Muenster did not become a bicycle friendly (fahrradfreundliche) city by accident. During World War II the city center was almost completely destroyed. In the reconstruction of the city after the war it was decided that bicycles and buses should be an important part of city traffic. For the past 50 years the city has continually worked on increasing bicycle use.

>>55540

Protip: "Progressive" means wanting to have this kind of totalitarian power, so you can raze a city an remake it according to your ideals any time you want, without having to actually be at war with some other asshole.

>>55550

You're frighteningly deluded and I suspect may well be an american republican. You're certainly a white male.

"You're certainly a white male."

Find me even one 4chan user who isn't a white male. I DARE YOU

>>55550

In case you forgot to read >>55541
the Allies razed Muenster themselves (that whole thing with Germany being an evil country of Jew-bakers back in the 40s), and the people of the city had to make do afterwards.

>>55556

haha QFT

>>55550

Razing a city is pretty bad under any circumstances, whether or not you're at war. Besides, "progressive" actually has nothing to do with razing cities. It's just a general political standpoint which tries to ensure that taxes are fair and that poor people don't get hosed.

You're getting it mixed up with New Urbanism--and even there you're wrong. New Urbanists are planners, not dictators, and can only work on pieces of land which they've been assigned.

>>55540
Ignoring the ignorant; that photo is of the bike wash, OP?

I don't know what you call these assholes telling me I need to move out of my small rural town to some "Urban" area and take up riding a bike and using public transportation as my sole source ot transportation but they are not very "progressive." Actually they seem sort of Left authoritarian.

>>55660
I love the Right. They're so anti government until affects them. I wish we could take away federal highway funding and see how they last on "freemarket" driven interstates...

>>55658
I'm curious as well. How does that thing work?

>>55663
Just exactly how does highway funding paid for by a fuel excise tax mean I am on the right? If you don't by gas tires or automobiles you don't fund highways.

Actually I am almost in the center. I am in center leaning just slightly libertarian. So anyone not agreeing we should all be rounded up and put in some place like urban area like NY NY is on the political "right" according to you. Sorry I like living in my little town too bad you don't like it.

You can get fucked you god damed Authoritarian "liberal".

>>55660

Like I said, that's not progressive. Progressivism is unrelated. When people say you should move to an urban area, it's not an order. It's a recommendation, something which you're advised to do to make your life easier.


>>55686

And just to point out, it doesn't have to be a city. Living in a small town is fine, provided the town is compact. A town of 5,000 people can be less sprawling (and should be) than a suburb of 500,000, and is therefore better in the eyes of smart growth planners. Look at Japan--tons of small towns are still connected to the rail network. We could do the same here.

>>55686

Freeway infrastructure costs upwards of a million dollars an INCH to build or repair (That $1,000,000 per inch figure came from the rebuild of Oakland, California's Cypress freeway in the early 1990's - it's more expensive now)

I don't have to "by" (you meant "buy") gasoline, auto tires, or any automotive product to have a HUGE chunk of my state and federal taxes go to pay for this stuff - which I, as a cyclist, am not allowed to use.

>>55765
Oh. You are a Bay area fag. No point in talking to you people.

Protip you all are out of touch with reality. Fuck you and your insistence the rest of the state do as you say and think like you as well.

The green areas are the sane parts of the California the rest is occupied by leftists that want to manage every part of your life.

Okaland is a perfect example of how NOT to run a city ,county or state. Bankrupt in every way. An urban shit hole. People should move out of that city and it should be turned into green space as it is and always will be a complete failure.

>>55847
Wow. Just In case you didn't know the highways in California are run by the state of California - Caltrans - and have nothing to do with any county or municipal authority. What that has to do with me being from Moscow, Idaho has me puzzled.

Picture related, my home town, in fifty years this shot has changed very little.

>>55847

You can't even spell or punctuate properly. Why would your political opinions matter to anyone outside your sealed compound?

>>55847

Not sure if you noticed, but you just issued an order to millions of people to change their lifestyles for their own good by moving. Admittedly, you told them to move away from the city, instead of into it, but do you see where I'm going with this?

I've never been to Oakland, and I don't know if I'll get the chance, but I'd like to have a look someday. I can't imagine it's as bad as you say, and even if it is bad, that doesn't mean it should be bulldozed. You don't throw away something broken, you fix it. Any city's problems can be fixed with enough time, money, and creativity.

