He touched my car

[theclaud]

Relaxed or bored?

Definitely not bored.

 

[Brandane]

Now......when I look at people in their cars (and I sometimes travel by car as a passenger) and I compare the choice they've made with the choice I've made, well, I'm sorry, but I think to myself 'dohhhhhhh - why would you do that?'

The other side of the coin is that there are plenty of car drivers looking at people on bicycles thinking to themselves - why would you do that?

I can see where they are coming from. There are many downsides to cycling, most of which you have listed. I am happy to be able to say that I enjoy BOTH cycling and driving . Sometimes there is nothing better than just turning the ignition key and listening to the engine purring away. Put your favourite sounds on the stereo, turn up the heater in this cold weather and then head off to find a nice quiet route somewhere and have a blast *. Admire the scenery from the comfort and effortless ease of your car. If it starts to rain, no problem, flick a switch and it will clear your view. In fact the protection from the elements will make it feel even more pleasurable.

I find cycling is also a pleasure, and granted - fitness is a useful bi-product; but it has many more restrictions.

* Admittedly, this factor probably does not apply to residents of London or other major population centres where even I would find car ownership more hassle than it is worth - but around here it remains a necessity for most working people.

 

[dellzeqq]

The other side of the coin is that there are plenty of car drivers looking at people on bicycles thinking to themselves - why would you do that?

They might, but, in a general way, they'd be better off thinking 'what needs to change in order for me to do that?' To return in a roundabout way to the beginning of the thread, the number one reason for outrage from drivers to cyclists, whether it be caused by leaning or not, is the irruption of the human in to the closed bubble of the car. It's the challenge offered by the dissolving of their removal from the world.

Ayrshire (a part of the world I've never had the pleasure of visiting) is a different kettle of fish from London, but there is one common consideration. The great fantasy of the bourgeois era is the individual. People remove themselves, seeking space, or isolation, or quiet in order, so they think, to become truly themselves. It's a great inspiration to artistic endeavour, but as a platform for managing our society and our ecology it's a complete failure. As a way to finding the best in humanity it's utterly hopeless.

Great art, though....

 

[Boris Bajic]

The elaborate beating-about-the-bush-and-using-up-the-internet thing is wasted on me, BB. The private car is a social menace, and my hostility to it is entirely open. Cricket, on the other hand, is really rather nice. And even if I hated it, it wouldn't threaten to run me over. See DZ's thing about analogies. The thing you have decided not to understand is that for most purposes that it is discussed, there is nothing - but nothing - in the real world that is comparable to the private car in function, reach or dominance. It's a hegemony thang, and it has you in its spell. I'm here to demystify it for you, to break the spell. To make the stone stony, as that Shklovsky fellow used to say. None of this has anything to do with any putative pleasure that might be derived from driving in fictional conditions, about which I am not arguing.

I know you disapprove of my filling the Internet, but it is a fault I live with.

You and I disagree about the private car being a social menace. I may be wrong, but I hold it to be a good thing. I agree with you that it has extraordinary levels of reach and dominance in the real world. I agree too about nothing being comparable in terms of function; I think that is part of the attraction for me.

I accept the difference between cricket and motoring in terms of running things and people over. The analogy was a poor one, although in mitigation it was made with reference to your words about drivers being bored rather than any explicit mention of social menace.

I would be careful telling people (as you tell me) what they have or have not decided not to understand. I absolutely accept your view (the commonly held view) that it is a hegemony thing. On the public highway the motor vehicle holds sway. It does not have me 'in its spell' as you say it does. It is thoughtful of you to take the trouble to break the spell, but there is no spell to break. I am reminded of a religious friend who tried to persuade me that Christ loved me. It was lovely of him to try, but religion did not and does not fit my pistol. Nor does the 'Evil hegemony of the car' thing, but it is equally lovely of you to try.

I have never driven in fictional conditions, so I cannot argue about that either.

I have driven and continue to drive in the real world. I rather like it most of the time. I quite like it some of the time and there is the odd, rare instance when it is horrid.

People bringing up three children in rural market towns are welcome to eschew the motor car if they choose. I choose not to. I have found cars helpful. And often fun.

When (years ago) I was bringing up toddlers and babies in Central London, we travelled by bicycle, tube and bus. I didn't think the car wicked, just inappropriate in those conditions. In sat on the street, but was driven rarely.

I enjoy cycling too. And train travel. And aeroplanes. And sailing boats and ferries. And walking. Helicopters frighten me. I wish they didn't.

 

[Fasta Asloth]

Had you studied statistics at school, you would know that a sample of 760/ 1,000 for a population of ~37 million gives a margin of error of less than +/- 3%.

In other words, we can be very confident that the sample is accurate.

Having studied statistics I was taught that the polled data is only accurate if it does truely represent the population at large that you wish to extrapolate your sample result onto. Do we know that this is the case here? If so, then can be more confident of the result..

