Hacker News Reader

Comment by scoofy | Hacker News Reader

I ride a bike. Most people can do that, especially folks who aren't paying child support. Obviously there should be a hardship exemption in cases of physical impairment, or a need to travel an extreme distance every day (more than about 30-40 miles).

Pretending that it's impossible to live without a car in the United States is an insult to those of us who do it everyday.

View on HN

Ohio resident, Ohio is not very bike friendly. There's recreational trails but a lot of metro areas don't have bike infrastructure (unless you count painting a little biker icon on the right traffic lane).

It's also of limited use for someone with dependents (kids, disabled) or a home owner (invariably you'll end up transporting large items owning a home unless you're going to coordinate deliveries).

In addition, it can get quite cold in the winter -20F wild chill and it tends to rain the majority of May/June. Frequently near or above 100F in late July/August. These are all surmountable but require a fair bit of outdoor gear and a decent bike.

This completely ignores all the folks that live outside metro areas. A bike is a complete non starter for anyone with a farm (which is fairly common outside metro areas...)

The town I grew up in had a "drive your family's tractor to school" day before homecoming in high school since you can drive a tractor at 14 (I think without a license)

My entire point is "yes there are edge cases, but most people could cycle if they really needed to." You point to some perfectly reasonable counter-examples, which I specifically referenced. However, most people here, including yourself are taking the position that "if it can't work for everybody, then it can't work for anybody" which is nonsense.

You point out that there aren't cycling facilities, while pointing to cycling facilities. You point to things like deliveries as though that isn't simply an inconvenience. The Ohio has six cities with populations in the hundreds of thousands.

Again, I'm not saying I agree with the policies here. I'm saying that losing a drivers license, especially in the wake of at-fault collisions, moving violations, fines, as well as many other reasons why the state might want to compel individuals to fulfill some reasonable request is not always, because America, a hardship. Alternatives exist for many-if-not-most people.

Driving is an earned privileged, not a right. If a hardship exists, it should be considered, but there are alternatives in many, many parts of the country, even Ohio.

"If it can't work for everybody, then it can't work for anybody" is indeed nonsense.

However, in Ohio, very few people are able to productively survive with only a bicycle as transportation. Some can, and some do (whether by force or by choice).

But just because it can work for some doesn't mean that it must also be able to work for many, or for most.

I’m talking about people for whom the state has good reason to suspend their drivers license.

Neat. I suppose that the small subset of people who can manage to survive in Ohio with only a bicycle must neatly overlap with the small subset of people who have had their license suspended as a punishment for debt, then, since that's the only way that these words of yours support your greater concept.

(And I've been that person, in Ohio. AMA.)

Horse drawn buggy is also an alternative Ohioans successfully use for transportion without a driver's license.

Many alternatives are possible while not generally practical.

> Driving is an earned privileged, not a right.

Pursuit of happiness, using whatever transportation you wish, is not a privilege

The constitution does not actually give you any right to the pursuit of happiness.

The declaration of independence was a breakup letter, not a legal document.

If you wanted to murder someone in the "pursuit of happiness", that would be still be a crime. Driving is a privilege and you have zero inherent right to it.

My standard for bike infrastructure is: Is it safe enough for a 65 year old woman to ride comfortably? Spandex wearing elite bicyclists who dare to ride in the shoulder of a 55 MPH road are much braver than most.

My point is that a cycling instead of driving might be a hardship for a 65 year old woman living in a certain area, at certain times of the year. That does not mean it's a hardship for everyone all the time.

We are talking about the court's ability to revoke a drivers license to specific people, who live in specific places. Sometimes it's a hardship, other times, it's not.

I'm not sure which area of the country you live in but the vast majority of people in the southwest and southern california likely do not live within walking or biking distance of their places of work.

I'm not sure what part of the country you live in, but here in southern california a huge number of people live within reasonable car free commute distance. It's almost certainly easier to manage than in Ohio due to the weather and public transit on top of biking.

Median commute distance is 10 miles (which is a reasonable e-bike commute depending on route) https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/ej_jhf...

Almost 1 million daily public transit riders: https://www.metro.net/about/l-a-metro-surpasses-900k-daily-r...

You dont hit the interstate on your bike you cant just take the existing commute and do it on a bike most places. Also Southern CA isnt the country or even very representative.

Why did you think virtually nobody commutes via bike?

The comment I was replying to explicitly used socal as their example of unbikable. That's why I am talking about it. Many socal commutes are unbikable, but not the "vast majority" and even fewer when you extend to other car free options. I biked to work this morning in LA (4 miles of surface streets).

> I ride a bike. Most people can do that, especially folks who aren't paying child support.

