Ulrich Salzgeber: Bike education needed

Advertisement

Congratulations to all the groups and individuals who have worked so diligently to bring bicycling to the forefront of our community. Our moniker of “Bike Town USA” dovetails nicely with our longstanding “Ski Town USA” and portrays us as an active, healthy outdoor community. The summer was filled with great local cycling events as well as highlighted regional and national events like the Ride for Yellow and the USA Pro Cycling Challenge (quite the party). The opportunities are ever expanding and being recognized by publications like Outdoor magazine and designations such as being named a gold bicycle-friendly community. We should be proud of these accomplishments and continue to market and embrace this effort.

No doubt we have seen more locals riding bikes to and from work, running errands and for everyday usage, though it didn’t seem to positively affect traffic or parking, but that is another letter for another time. The increased bike usage also brought increased poor and dangerous behavior. Riders not stopping at stop signs, riding on the downtown sidewalks which I thought was illegal (is it?), riding the wrong way on the designated paths on many of the roads, etc. It has been a long time since I took bike safety on my three speed Schwinn in grade school, so I am sure that a lot has changed. Most, I would think, is common sense, but I really would like to know. If I am in a car and the first at a light with my right turn signal on, is it proper for a group or family of bike riders to pull in front of me? I always thought that as a vehicle of the road they were supposed follow the same rules of the road as other vehicles. Perhaps that has changed. I know I am not alone in wondering what is proper and what is not. I have witnessed many instances of drivers being extra cautious of riders, which is great except by doing so they are potentially endangering other pedestrians and drivers.

I believe it is incumbent for the various biking organizations and bike shops to form a committee and create a brochure with some basic rules, directions and courtesies of biking. These should be distributed in all locations that rent and sell bikes as well as the Steamboat Springs Chamber Resort Association and lodging members. Oh, and please make them available to the rest of us who interact with riders on a daily basis. We also want to do the right thing. Perhaps a weekly safety article in this very paper would be warranted. An educated Steamboat Springs will lead to a safer and more tolerable community allowing for the continued expansion of bike riding in Routt County.

Ulrich Salzgeber

Steamboat Springs

Comments

mtntrekker 3 years, 2 months ago

A great idea about the brochure on bike rules and safety. I would not mind a refresher course. Yes, bikes do have to obey the same rules as cars. Not sure if the police know that. I never see them pulling over bikers. You have to stop completely at a stop sign. It is a pain to unclip at a stop sign then clip back in, so most riders just keep going. You have to signal your turn. Driver/biker on the right has the right of way at intersections. I try to wait in line to make a left turn, not pull up beside another car. Common sense! I ride my bike on the streets, so when I drive I respect other riders.

0

heboprotagonist 3 years, 2 months ago

Now this is the type common sense I can get behind. Thanks, Ulrich.

Sounds like a perfect Leadership Steamboat project.

0

Brant McLaughlin 3 years, 2 months ago

Good points Ulrich,

I've been wondering some of the same things myself. I sit here at my office watching the 5th and Lincoln intersection from my desk and I see cyclists running the lights, riding on the sidewalks and crosswalks and generally doing unsafe things on a regular basis. I think more education for the cyclists will help.

As a driver, I think we need some additional education as well. These new bike lnaes have thrown a curve ball at us. Earlier this summer I was driving northwest on Yampa Street. I got ready to turn at 9th street and there were pedestrians crossing 9th street so I was stopped on Yampa with my right turn signal flashing. After the pedestrians finished I started to turn and was passed on the right by a cyclist in the bike lane. It all happened so fast. Out of the corner of my eye he appeared. All I could do was hit the brakes and hope for the best. He swerved to avoid hitting my car but it was a close call. He gave me a look like I did something wrong and I gave him the same look back. I have always been told that the law says bikes are not suppoed to pass cars on the right, but now I'm not so sure about who has the right-of-way when dedicated bike lanes are involved.

Do the bike lanes change any of the usual rules of the road?

Are drivers now required to constantly be checking over their right shoulder now before making every turn?

Can cyclists legally pass drivers on the right if they are in a bike lane?

Who holds the answers to these questions? Please let us know?

