Cyclists in bus lanes (cut from 'giving way to buses' thread)

ThisRegard

Spook_ie wrote: »

taxis don't block the bus lanes otherwise you wouldn't have people complaining about taxis pulling out of bus lanes all the time to over take buses and causing them to jam on, usually mentioned alongside no indicators! You really need to stick to one argument at a time

Are empty taxis allowed to use bus lanes ? How many are actually on their way to jobs or have current fares and not just driving around aimlessly like the majority are ? If such taxis kept out of the lanes there'd be less congestion in them (unlike the ridiculous argument that cyclists blocking them up).

smackyB

I too would be interested to hear the justification for allowing taxis to use bus lanes (occupied or not) - they're currently banned from using them in Belfast (though this may change soon) so I'm wondering is Dublin out of step with other cities or is this the norm?

mitosis

monument wrote: »

1.55

That's the car occupancy rate for cars crossing into Dublin city centre. That's the real world of most traffic in our cities and towns -- not your car with three people in it.

I am reluctant to debate this further - it is off topic, and entertaining the derailment of the thread by some through making it a car vs bike argument. Which it is not - it is about road users respecting the right of others to use the road. But here goes

OK, but the illustration used is slanted to show as many cars as possible. Each with only one occupant - well short of your attested average. My point is what was posted was little more than propoganda and bore only 45% truth.

mitosis

ThisRegard wrote: »

Are empty taxis allowed to use bus lanes ? How many are actually on their way to jobs or have current fares and not just driving around aimlessly like the majority are ? If such taxis kept out of the lanes there'd be less congestion in them (unlike the ridiculous argument that cyclists blocking them up).

I would argue taxis hired or available for hire (prove it!) be allowed use the bus lane, but a lad driving his taxi home not.

Taxi drivers don't just drive around aimlessly, generally. You know the cost of fuel, who would?

Jawgap

Zebra3 wrote: »

The hatred towards cyclists in here is shocking.

A bus gets delayed for a few seconds because of a cyclist. Wow! Why not remove all pedestrian crossings then!!! :rolleyes:

I can only imagine the uproar if every cyclist used a car instead of their bike on the same day.

Certain people in here don't seem to realise the benefits as motorists they get from others choosing to cycle instead.

You make a solid point and one often overlooked by many motorists - if cycling was perceived to be safer and more convenient then more would cycle, freeing up more road space. I think this would be particularly the case for a lot of the short journeys such as school runs etc.

Cycling around Dublin is quite safe and enjoyable, but the perception is that it is not - in much the same way there is a perception that the city has many kilometers of 'perfectly good' cycle paths - it doesn't.

There is also a perception that someone on a bike is on a bike because they can't afford a car. In my own case - and I suspect in a significant number of other cases - if I wasn't commuting by bike I'd be in the car taking up a lot more road space with four wheels than I do with two.

The mouthy-shouty brigade seem intent on maintaining the perception that cycling is dangerous, inconsiderate, selfish etc in the vain hope that it will drive cyclists from the roads and magically all the city's traffic problems will be solved. Put simply, they lack the imagination to appreciate that more people cycling is, generally, a good thing and something to be embraced and encouraged.

beauf

I don't really have a problem with taxi's using the bus lane. But stopping in them yes. Theres a problem all over with taxi's stopping in dangerous locations, or causing traffic jams by stopping with no consideration of others. Likewise inconsiderate cyclists. But cyclists in bus lanes is critical to easing congestion and facilitating cycling.

mitosis

Zebra3 wrote: »

The hatred towards cyclists in here is shocking.

A bus gets delayed for a few seconds because of a cyclist. Wow! Why not remove all pedestrian crossings then!!! :rolleyes:

I can only imagine the uproar if every cyclist used a car instead of their bike on the same day.

Certain people in here don't seem to realise the benefits as motorists they get from others choosing to cycle instead.

What do they call it when things get exaggerated to make a point?

The OP doesn't say how long the delay was, and there were three buses. Neither do I see any "hatred" of cyclists, just the usual nonsense polarisation of views - caused ironically enough by the same lack of consideration or empathy road users hold for each other.