So how about this: you throw me some problems Oakland has, and I'll do my uneducated best at thinking of solutions. While you're at it, don't complain about people "ordering you" to move into cities if you're then going to tell them to move out of cities so they can be demolished and overgrown.

>>55851

That fellow probably went to Oakland once and got mugged. Sure, the city has problems (what city doesn't) but once they get Ron Dellums out and someone like Rudy Giulani in, they'll be fine.

Picture vaguely related (it's Emeryville, just next door)

>>55853

Can't honestly support Rudy. But if you guys ever got your hands on Bloomberg...

>>55850
Bawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww!

>>55851
The state of California has been throwing money at Oakland for years. Any place that can't even manage schools on their own pretty much fails it. Even with State support Oakland is still bankrupt.

>>55853
LOL. No they will elect someone like Hugo Chavez next. These people consider Arnold to be far right when he is an obvious liberal.

wow.

more americans squabbling over left and right

fox news is full of fucking monkeys, oakland is a shit hole but not as bad as l.a.

it doesnt cost 1,000,000 to build an inch of highway

markets won't regulate themselves.

its about motherfucking balance and you republicans have no idea about what fair and balanced is.

you've been gorging at the trough of excess for too long.

im not even a leftie, or a liberal.

just a motherfucken realist that is sick and tired of you right wing cocks espousing free market and then when the motherfucking shit hits the fan socialising all the god damn losses.

$700 billion would fund medicare for a fucking generation, instead you've got it going to rich inbred pricks that run failing banks in order to expand their empires.

corporate america is rotten to the core and right wing anti-government fuckwits is what let it get to that state.

>>55853
is that the Amtrak station there?

I'd bike to work if I was hired within biking distance from home or if it was cheap enough to live near work. Not everybody lives in the city, lame-ass. When you get out of college and do shit on your own you'll learn.

>>55877
What the fuck are you bawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwing about?

Whatever the fuck it is it sure doesn't relate to the reason the Bay Areas ideas about what the rest of us in this state must be forced to do being a shit idea.

It's typical urban vs rural where the urban people think it's fine to steamroll the rural people because they think they are somehow more enlightened because they live in the city.

>>55888
cities have a better (potential, not always realized) resources needed per person ratio. land-bound industry is the only required thing to be kept rural, the rest, e.g. factories have better be urban: before you start putting words in my mouth, i don't mean putting factories on top of residential areas. most of the rural areas, suburbia, that is, should ideally be folded up into proper cities. just look at europe.

you're just trying to keep the historically instituted, nowadays unjustified benefits we rest enjoy in a different and less resource-hungry way. just like car culture people.

>>55888

Seriously? Grow the fuck up. You act as if the only city in the world is SF, and as if everyone there is out to ruin your life, personally. Nobody here has ordered you, with a gun to your head, to move to San Francisco. All we have said is that dense development makes more sense than sprawling development, and that cities have greater potential than rural areas. You, on the other hand, advocated destroying Oakland and replacing it with "green space." You can barely type to begin with, and when your sentences CAN be followed, they're retarded. I'll always stand up for the preservation of the rural lifestyle (it's the suburban lifestyle I hate--nothing wrong with a farming town), but if anyone deserves to have his opinion ignored and be told what to do, it's you. Not "people living in the Central Valley," not "people living in the countryside," not even "people who drive ridiculously oversized cars," just you, the one troll who has nothing better to do than look like an ass on the slowest board on 4chan.

If you really have nothing better to do than troll, grow a pair and take it to a board where you'll piss off more people. The ≈20 people on this one are pretty fed up.

>>55917
Fucking signed. I never understood why people hated suburbia so much until I went to college on Long Island and realized that New Hampshire was small towns. Whoops.

To think the city I live in was fucking huge until the mines shut down. And that it had a very nice public transit system that got buggered by the Streetcar Conspiracy.

>>55917
Fuck off, really. I hope you all starve to death in your "dense" cities when the shit hits the fan. All you need comes from the countryside. All you urbanites produce is waste and pollution. Your water, power and food come all from the countryside.