0

Jason Krueger 3 years, 2 months ago

Dear Brant and Ulrcik and the anonymous peanut gallery,

Lucky for you there is an ENTIRE handbook that explains ALL of the rules of the road!!! It can ALL be found right here:

http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite/Revenue-MV/RMV/1212657832969

Interestingly enough, I believed all of you signed a document when you renewed your drivers licenses attesting to your knowledge of this handbook.

In specific response to your question regarding bike lanes, you were at fault. That bike lane is considered no different than a bus lane or similar vehicular lane. You were changing lanes into that bike lane. (see page 15 & 16 regarding right-of-way)

Bikes ARE allowed on sidewalks unless a local ordinance states otherwise (pg 30).

0

heboprotagonist 3 years, 2 months ago

Jason-

There are signs all over Lincoln that say "No Bicycles, Skateboards, or Skates, on sidewalk".

As for your overall tone, I think it's exactly what so many of us find repugnant about cyclists. Dial down the sarcasm, back off the insults, and stop expecting others to be as resourceful as you.

How many tourists or casual bike riders have actually read the link you referenced? Are you actually suggesting that providing that information in multiple locations is a bad thing? Would it not benefit our town if the bike rental operations provided the literature?

If you ride your bike in the same aggressive manner as this post, it's no wonder people are fed up with cyclists. If cyclists want respect on the road it would be wise to earn it before demanding it.

0

Jason Krueger 3 years, 2 months ago

This has nothing to do with cyclists versus drivers. This has to do with understanding the laws that are already written. My sarcasm comes from the audacity of your statement; "stop expecting others to be as resourceful as you". You seem to imply I should not expect others to have a clear understanding of their rights and responsibilities associated with driving, biking, etc. As for the amount of "resourcefulness" this entailed, it required a google search which yielded the information in under .5 seconds.

The signs stating "no bicycles, etc." seem pretty clear cut to me. A bicyclist on those sidewalks is obviously in violation.

Perhaps it would benefit you to spend an equivalent amount of time "learning" about things you aren't sure about as you do posting your expectations of others. You and the 3 other people all posted (in addition to the author of the letter) that you had absolutely no idea what the laws were and someone should so something about it. In other words, the 4 of you spent a significant amount of time supporting each others ignorance rather than striving to educate yourselves. Again, this case can be made for bicycles, horses, skateboards, airplanes, hang-gliders, and anything else you choose to propel yourself around in/on; if you plan on operating it, know the rules!

0

BeCoolHoneyBunny 3 years, 2 months ago

Brant, Jason is right, you would be at fault. I had to look it up too.

A bike lane is a travel lane, like a standard travel lane, it's just not meant to have motor vehicles "traveling" in it. But to make a right turn, any vehicle (bike, car, truck, etc) is supposed to be in the right lane, so a motor vehicle needs to safely merge into the bike lane (yielding to any traffic already in that bike lane), before making the turn.

That way the bicycle would need to yield to the motor vehicle that is already occupying the bike lane (which is the furthest right lane) in order for it (the motor vehicle) to safely make a right turn.

0

heboprotagonist 3 years, 2 months ago

Jason, you're right. I'm saying that you can't expect the majority to to be as invested in the "rights" of the minority. The minority in this case is cyclists. Just b/c laws are on the books doesn't mean that citizens know anything about them.

Just last year NFL player Donovan McNabb admitted he knew nothing about overtime rules in the NFL.

If a professional athlete can't be bothered to know the rules of the game that he's paid to play, how can you expect motorists to go out of their way to know the rules of the road? Unless I get arrested for not reading the manual, I doubt I'm going to spend much time with it.

Sure, it would be nice if we all enlightened ourselves. I can support that. What I don't understand is why you think what we have is enough? Empirical evidence proves that neither motorists nor cyclists have adequate understanding of those rules as currently provided. And that's not going to change as long as the mode of communicating the traffic laws remain the same.

I'm sure it makes you feel superior, pointing out the people dumber than you and how they should know better. But ultimately, it doesn't change anything. You're finger wagging only succeeds in creating a very small breeze.