ThisRegard

mitosis wrote: »

I would argue taxis hired or available for hire (prove it!) be allowed use the bus lane, but a lad driving his taxi home not.

Taxi drivers don't just drive around aimlessly, generally. You know the cost of fuel, who would?

That's my point, taxis currently on hire with someone in it, or on hire by basically being on the way to pick up a customer who has just rang, are only supposed to be using the lanes.

Driving to the shops, dropping the kids off, driving into the city on the way to a rank, driving while waiting to be flagged down, they all still use the bus lane.

Spook_ie

monument wrote: »

This has been proven to be untrue a number of times so I'm presuming you're trolling and you will be infracted and banned if you keep this up.

Also against the rules to discuss moderation.





More trolling so my reply below is just for others

The rate is actually lower -- it was 1.24 per car in 2012 and not higher than 0.01 more in any if the years reported.

It's an adverage which shows that three people in a car is not typical - not even two are.

Point 1 What has been proven untrue?

Lets try it algebraically then

Average Joe = X
Excise on Fuel etc. = Y

X=X ( Average Joe on bike )

X+Y > X (Average Joe in Car )

Therefore Y contribution is in excess of X

It's pretty simple really


Point 2 OK


Point 3 Did you or did you not say in the real world, if it's the real world you don't get fractions of people, that's not trolling that's correcting a glaring mistake

edit FTR

2011 45% of private car journeys were with a passenger
2006 41% " " " "
2002 47% " " " "
1996 59% " " " "
1991 65% " " " "
1986 65% " " " "

Source CSO

Spook_ie

ThisRegard wrote: »

That's my point, taxis currently on hire with someone in it, or on hire by basically being on the way to pick up a customer who has just rang, are only supposed to be using the lanes.

Driving to the shops, dropping the kids off, driving into the city on the way to a rank, driving while waiting to be flagged down, they all still use the bus lane.

Taxis are allowed to use the bus lanes while plying for hire, imagine how many cyclists/buses would get milled out of it if every time an intending passenger had to flag a taxi down that had to cross into the bus lane to then stop and pick and them up, however, I do agree about the driving to shops/dropping kids off/going to their normal jobs etc. a taxi is a taxi not a private use vehicle, perhaps, a start could be made by the GS/revenue enforcing the use of taxis to taxiing and what is termed "incidental" use

Jawgap

Spook_ie wrote: »

Point 1 What has been proven untrue?

Lets try it algebraically then


.......

Oh God! let's not.....

......but if you insist - how does your model account for re-distributive effects of income and welfare payments?

If 'Average Joe' (I prefer Sean Citizen, it's less American) derives any portion of his income from state handouts or welfare payments then I'm subsidising him (through my income tax, PRSI, etc) to subsidise me!

In summary, what you are proposing is a zero-sum situation which is plainly not a reflection of real life.

Jawgap

Spook_ie wrote: »

.....
edit FTR

2011 45% of private car journeys were with a passenger
2006 41% " " " "
2002 47% " " " "
1996 59% " " " "
1991 65% " " " "
1986 65% " " " "

Source CSO

And according to the AA....

64% of mums compared to 31% of the fathers said that they drive their child/children somewhere at least once a day.

I wonder how many of those trips could be done on a bike or by walking

Spook_ie

beauf wrote: »

I don't really have a problem with taxi's using the bus lane. But stopping in them yes. Theres a problem all over with taxi's stopping in dangerous locations, or causing traffic jams by stopping with no consideration of others. Likewise inconsiderate cyclists. But cyclists in bus lanes is critical to easing congestion and facilitating cycling.

If a passenger wishes to avail of a taxi are you suggesting they should pull out of the bus lane to stop? Just imagine the people crossing the bus lane to get into a car, farcical.

Not that I advocate the practice of some drivers of jumping on the brakes when someone puts their hand up without looking in their mirrors first

Spook_ie

Jawgap wrote: »

Oh God! let's not.....

......but if you insist - how does your model account for re-distributive effects of income and welfare payments?

