underneath the Rory McCarron one: https://twitter.com/EmilyKerr36/status/1621280840918482947

Quote:

Cllr Emily Kerr [💚]
@EmilyKerr36
OK so I really just want everyone to be able to cycle safely to dinner two miles away wearing high heels & a nice dress, as I did this evening. The easiest mode of transport, as it should be. #lovecycling #lovemybike

Are those clothing choices going to be made mandatory for short distance cycling? Is getting us all in high heels the next stage of the Evil Cycling Lobby's agenda?
 

to be able to and have the right to, you don't have to.

Quote:

We shall fight the oppressors for your right to have babieswear a dress while cycling, brother. Sister, sorry.

wycombewheeler wrote:

to be able to and have the right to, you don't have to.

 

Quote:

We shall fight the oppressors for your right to have babieswear a dress while cycling, brother. Sister, sorry.

That's just how it starts. It's the thin end of the wedge.

Wait... isn't Grayson Perry a mean mountain biker?

You're right - they're coming for our traditional dress (or kilt / trews, rather) next!

No doubt those bloody cycle clothing companies will start pushing it for everyone as soon as the pro peleton adopt it, even though we all know that normal people can't cycle in a dress.

wycombewheeler wrote:

We shall fight the oppressors for your right to have babieswear a dress while cycling, brother. Sister, sorry.