I'll start spending .5 seconds in a google search and then another 30 minutes reading those rules when I see cyclists coming to a complete stop and the four-way outside my front door. Until then, consider me blissfully detached.

0

Brant McLaughlin 3 years, 2 months ago

BeCool,

That being said I'm sure my car was sitting at least partially blocking the bike lane for at least 20 seconds with my turn signal flashing while the cyclist approached from the rear.

Next time you drive down Yampa look at 9th street. The bike lane takes a big jog to the right at the 9th street intersection. The pedestrians were crossing 9th, not Yampa so my car was angled into the bike lane toward the turn I was getting ready to make.

As Jason said and I agree, this isn't about cyclists vs drivers. It's about everyone working together to stay safe. Please note, I'm writing this from the perspective of a cyclist as well. In high school and college I biked nearly 30 miles a day to my summer job on rural roads, 4 lane highways and city streets. I've logged thousands of miles biking on roadways and I've come up with one cardinal rule to live by;

Cars are much bigger and it simply doesn't matter who had the right-of-way once an accident has happened!

Proclaiming that you had the right-of-way from the back of an ambulance on your way to the hospital is a moot point. If a cyclist can use a bit of common sense and avoid creating a scenario where an an accident is more likely to happen it's better for all parties involved.

Common sense in my book is not racing full speed on your bike past the right hand side of a car that is signalling a right turn.

0

Brant McLaughlin 3 years, 2 months ago

As for the comments about the manual, I did look through the Colorado drivers handbook and even looked up statutes from other municipalities around Colorado before posting. I couldn't find anything specific for cycling rules in Steamboat.

The drivers handbook has some vague descriptions and does not specifically address passing on the right by cyclists. It says bicycles shall be considered a vehicle and subject to the same rules as motor vehicles. It also says bicycles are to stay on the right hand side of the road but may use the entire street for making left turns and passing, which vaguely insinuates that they should be passing on the left just like other vehicles.

As for lanes, the manual lumps bike lanes in with HOV lanes and bus lanes and it says these lanes are restricted for the specific use listed. In some states (again Colorado doesn't have a specific reference one way or the other in their drivers manual) blocking a bike lane with your car is illegal. I know it is certainly illegal to block or drive in an HOV lane without additional passengers and it is illegal to block or drive in a bus lane for any reason which makes me think it's also illegal to block or drive in a bike lane.

The laws that are already written are vague and don't give enough direction to protect cyclists and drivers. Some municipalities such as Boulder realized this and have enacted better more descriptive laws regarding bike and car interactions and scenarios. Boulder among other things has made it illegal to do what the cyclist did on Yampa that nearly caused my accident. Boulder says a cyclist can pass a line of cars on the right all the way up to the rear tire of the first car that is stopped at an intersection.

Picture this. If you rode down Yampa street watching and approaching the rear end of a car that was signaling a right turn for 20 seconds while pedestrians were in the crosswalk, would you;

A.) try to race by the right hand side of the car at the last second before they made their turn? B.) stop at their rear bumper and allow them to turn knowing that more often than not the driver probably doesn't see you?

0

Ulrich Salzgeber 3 years, 2 months ago

Wow, never thought I would get this much reaction. I also want to thank everyone on the insightful feedback and the positive attitudes. This is an issue that we can work on colaboratively with mutually acceptabel resolutions. A couple of points, I really have no issues with the riders and encourage our current path of enhancing or even adding bike related events. I just believe that those that are profiting directly from the riders and the organizations that are promoting this should take the responsibility to make sure that we avoid as many conflicts as possible. I would be happy to represent the part time bike rider, pedestrian and automobile operator on a committee. Also to Yampavalleyboy, some of us remain quite busy in our Real Estate Careers, last year was my second best ever and I am on track to match or surpass that this year. Just don't tell my fellow REALTORS.

0

Bill Dalzell 3 years, 2 months ago

Brant, Everything I have read points in the direction that you were in the right. Bikes are supposed to pass on the left just like other traffic. A bike lane does not entitle a biker to overtake a car making a right turn on that side. Unless you sped up and cut the biker off, you are in the right. It appears that Jason does not know the rules of the road as well as he thinks.