If 'Average Joe' (I prefer Sean Citizen, it's less American) derives any portion of his income from state handouts or welfare payments then I'm subsidising him (through my income tax, PRSI, etc) to subsidise me!

In summary, what you are proposing is a zero-sum situation which is plainly not a reflection of real life.

Will you ever stop bringing yourself in as Average Joe plus something else, the term Average Joe in the conversation automatically means that to maintain him as Average Joe then the rest of the Average Joes have the same facility, if that means they are all on SW then they are all on SW, if it means they all have 6 figure salaries then they all have 6 figure salaries, what is so difficult in understanding that as a concept model?

Edit

I never said it was a real world situation but it is an example exposing the fallacy often used that motorists don't pay road tax, they do, and before anyone starts, the term road tax is applied as a term for any extra tax that may or may not be used for road funding, it may well be a hospital tax or a school tax but is still a net gain to the states coffers

Jawgap

Spook_ie wrote: »

Will you ever stop bringing yourself in as Average Joe plus something else, the term Average Joe in the conversation automatically means that to maintain him as Average Joe then the rest of the Average Joes have the same facility, if that means they are all on SW then they are all on SW, if it means they all have 6 figure salaries then they all have 6 figure salaries, what is so difficult in understanding that as a concept model?

A model is generally described as a theory, formally presented, representing economic processes by a set of variables and a set of logical and/or quantitative relationships between them.

You're not articulating a model, just a particularly skewed view of the world, in other words 'an opinion' - which you are quite entitled to hold and articulate, just avoid describing it as anything more substantial than that......

EDIT: Basic Concepts of Research in Economics

ThisRegard

Spook_ie wrote: »

Taxis are allowed to use the bus lanes while plying for hire, imagine how many cyclists/buses would get milled out of it if every time an intending passenger had to flag a taxi down that had to cross into the bus lane to then stop and pick and them up,

Are you implying taxi drivers are really as bad as many are perceived to be and that they can't pull over to the side of the road safely ?

Spook_ie

Jawgap wrote: »

A model is generally described as a theory, formally presented, representing economic processes by a set of variables and a set of logical and/or quantitative relationships between them.

You're not articulating a model, just a particularly skewed view of the world, in other words 'an opinion' - which you are quite entitled to hold and articulate, just avoid describing it as anything more substantial than that......

EDIT: Basic Concepts of Research in Economics

You don't have to have variables in a model ( black box as opposed to whitebox or an A priori ) therefore the remaining logical and quantitative relationships remain and hold true

Spook_ie

ThisRegard wrote: »

Are you implying taxi drivers are really as bad as many are perceived to be and that they can't pull over to the side of the road safely ?

No I'm saying that some taxi drivers are bad others are good, luckily in my experience the majority are good. However as they are not required to drive outside of the bus lane when plying for fares the argument is theoretical at best

Does pose a thought though....

Given that some drivers are ass holes and that some cyclists are ass holes and some taxi drivers are ass holes are they the same ass holes ? or in other words does an ass hole driver make an asshole taxi driver and an ass hole cyclist make an ass hole driver etc.

Tarabuses

A taxi is nothing more than a chauffeur driven car, as Micheal O'Leary has shown. There is no reason for them to use bus lanes that would not apply to someone chauffering themselves.

Jawgap

Spook_ie wrote: »

You don't have to have variables in a model ( black box as opposed to whitebox or an A priori ) therefore the remaining logical and quantitative relationships remain and hold true

.....but can't be proven to be true......


......equally they can't be proven to be false which is somewhat convenient for you, but it means that in lacking the quality of falsifiability it is not a theory.

Surveyor11

Jawgap wrote: »

.....but can't be proven to be true......


......equally they can't be proven to be false which is somewhat convenient for you, but it means that in lacking the quality of falsifiability it is not a theory.

Waaaaaaay over me head, *unsubscribes*

Spook_ie

Jawgap wrote: »

.....but can't be proven to be true......


......equally they can't be proven to be false which is somewhat convenient for you, but it means that in lacking the quality of falsifiability it is not a theory.