>>55988

Urban farming: most of Japan's (locally grown) food comes from the Kanto area (Tokyo), simply because it's the biggest open space in the country. Despite the fact that over 34 million people live in the area (more people than the state of California), it's farmed extensively, and yes, it's fairly urban, very dense, and crisscrossed with railways. Tokyo draws its water from major natural and artificial lakes, all within the metropolitan area. Ditto for power plants (which are even closer to downtown than the farms and water supply).

On top of all that, Tokyo is the hub of the country, home to the best schools and the most jobs. It is recognized around the world as a spectacular city, and does a pretty good job of taking care of itself.

If you have any legitimate reason to hate cities so much, I'd like to hear it. I have never said that the countryside is useless or should be destroyed. All I'm saying--repeatedly--is that cities are more interesting, exciting, and convenient to live in. On top of that, using Tokyo as an example, they are remarkably self-sufficient. If you really feel the need to keep talking, start by trying to prove me wrong.

>>55991

Jethro went to the big city once. Everyone pointed and laughed at him. He ran home crying and hasn't come back since.

So, anyway, my original point was, clean bicycles are a sign of advanced civilization. Yes, there are those that disagree but I think that all reasonable people can see the value in a clean bicycle.

>>55658

It is! I have no idea how it works, but I'm guessing you remove any panniers or saddlebags, then just push it in... Might want to cover up a Brooks saddle.

>>55991
One city of remarkably homogenous people live in the highest concentration of humans on the planet but it isn't matched anyplace else on the planet. Your example actually speaks to how untrue that is of anyplace else on the planet.

>>56015

Rewrite this so it isn't fucking retarded and incoherent.

>>56018
Learn to read at the college level.

Japan and Tokyo are importers of food and raw material. They can not be sufficient with the population Japan supports or the resources native to Japan.

>>56019
Actually, it really is an incredibly confusing sentence.

>>56021

They import food, but not water and power. And they do a hell of a lot to try and grow their own food.

>>56015

My example doesn't say a thing about it being impossible on the rest of the planet. It does, however, show what cities are capable of, and I daresay they can do even better than that. A city like Boston could, if agriculture in MA was dramatically intensified, probably feed itself with enough farms inside 495.

I'm still waiting for your response to this, though:
"If you have any legitimate reason to hate cities so much, I'd like to hear it. I have never said that the countryside is useless or should be destroyed. All I'm saying--repeatedly--is that cities are more interesting, exciting, and convenient to live in."

>>56015

Seriously grow the fuck up and throw your discreet racism out the window. Multiculturalism doesn't inherently bring crime. It's because the affluent population of America decided to sprawl out into the suburbs after the introduction of affordable cars. Sure, you leave behind some minorities, but more generally, you leave behind the low-class (including white trash) that are crime-prone to begin with. Thanks to that, major American cities are plagued with traffic, pollution, and crime.

If you still want to draw causation between a diverse population and crime, you also need to take into account other factors. For example, eastern and western concepts of "respect" differ widely. Nowhere else besides the US do you see "ghetto" rappers glorifying violence and street living. Also, there are such things as diverse suburbs (I live in one) without much of a crime problem.

>>56032

Tokyo still remains as a good example of a smart, transit-oriented developed city. The Japanese aren't able to magically designate a spot of land as the new suburb; land is already exhausted. Nonetheless, Tokyo is capable of accommodating a high density of people through smart planning.

Major American cities are already at their housing limit, or are quickly approaching them. The traditional American approach is to make another suburb close to the nearest major highway. Let's see that continue with higher gas prices, endless traffic issues, and increasing distance from the job centers. Protip: we're wasting billions of TAX DOLLARS (did I raise an eyebrow?) on expanding roads that will only last a few years before needing further expansion and extensive repair. I wouldn't have problems with suburbs if they were designed with convenient access to frequent rail service to bring people into the job centers, a system not unlike Japan's. But seriously, hundreds of thousands commuting by personal car into the city? It's not workable anymore.

Also, writing at a college level does not imply the need for overloaded sentence structures. Besides, your logic is atrocious.

>>56033

I was gonna say--as good as Japan is about trains, they aren't without suburbs (I lived in one for 2 years when I was a kid). The difference is in how carefully planned out they are and how well they use every available speck of land. I'll take some pictures on Google Earth to show what I mean and post them tomorrow.

Class at 9:30, gotta sleep :P

Thats the benefit of getting the shit bombed out of them I suppose, they could rebuild exactly how they wanted.