0

sledneck 3 years, 2 months ago

On a tombstone one day the words of comfort will read: " Here lies biker J. He knew he had the right-of-way".

0

mtroach 3 years, 2 months ago

Yvb. Nice catch22; You will shut up if I licence my bike yet no such licence exists for cyclists to buy. Can I just donate extra money somewhere to silence your anti-cyclist retoric?

0

Brant McLaughlin 3 years, 2 months ago

I appreciate the vote of confidence from you but I'm still not quite sure myself Billy, I've stated my views but I can see the points that Jason and BeCool have made as well. I think there's still a lot of cloudy grey area that could be argued both ways. This is why I think Ulrich has a good point in getting everyone together and drafting some rules for these kind of scenarios that we all can agree on. Then put the info out there on brochures that can be placed in the racks around town. I think it would be beneficial for everyone.

0

Bill Dalzell 3 years, 2 months ago

Brant, I think you are trying to analyze it too much. It comes down to common sense. A bike lane is another lane of traffic. Did you cut the bike off? If so you are most definitely in the wrong. BeCool seems to think that your comments insinuate that you did. Its like switching lanes on the highway. Yeah, you can signal and move lanes, but if you do it in a tight spot creating a dangerous situation for the driver you are moving in front of, you most likely, by law are in the wrong. At the very least you are a jerk. It is no different with a bike. For instance, take the extreme example, if you turn right off of Yampa, signal start, your move, and a biker comes flying up off a side street and then down the bike lane. You couldn't reasonably know he was coming, and the bike lane does not give him special permission to pass on the right. It all comes down to common sense. It is my understanding that bike lanes are primarily there to make drivers more aware of the distance (3 feet or so) that they are supposed to give bikes in the first place.

0

mavis 3 years, 2 months ago

yes.. when was the last time a biker had to pay a $150 dollar fine to the county for NOT following a law on a county road????????

I WOULD REALLY like to see that statistic......Because if they did actually have to pay for their infractions in both county fees and vehicle/ bike insurance fines... maybe we would have a safe "bike town" that we would ALL support... But again bottom line.... everyone is Missing the boat on ya "gotta pay to play."
Since we continue to ignore the broken laws of some sub groups in this town (bikers)... Only certain "groups" (licensed vehicles of EVERY other TYPE) are held accountable.

and ya wonder why some of us just can't jump aboard this new logo... You want it to be the new Steamboat... then FUND it in EVERY way the way the rest of us pay for EVERYTHING!!

0

mtroach 3 years, 2 months ago

Impeech Wiggins! Or maybe the RCSO thinks there are bigger threats to our community than cyclists. And mavis...you do not need a licenced bike to get cyclists ticketed, you need a stricter sherriff.

0

mavis 3 years, 2 months ago

mtroach-- ya missed the point AGAIN the sherriff is fine and great... the problem is bikers DON'T pay to license their bikes... they don't pay road and bridge fees, taxes or ANY other licensining fees like we all do on our snowmobiles, ATV's or colorado parks passes for camping and other activities such as fishing. They buy the bike and some insurance and are DONE. How can there be enforcement of them when they don't actually PAY for the roads or trails in any type of porportion as the rest of us?? Bike Town USA should not be a free ride to PLAY in your sport while you charge everyone else. It is SIMPLE.

0

Troutguy 3 years, 2 months ago

Does that mean we need to license shoes too? Those pesky pedestrians don't pay for the right to cross the street. Don't pay the cost for the little flashing light that tells them to cross the street. Don't pay for the striping that makes up the crosswalk. What we have here is freeloading pedestrians that aren't paying their fair share. Oh, the humanity of it all! Baby strollers? Skateboards? Rollerblades? Dogs? All freeloaders. Until they pay their own way, we need to keep them all off the roads.

0

mtroach 3 years, 2 months ago

Mavis,I get you and others want me to license my bike. Why don't you get off this forum and make it law to require bikes to be licensed? Currently it is not. Currently I am legally entitled to ride my bike on all of Routt county's roadways without any sort of government registration. Sorry, that's the system, change it and quit this "they ride for free" sobbing. You and yvb sound like toddlers criing on the playground..it's not fair..it's not fair..it's not fair. Talk to your elected officials, noone on this forum can change the system.