 

[User482]

Having studied statistics I was taught that the polled data is only accurate if it does truely represent the population at large that you wish to extrapolate your sample result onto. Do we know that this is the case here? If so, then can be more confident of the result..

The calculation of < +/-3% was at 95% confidence.

 

[Boris Bajic]

The fact is that driving betrays an inability to engage with the world. It's not a grown-up thing to do. As the waffle two posts up amply demonstrates. There are people who find themselves in positions that make it the least worst alternative, but driving as a choice, or, heaven help us, an expression of individual liberty is a poor thing indeed.

I'll tell you this. If I pass you on the road, you in your car, me on my bike, I know I am the better person. There's nothing you can do by way of leather-backed driving gloves, tweed caps, shinier hubcaps or car stereos that can convince me otherwise.

The waffle was mine. I do not advocate driving as an expression of individual liberty. I'm not even sure how that would work. I drive as a choice, not as a least-worst option.

I disagree about driving betraying an inability to engage with the world. That seems a fairly sweeping statement to label a fact. Similarly your position that driving is not a grown-up thing to do. I'm not sure it helps to divide activities into 'grown-up' and 'not grown-up'. I do not. If I did, I wonder where I'd place nebulous Internet discussions with people I've never met.

On occasions when I'm driving in traffic and cyclist passes me, I do get little pangs of envy. It is quite natural. I'm not sure the cyclist is a better person, although he or she may be.

I frequently pass cyclists when driving and I frequently pass motorists when cycling. The reverse is also true in both scenarios.

I've never found myself thinking as I pass someone (or am passed) who is the better person. I'm not sure how I'd judge.

There is a huge (and doubtless valuable) debate to be had about whether cars are wicked and naughty and whether drivers are unable to engage with the world, rendered so by a cage of steel and glass. Until a jury has come to some sort of conclusion on that, I hold that it is poor form for cyclists to lean on a car in traffic.

 

[Fasta Asloth]

The calculation of < +/-3% was at 95% confidence.

I wasn't referring to the CI, but the actual sample demographics....for example if I were to poll 1000 drivers in the nice scenic quiet roads of NW scotland, then perhaps there would be a lesser proportion who are bored when driving vs a sample of a 1000 drivers who routinely drive the M25 at rush hour..... it's that kind of demographic data in the actual sample that is also required to then know how well this extrapolates to the whole UK...

 

[Norm]

The calculation of < +/-3% was at 95% confidence.

Nicely but completely avoiding the question.

I love driving, I find it fun even if I'm queuing up to pass the local school gates and being overtaken by cyclists. I am neither jealous of nor righteous towards people who chose other modes of transport because I am largely content with my decision to use something which I consider to be appropriate for my journey whilst not bothering myself about the decisions of others.

I can heartily recommend it, it is very relaxing.

 

[User482]

I wasn't referring to the CI, but the actual sample demographics....for example if I were to poll 1000 drivers in the nice scenic quiet roads of NW scotland, then perhaps there would be a lesser proportion who are bored when driving vs a sample of a 1000 drivers who routinely drive the M25 at rush hour..... it's that kind of demographic data in the actual sample that is also required to then know how well this extrapolates to the whole UK...

The only people who can answer that are Allianz. But it's irrelevant - the vast majority of people live in or near densely populated areas.

 

[User482]

I can heartily recommend it, it is very relaxing.

I very occasionally commute by car, which never fails to remind me why I usually cycle.

 

[Fasta Asloth]

The only people who can answer that are Allianz. But it's irrelevant - the vast majority of people live in or near densely populated areas.

If we dont know how Allianz set-up the sample demographics then no, not irrelevant.....

 

[User482]

The only people who can answer that are Allianz. But it's irrelevant - the vast majority of people live in or near densely populated areas.

Edited to add: the entire population of the Scottish highlands is (depending on what you count) around 300,000, which is 0.5% of the UK population. In a randomised poll, that would mean of the 1,000 people asked, 5 would be from the Highlands.

 

[srw]

I wasn't referring to the CI, but the actual sample demographics....for example if I were to poll 1000 drivers in the nice scenic quiet roads of NW scotland, then perhaps there would be a lesser proportion who are bored when driving vs a sample of a 1000 drivers who routinely drive the M25 at rush hour..... it's that kind of demographic data in the actual sample that is also required to then know how well this extrapolates to the whole UK...

Market research companies know this and are extremely likely to take it into account - it's not in their interest to provide duff data to their clients.

Edited to add... Since the report said that the M25 was people's least favourite motorway, I think we can take it for granted that quite a lot of people in the sample drive on the M25.

 

[User482]

If we dont know how Allianz set-up the sample demographics then no, not irrelevant.....

You've failed to understand my point. See previous post.