What is Digg?197 Comments
- schroeder, on 10/10/2007, -8/+91Sure, tell that to billions of Chinese.
- MercedRocks, on 10/10/2007, -22/+70Another reason why Americans are so fat...
- davidsmero, on 10/10/2007, -3/+45Anything can be considered transportation as long as it takes you from point a to b.
- CandidCanon, on 10/10/2007, -9/+49Note that the secretary was quoted saying the bike paths and trails, IE park trails upon which rides bicycles for recreation are not directly related to transportation. Note that there was no mention of bike lanes being lumped in with park trails as not being related to transportation.
Buried as inaccurate. - NikoKun, on 10/10/2007, -8/+41yeah good... meanwhile all the other countries in the world have sections of the street JUST for bikers... While we here in the states don't even consider bikes a mode of transportation... -_-
- kevinmotel, on 10/10/2007, -8/+382,000,000,000 bikes in everyday usage throughout the world and its not a form of transportation?!
- reeder, on 10/10/2007, -10/+38What do you expect when they are all auto lobbyists Bush put in charge to pay back the companies that bribed him.
- MasterThief117, on 10/10/2007, -6/+29Then Chuck Norris' roundhouse kicks are a form of transportation.
- keyboardduder, on 10/10/2007, -5/+27Of course, what money and benefit is there in classifying bicycles as a form of transportation? Their fuel is people's calories. Theres no money in that. Soon Sedans wont be, only SUVS and trucks, for the good of oil!
- JayD16, on 10/10/2007, -6/+27Just to play the devil's advocate, bike lanes are transportation, bike trails and bike paths are recreation. Would you count race tracks as something the transportation department should deal with?
- sleeknerve, on 10/10/2007, -3/+24I think he meant bike paths as in like bike trails in the mountains, not a as a way to get to work or through the city
- halavais, on 10/10/2007, -2/+17Don't know why the parent is being dug down. New York City has more people walking & biking to work (along with public transit) than in any other city in the US, and they live longer and weigh less. Better walking and biking infrastructure is a health issue, an environmental issue, maybe even a national security issue, in addition to being a transportation issue.
- Bhima, on 10/10/2007, -0/+14As it happens I take a 'bike trail' to work most warm and sunny days; along with most of the people in my office.
I suppose it's just the luck of the location of the building and layout of the bike paths in the city. - fober, on 10/10/2007, -2/+15HOW DARE YOU TAINT THIS DISCUSSION WITH TRUTHS AND RELEVANCY
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -2/+15You will be buried for making sense.
- tehpwnrate, on 10/10/2007, -1/+13Also note that the quote is inaccurate. They left out parts of it. "There are museums that are being built with that money, bike paths, trails, repairing lighthouses." This is about pork barrel spending, where some congressperson finagles their way into getting the Department of Transportation into paying for things it's not meant to, like (as you said) recreational bike trails.
Buried. - jerryparid, on 10/10/2007, -1/+12Na; its actually mopeds. In major urban Chinese cities; mopeds/motorcycles and cars are everywhere. Very few people still ride bicycles in such cities. The other portion use public transportation.
- Cykaos, on 10/10/2007, -2/+12I agree that bike trails are usually recreational and the article doesn't say anything about bikes not being a considered transportation. However, many people do use bike trails for transportation. I for one rode the Burke-Gilman Trail bike trial from Ballard to the University of Washington campus every day. Thousands of people every day use bike trials as transportation from point a to point b.
- Parker307, on 10/10/2007, -5/+14This is totally relevant and vitally important. If we had the infrastructure to live in a way where we didn't have to drive everywhere., Bike and pedestrian infrastructure, we would be healthier from more exorcise and cleaner air and we would be more secure from less dependence on foreign oil. Maybe we could save the oil we have in case we need it for national defense, fueling jets, ships and other military gas guzzler's
- falstaff, on 10/10/2007, -2/+11If this submission is any sort of proxy of how many people Digg the headline without bothering to RTFA, it's pretty sad.
- lieutenantmudd, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Bike lanes leading around the countryside are recreational, but alot of cities have urban bike trails that are grade separated and act as bike highways during rush hours
- ToadLeg, on 10/10/2007, -3/+9I think the point here is that bicycles are a MAJOR form of transportation. This isn't some obscure Segway or pogo-stick technology, but something that billions of people use to travel long distances.
- Kazenodeku, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7Buried as inaccurate. It refers to bike paths and trails, not bikes themselves, and bike paths/trails are generally recreational and not used for getting from point A to point B.
- pb4upoo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5 Not only are bicycles a current form of transportation in the US we need to push for them becoming the dominant form of transportation where possible. Obviously Minnesota in the middle of winter is not a situation where we have current bicycles that will do the job. But technology can cure many short comings once people make up their mind to get the job done.
- inhaler, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Come on guys, rich people don't ride bikes: They get from point a to b on the backs of the proletariat.
- CandidCanon, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7I'm sorry, I forgot I was on the new DIGG. Please, forgive me.
- xaxxon, on 10/10/2007, -4/+9EXACTLY. Please note what was said. Bike paths and trails are recreational - they aren't used by people to get from point a to point b. Nowhere does it say "anything related to a bicycle is not considered transportation."