So do you expect the cycling community to step up and say " I want to pay the government for road use" that's just silly. And as I have stated, I (we) do pay as much as you into the system. I register all my vehicles and only use one at any given time, I have a parks pass and fishing license. Your thinking that cyclists live in a tax/license-fee free vacume is incorrect. Really, how many roads have you "built"...none. At a million plus all your registration fees combined wouldn't generate enough funding to build even a simple dirt road. I volunteer my time up on Emerald mt building trails on city property for everyone to use. Get a bike or horse and enjoy them. Then you can laugh at how you are grifting the system and using government assets for free! Ha.ha.

Further, anytime the RCSO has a problem with how I ride my bike they are fully empowered to stop me beside the road, issue a ticket to me, or detain me as any other citizen. Your imaginary "bike license" has nothing whatsoever to do with the power RCSO has to issue tickets. As top law enforcer, Wiggins is the problem if he is not enforcing all these laws cyclists seem to be breaking. Or maybe like I said before even hard nosed Wiggins dosnt think cyclists are a problem on our roads.

But, I really think you harbor an unjust prejudice against cyclists. Why can't you admit your an anti-bikeite and nothing the cycling population does will change your mind?

0

S_G30 3 years, 2 months ago

Enforce the rules, and all of this goes away..

0

mtroach 3 years, 2 months ago

Boy; Great to see you have taken the lead stripping me of my liberty and bringing about additional taxes and bigger government.

0

mtroach 3 years, 2 months ago

Sorry to correct you again, but I am one of the others funding roads. I pay as much tax as you, aside from your AG exemption that allow you to not pay as much as some "others".

0

mtroach 3 years, 2 months ago

Boy, I understand far more than I let on.

I support the AG exemption, I just feel it is another abused loophole in our tax code. I would love to offer a grandfathered exemption for ranchers in this vally to prevent famliy ranches from going away when their property values grow due to real estate spectulation. But I really think some newer "ranchers" don't need or deserve an AG exemption. Just another millionares subsidy from the taxman. The very people that are driving out our true locals are grifting the system and undermining the property tax base that funds our roads.

Now do you need a economic's lession to explain how hosting an event that brings 400 paying road users to steamboat ultimately will bring in dollars to fund our roads. Routt county may not get a direct payment, but if an event earns me money from a front range visitor, and I pay my taxes with those profits, and spend the rest with a business that pays taxes, and that business pays someone who pays taxes we all indirectly benifit from a couple of minutes of inconvienence on our roads one or two days a year...Get it?

0

mtroach 3 years, 2 months ago

Sorry boy, you have antibike-ite blinders on as to how cycling events effect our town. You only see what you want. Many businesses reported an uptick in sales during those events, and I know for fact those events bring profits to our community. Do you supppse they are all tax cheats? As for class warfare, we have undergone de-facto class warfare for the last 20 years. The rich have the time and money to influence elected officials, and guess what the poor and middle class are getting screwed. Unemployment at 10%, federal govt bankrupt, richest 5% own more than the lower 90% it's just a matter of time before the Wall st. Protests get angry.. If you don't see it that way , I'm not surprised. As for spelling..not my strong suit.

0

sledneck 3 years, 2 months ago

I agree with roach about the ag thing.

The poor and middle-class make up so much of the electorate (you know the "99%") yet they keep "gettin screwed"??? How could this be??? Because of their definition of "screwed".

If being protected by the military, availing yourself of roads, bridges. municipal water systems, sanitary sewers, libraries, airports, trains, telephones, landfills, state parks, municipal and national parks, bike trails, skate parks, rodeo grounds, schools, job training programs, unemployment benifits, food stamps, welfare, police protection, fire protection, radio, television, etc ad infinitum WHILE HALF OF YOU PAY NO INCOME TAXES, CAPITAL GAINS TAXES, PROPERTY TAXES, etc is your definition of "gettin' screwed" then, yes, you are "gettin' screwed".

You should move to a country where you won't be taken advantage of so much. If you had a lick of brains half the size of the greed and envy in your hearts you might set out to BE rich instead of to EAT the rich.