I didn't say it was a theory, I said it's a model to prove that "road" tax is paid by motorists

Spook_ie

Spook_ie wrote: »

2 Exactly the same point that the Average Joe on a bike contributes less tax than the Average Joe in a car, therefore the Average Joe in a car IS contributing more to the roads

And we should all give way to rich folks who selflessly subsidize our roads with their high tax payments!

Even if this argument about motorists paying more towards the upkeep of the roads worked, so what? It's not about who pays for the upkeep of our roads, it's about every road user having a right to do so safely.

When cyclists don't use cycle lanes they are required to cycle to the left of the road and in Dublin this is also where the bus lane is situated. While many posters have pointed out that cycle lanes are often unsafe, I'd like to add that the majority of buses which pass me on my bike find room to overtake me and I try to give them as much space as I safely can.

Jawgap

Spook_ie wrote: »

I didn't say it was a theory, I said it's a model to prove that "road" tax is paid by motorists

Jawgap wrote: »

A model is generally described as a theory, formally presented, representing economic processes by a set of variables and a set of logical and/or quantitative relationships between them.

You're not articulating a model, just a particularly skewed view of the world, in other words 'an opinion' - which you are quite entitled to hold and articulate, just avoid describing it as anything more substantial than that......

EDIT: Basic Concepts of Research in Economics

Call it what you want it's still not what it says on the Tim, sorry, I meant 'tin'

Aard

Zebra3 wrote: »

Certain people in here don't seem to realise the benefits as motorists they get from others choosing to cycle instead.

Exactly. As the aphorism goes: "You're not stuck in traffic -- you *are* traffic."

Spook_ie

Deleted User wrote: »

And we should all give way to rich folks who selflessly subsidize our roads with their high tax payments!

Even if this argument about motorists paying more towards the upkeep of the roads worked, so what? It's not about who pays for the upkeep of our roads, it's about every road user having a right to do so safely.

When cyclists don't use cycle lanes they are required to cycle to the left of the road and in Dublin this is also where the bus lane is situated. While many posters have pointed out that cycle lanes are often unsafe, I'd like to add that the majority of buses which pass me on my bike find room to overtake me and I try to give them as much space as I safely can.

Again it is an exercise to prove that road tax does exist and has nothing to do with who has precedence on the roads. Just something that cyclists always argue that they pay their taxes and that's it, whereas I'm arguing that car drivers, bus users, HGV's pay more tax in a given situation so therefore they are indeed paying a road tax

The fact that it is economically more efficient to give way to buses hasn't even been touched on as yet

Aard

Spook_ie wrote: »

Point 3 Did you or did you not say in the real world, if it's the real world you don't get fractions of people, that's not trolling that's correcting a glaring mistake

Do you honestly not understand how averages work? I assume so, since you use words such as "algebraically".

TheChizler

Spook_ie wrote: »

Again it is an exercise to prove that road tax does exist and has nothing to do with who has precedence on the roads. Just something that cyclists always argue that they pay their taxes and that's it, whereas I'm arguing that car drivers, bus users, HGV's pay more tax in a given situation so therefore they are indeed paying a road tax

The fact that it is economically more efficient to give way to buses hasn't even been touched on as yet

What about your model proved that it was a road tax as opposed to an emissions tax? Or engine size tax? Or axle tax? There is no tax for anyone to just use the roads, there is tax to do that in combination with other things. But you can't separate the latter.

TheChizler

Personally I don't think I've ever been held up by a cyclist in a bus lane for more than a few seconds on a bus. Unless its rush hour the bus can overtake by moving into the next lane, and in rush hour my local bus lanes at least aren't in operation so they're clogged with cars anyway.

ThisRegard

Spook_ie wrote: »

Again it is an exercise to prove that road tax does exist and has nothing to do with who has precedence on the roads. Just something that cyclists always argue that they pay their taxes and that's it, whereas I'm arguing that car drivers, bus users, HGV's pay more tax in a given situation so therefore they are indeed paying a road tax

I therefore think a cyclist who pays motor tax should have more rights on the road than a motorist without a bike. Afterall, the cyclist has paid their VAT on the bike and accessories.