Please digg the parent up. - inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5An amount between zero and some.
- vornan19, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4But America never had to be.
- ClOlD, on 10/10/2007, -4/+8Article's lacking in details to fully support the Digg headline claim, but based on the sentence grouping of "...bike paths, trails...", I get the distinct impression that this is referring to recreational unpaved paths for mountain biking, which has about as much to do with transportation as hiking trails have to do with sidewalks.
- jacquesm, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5or to millions of dutch
- tehpwnrate, on 10/10/2007, -6/+10You're an idiot. First, we have bike lanes. Second, it's not bikes that aren't considered transportation, it's bike trails outside the roads. That's not the Dept. of Transportation's job.
- lanthus, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6OMG! The US Transportation Secretary doesn't think that spending $250,000 to put in a bike path in the park my senators kids use should be part of a highway spending bill. IMPEACH BUSH!!!1!!1
- FonWin, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5
If you want bike lanes to travel around in town on, take it up with your local gov.
We don't need the federal involved in crap like this. First of all it's not the feds job to make bike paths, govern interstate commerce yes, bike paths no. And when the fed gets involved it always comes with strings. - tonyyarusso, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Yes. Actually, I'd be willing to pay more in pretty much any area to get state services, since Pawlenty's aversion to providing such has resulted in a general deficiency statewide. For instance, I'd be quite happy to pay for the re-opening of the portapotties along the Willard Munger state trail. However, I'd be even happier if we could stop wasting funds and reapply what is being spent in intelligent ways first, but still, yes, I would support an increase of fees if I knew it would result in real gains.
- Parker307, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6This is totally relevant and vitally important. If we had the infrastructure to live in a way where we didn't have to drive everywhere., Bike and pedestrian infrastructure, we would be healthier from more exorcise and cleaner air and we would be more secure from less dependence on foreign oil. Maybe we could save the oil we have in case we need it for national defense, for fueling jets, ships and other military gas guzzler's
- orangester, on 10/10/2007, -4/+7BREAKING: Walking For Poor People. SUV's Mandated by Gov't.
- napsack, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5Heh, one of the few times I actually laugh at a Chuck Norris joke.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4I really hate having to digg down a lolcat comment...
- lieutenantmudd, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5No bike infrastructure = Less bike commuters = More cars during rush hour = Spending even more on car infrastructure
Bike infrastructure is a bargain compared to car infrastructure. - vocalyouth, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5I ride as often as i can, I know I would ride more if the city provided more bike lanes / safe areas for me to ride. I love riding my bike. It's a fun, green way to get around.
- manicallday, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6Here in DC the Bike trails are fairly extensive and also used as a major thoroughfare for commuters.
- jitterbits, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3hehe, I love the thought of a dedicated pogo-stick lane.
- sendben, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Another reason why Americans are so wasteful of the Earth's natural resources
- spira, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6I hate to defend anyone in this administration, but this post is ridiculous - this official said nothing whatsoever about bikes not being transportation. Bike paths and trails aren't any more related to our nation's transportation infrastructure than the Indianapolis motor speedway. Paths and trails have far more in common with our nation's parks than our nation's roads, since they are primarily intended for recreational use. I fully support the building of bike lanes and efforts to make our streets and mass transit more friendly to bikes, but attacks on officials who are doing nothing but telling it like it is takes away focus from dealing with the many folks in Washington who do not have reality-based agendas.
- tonyyarusso, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6A note for those who incorrectly labeled this as inaccurate:
Here in Minnesota (the location of the bridge being discussed, interestingly enough), bike lanes do not exist in any remotely significant number. As someone who has used a bicycle to commute in the state, I can tell you that the needs of bike commuters are NOT being properly addressed by local, state, or federal agencies. Sidewalks are very unsafe and often illegal to ride on, and many roads lack even shoulders, not to mention a proper bicycle lane. Additionally, awareness and respect on the part of the population is dismal, and it is not uncommon for motorists to run you off the road (yes, I can touch their door - some come close enough to bump your handlebars), throw trash at cyclists, scream at them to get off "their" roads, etc. In short, bike paths are an EXTREMELY important part of many routes for both commuting as well as non-daily point-to-point travel, as they are often the only safe option. It is truly appalling that an official charged with the responsibility for all forms of transportation would be so blatantly either ignorant or dismissive of a form deemed less important by her department and the current administration, not to mention a dismaying percentage of the population/electorate at large. (Oh, and outside of St. Paul and Minneapolis proper, the suburbs lack any significant amount of public transportation options as well, so if you live in the suburbs, that's out.) You'd think the government would want to encourage behavior that lowers dependence on foreign oil and roadway maintenance spending, but apparently they still don't care. - sodade, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3For every jackass that buys an F150 to commute in, a potential bike commuter decides that it is too damned dangerous. I am a hardcore cyclist. I ride my road bike on long open highways, but there is no way in hell that I would ride on a city street in the US.
- billbacon, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3I'm in Japan. There are about 10 bikes to every car. Then again, you see souped-up scooters with after market parts and neon lites so to say the least it's a much different place. I think part of what makes it such a viable form of transportation here is the fact that you can leave a bike on a corner, without a 20lb chain looped around every detachable part, and it will still be there in a week.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 193 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is