Of course the wall street bailouts were unfair. You "99%" put the people in office who made that happen. You 99%, the American electorate who are economically illiterate fools allow yourselves to be duped over and over again. You are bilnded by envy and ignorant of economics. As wealth increases it ALWAYS fills peoples pockets DISPROPORTIONATELY. So unhappy and ignorant of that are you 99% that you, instead, are pleading for the equality of poverty! Fools! I think you might just get your wish.

0

Brant McLaughlin 3 years, 1 month ago

Hey Ulrich,

I just picked up a copy of the "Steamboat Springs Bike Guide" and think I finally found a definite answer to our questions. Page 34 of the Bike Guide is the page dedicated to "Road Safety" Page 34 among other things states;

"Ride in the right lane, except when passing another vehicle, preparing for a left turn or avoiding hazards."

0

Brant McLaughlin 3 years, 1 month ago

In response to Jason Krueger and BeCoolHoneyBunny, I still think I was doing nothing wrong when I made my right turn. Cyclists approaching from the rear, who can clearly see the flashing turn signal and the intentions of the driver while a car is waiting for pedestrians to finish crossing should not be passing that car on the right hand side.

0

Zed 3 years, 1 month ago

"to all...I've been working with State Reps to get the "Biker License" thing underway. The law will change, but until it does, this "toddler" will continue to cry "foul"."

YVB, since you are putting the time in to craft new government regulations on the use of bicycles can you answer a few questions?

1) Would mountain bikers getting to/from trails need a license to ride a mountain bike?

2) What would the tax/reg fees be based on and how much total revenue would that generate? Assuming the registration on a $20,000 car cost $150 how much would be raised on bikes that will mostly be less than $1000. Give me a hard number/percentage that would be a reasonable tax/fee on bikes.

3)Would the cost of administrating bicycle registrations be covered by whatever the total in registration fees raised are? Would any additional funds raised make roads my bicycle friendly?

4) Would young children riding to school or in their neighborhoods need to pay taxes/license/registration? I have 5 plus kids bikes, does each one need to pay a registration fee? How about my snow bike?

5)If you came from out of town would you need a license to ride a bike in Routt County or is your proposal national/state? What if tourists coming from Canada bring bikes? Will they have to seek registration from the state before they can operate they 10 speeds on our roads?

6) Is a bicycle a vehicle, but a roller skier on that same road being equally negligent not a vehicle?

0

Zed 3 years, 1 month ago

Sled,

The majority is getting screwed by the concentration of money and power in that 1% of the population. Our economic and political system will never be fair when that 1% is so deeply connected to political system and able to influence decision making. Follow the money in politics and it is not leading back to folks in the projects living off of food stamps. And those are not the people benefiting from million dollar contracts to Halliburton to occupy foreign countries.

A further thought on the issue would be that tax rates on that top bracket are claimed to be so high, but how much money is really payed out by the wealthy when you consider the loopholes and subsidies that lower the actual amount of money they pay into the system?

To your statement of 51% people not paying taxes, I call #NOTAFACTUALSTATEMENT. At least 10% are senior citizens no longer working, another 10% are unemployed, and the rest are making money and likely paying other taxes like payroll, which would go to medicare, social security, etc. The issue is that we have gotten carried away with tax credits. One great subsidy in the system that probably reduces many people's tax liability to zero - Mortgage insurance deductions. Child Credits? How many deductions are you claiming each year sled?

0

rhys jones 3 years, 1 month ago

My Trek remains my primary, non-public, wheeled mode of transportation. Yet on this issue I find myself aligned with sled and yvb. Be assured I am not as stupid, arrogant, or ignorant as half the cyclists you see.

Better trails won't keep the kids and neo-"locals" off the downtown sidewalks. A slogan won't keep the spandex-clad skinny tires from riding 2 and 3 abreast on the county roads, making you pass in the oncoming lane -- and it won't keep the stupidest one from swinging clear out in the lane on the blindest curve. He thinks he is teaching a lesson or mandating his warped form of compliance to HIS rules of the road -- while the driver approaching from the rear knows nobody would be so stupid, as to pull such a stunt were it actually an issue -- so he passes on the left anyway, and should his judgment be in error-- SPLAT!!