Very significant portions of the US completely lack the infrastructure required to safely bike, especially in lower income areas. It is not uncommon at all for places in the US where >95% of commutes are by car, for a commute to require travel on a highway without sidewalks or bike lanes. Much of the US is covered by undivided highways with shoulders unsuitable for safe cycling.

Given this fact, I am kind of curious - how is DRS any different than debtors prison in America? I get how in Europe where driving is a privilege and alternatives are available some scheme like this could be effective, but when you literally have to be able to drive to work to produce money to pay your debt it really does feel like the exact same as debtors prison - something that does the exact opposite of the goal it sets out to achieve

About half of US states have reformed their laws and are no longer doing this. But the biggest difference is that, well, it isn't actually prison.

There are other situations which might be better compared to debtors prisons, like being sentenced to jail for contempt of court for nonpayment of judgements, etc.

Maybe I am too risk adverse. I imagine if I were in debt enough to have my license suspended, then riding a bicycle might be more risky than it's worth from a cost/injury point of view.

Healthcare costs are the leading cause of bankruptcy in the US, and I imagine any accidents would be beyond detrimental to one who is in bad enough debt to have his or her license suspended.

The average person commutes by car 10 hours per week. The average person doesn't live a bike commute from their job. What you are describing as extreme distance is extremely average.

Then there is places that get extremely cold or hot.

Places where biking is very unsafe.

The fact that most people are physically unable to bike 30 miles.

The lack of an extra 10 hours per week to commute without giving up sleeping or becoming unable to pick their kids up or be there after school.

Most people cant bike to work or replace their car with a bike.

Where are you getting your averages from?

Based on a quick google search I see median distances under 10 miles: https://www.streetlightdata.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/C...

And the times that line up with your 10 hour estimate look to be public transit users, not drivers: https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2021/one-way-...

Why do you think giving up a car will add 10 hours?

The US census which gives times not distances . The average person only averages 8-10mph on their bike and most take a more indirect route so as to avoid highways when commuting by bike.

I misspoke insofar as the average citizen taking 10 hours total by car in fact its 5 which an average one way commute time of slightly under half an hour. I believe it would be reasonable to suppose that the average commute time would somewhat more than double to aprox 1 hour 1 way for an increase in time cost of 5 hours per week.

Given the average persons existing time commitment and fitness I don't think an extra 5 hours and 100 miles per week on the bike is altogether reasonable on its face.

If you take the intersection of those who are at least median closeness, sufficiently fit, and have the time to spare probably about 10% of the pop could commute that way. If we would like to achieve anything like that we probably need to make biking a bit friendlier than it presently is.

Bet you don't live on Long Island.

We eat bicyclists for breakfast. The most dangerous roads in the US for bikes, are on Long Island.

Cycling to work, hereabouts, is worth your life. A lot of undocumented workers do that (can't get licenses), and they get hit, fairly often. I'm starting to see a lot of electric scooters.

But I really wish it weren't so. I moved here from the DC suburbs (MD), where they had really good support for bicyclists.

No, it's not an insult. I live in North Dakota and it would be extremely difficult to get around on a bicycle for half the year.

I could move close enough to my job that walking or biking, even throughout most of the winter, would be ok. Going to the nearest grocery store would be fine for half the year or so. Going most anywhere else around town, I'd have to rely on our crappy bus service.

The article specifically focuses on job postings that mention that the job itself requires a valid license. So ride as many bikes as you want, you will not be commuting to work at that job.

You have to be willing to be a self starter and work incrementally. Most people will just throw up their hands and say it is impossible. Some obstacles are more obvious than others. Being sweaty might require a shower or a change of clothes. Similarly, extreme cold will require proper attire. Spiked ice tires on a bicycle offer greater traction than the typical 4WD vehicle.

Aside from equipment, people need to build up their skills and traffic awareness. These are not instant fixes which can be purchased at a store. This is where incremental growth is important. You wouldn't expect a rookie driver to drive on a highway on his first trip. Comfortably operating inside traffic without being disruptive is a skill unto itself.

Yes, it is possible, but if you're not an enthusiast, you're probably not going to develop yourself in these areas.

Where do you live – and, is it cheap enough to live there, and to commute to where low-barrier jobs are? Or to even get a bike in the first place?

No kids I assume?

Don’t do it, don’t go that way :P You’ll get dozens of Dutch and German people who will tell you that “they do it all year long so you can also do it”. You can’t win.

It's absolutely doable in Netherlands and (parts of, usually urban) Germany. That doesn't make it doable in the car-bound hellscape that is much of the US.

I ride a bike or take public transit almost every day too, and live car-free, but I had to leave the US to do it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com