We had another righteous biker a while back, cross-country skied down the Strawberry Park roads in winter, making drivers wait, then in summer his bike's right-of-way and the cement truck followed different sets of rules, inertia now weighing in. I'll bet that driver has nightmares to this day.

I am ashamed of what I see representing us on the road and sidewalk, and I think we could use a little FEWER bikes. To get respect, you've got to give respect, and nothing gets my respect like a 2-ton vehicle which can squash me like a bug. Maybe a fatality or two will enhance our Ski Town USA image; it seems to work for the mountain.

0

rhys jones 3 years, 1 month ago

What a dolt -- I MEANT "Bike Town USA." Where you can dodge cars AND pedestrians!!

0

mtroach 3 years, 1 month ago

Rhys ...Really, implying a roadside fatality would straighten out cyclists in this town. What if that fatality we all learn from is you?

0

rhys jones 3 years, 1 month ago

Again my facetious humor is taken literally. It'll happen again, but if it's me, it'll be a tree or rock, not any stupid car.

0

1999 3 years, 1 month ago

a bike rider is required to be in a lane and use a lane AS A CAR WOULD!!!! (not passing on the right)

adhere to all signs and directionals AS A CAR IS REQUIRED!!!

0

sledneck 3 years, 1 month ago

Zed, I agree that the government is too "in the pocket" of the very wealthy. You blame the wealthy; I blame the government. If a man leaves cheese out all night, who is to blame for it's disappearance?? The mouse or the man????? I blame the man, or in the case of the bailouts, the government. Remember, a lot of the banks were not just offered bailout money, but were told they MUST take it. Go back and check.

As for the "follow the money... not leading back to the projects..." statement: Thats acctually a good thing! The political influence should not come from people "in the projects living off food stamps" any more than it should come from banks. If you get government assistance your influence should be muted. And you should be on forced birth controll and drug testing. "Can't feed 'em- Don't breed 'em! Nobody without skin in the game should call the plays.

The Haliburton thing is wearing a bit thin after 11 years. No person on this earth has recieved more money from Wall St. than Barack Obama. Check that and get back to me...

As for my tax deductions, I have instructed my accountant to find and claim as many deductions as legally possible. After all... I am not one of those mealy-mouthed hypocrites asking uncle scam to raise my taxes. I want to pay LESS. If you or Warren Buffet want to pay more just whip out your checkbook. And, by the way, the fact that Warren Buffet pays less taxes than his secretary is not proof that his taxes are too low; it's proof that his secretary's taxes are too high! Buffets taxes are capital-gains which means that is the SECOND tax on those dollars. His secrataries tax is payroll, their FIRST tax on those dollars.

Wealthy people pay a payroll tax when they earn their first dollars. They invest that after tax money and pay capital-gains tax on proffits from that. Then, when they die they get to pay half of whats left back to uncle scam! Why? So people "in the projects living on food stamps" can keep sittin on their ass??? Do you really think that has to continue? Do you think the rich can take their bank accounts to Mexico just as easily as they move their factories there??? Maybe easier???

As to your question about how much money do I think "is actually paid out by the wealthy when you consider the loopholes..." The answer is: MOST OF IT. Most of the taxes are paid by the wealthy, period; loopholes or not.

0

Zed 3 years, 1 month ago

Actually I blame US citizens, as we should be holding government and the wealthy accountable. The tea party and the occupy wall st crew probably have more in common than they realize and should join forces or at least collaborate to clean up our political system. Those bailouts were the direct result of wealthy lobbyist, it had nothing to do with Joe six pack's view on the situation. If bank's failed, who were the ones set to really lose out? Political influence is coming from the lobbyist, the P.A.Cs, those with money and influence. Don't kid yourself into thinking who is currently calling the shots in Washington.

Forced birth control and drug testing, well that's a different approach to the problem of poverty. Maybe we can restrict certain people to ghettos as well and take away their right to vote? Don't oversimplify why people are in the situations they are or what they may or may not have the capacity to do.

As to tax evasion, guess how much Google corporate tax rate is? Yes, you can take your bank accounts to another country. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-21/google-2-4-rate-shows-how-60-billion-u-s-revenue-lost-to-tax-loopholes.html

People with money will and can find way's to reduce or eliminate their tax liability as well as influence the system to maintain their wealth and power. The other 99% don't have time or money to watch them.

0

sledneck 3 years, 1 month ago

Zed, We actually agree on a lot. Primarily that those in power need to be held way more accountable. Also, that the WS crowd and the Tea Party crowd do, indeed, have a bit in common. I felt that from the beginning.

Now I have to take exception with the notion that the bial-outs "had nothing to do with Joe Six Pack"... Please bear with me as I will try to explain... Joe Six Pack helped put the guilty congressmen in power. (the ones who sent your money to Wall St.) Joe Six Pack accepted illeterate 12th graders from government schools. Joe Six Pack voted as if he understood the Federal Reserve. As if he understood Wall St. As if he knew the term: Fractional Reserve Banking or Sub-Prime Lending or Credit Default Swaps. He purchased stocks like they were "going out of style" because he was told by the "Suzie Ormans" of the world to do so. He had no business voting for those people because he was in way, way, way, way, way over his head. Making matters worse, he voted for those people not because of their intentions on any of those things, but because they told him they were going to "make his life easier". Thats a piss-poor reason to cast a vote but thats why a lot of votes got cast in the last several election cycles.

On the tax evasion thing; I want to caution you that it's called tax-avoidance... right up to where the law makes it illegal. Most of the big guys don't want any part of "evasion" but they line up thick for "avoidance"... which is totally legal. And remember this: no matter where you put the line, most people of consequence are going to dance right up on it. Just like you and I ride right up close to the stop light before it turns green. It's not illegal.

I think there is also merit to your notion that most Americans do not have time to oversee all the 'good ole boy" deals that are done in the back rooms because we are too busy working our 9-5 jobs. I have said that for years.

What I would really like to impart to you is that the most effective way to circumvent these numerous injustices is to reduce the size of the defacto wrong-doer, government. Shrink government and injustices on the left AND on the right will shrink proportionally. Grow government and both the "Zeds" and "Sleds" will lose.

0

BeCoolHoneyBunny 3 years, 1 month ago

Brant,

I do believe that you didn't do anything wrong. A biker should have yielded to your right hand turn, it's common sense. But if an accident happened and a police officer was called, you would have probably gotten the ticket according to the letter of the law. The way I read the rule, was that you should occupy the bike lane to make that right hand turn from Yampa Ave. I didn't know this either before I looked it up. Seems like the city should have made clear the rules of the new lanes before they laid them down.

When is the last time you saw a biker obey the rules of the road anyway?

0

BeCoolHoneyBunny 3 years, 1 month ago

Here's a link to some good info, it's California, but I'm guessing it applies here to.

http://www.sfbike.org/?bikelane_right_turns

Bike Lanes and Right Turns (how it's supposed to be done)

How is a car supposed to make a right turn from a street with a bike lane? It's one of the most widely misunderstood traffic rules (at least in California). Most cyclists, motorists, even cops don't get it, and the DMV doesn't express the concept as clearly as they should.

A right-turning car is supposed to move into the bike lane before the intersection, anywhere from 200 to 50 feet before, first signalling the lane merge, then merging right to the curb lane, then finally making the actual turn when safe.

The guiding principle is to always make a right turn from the right lane, and a left turn from the left lane, or left turn pocket if there is one. Turning across lanes is a big no-no, since it can (and often does) result in crashes and near-crashes, especially "right hook" collisions frequently suffered by bicyclists.

It's similarly dangerous for cyclists to make left turns from a right lane, and it's the same process in reverse to do it correctly: signal a left merge, merge left when safe (yielding to any traffic already in that left lane), signal a left turn, make the turn when safe.

A bike lane is a travel lane, like a standard travel lane, it's just not meant to have motor vehicles "traveling" in it. But to make a right turn, any vehicle (bike, car, truck, etc) is supposed to be in the right lane, so a motor vehicle needs to safely merge into the bike lane (yielding to any traffic already in that bike lane), before making the turn.

0

Requires free registration

Posting comments requires a free account and verification.