Comments on: The Fat Argument http://isocrates.us/bike/2009/07/the-fat-argument/ Getting Around on Two Wheels and Two Feet Tue, 22 May 2012 00:58:14 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Andy Cline http://isocrates.us/bike/2009/07/the-fat-argument/comment-page-1/#comment-3903 Andy Cline Fri, 24 Jul 2009 03:58:15 +0000 http://isocrates.us/bike/?p=1574#comment-3903 Alex... I'm always interested in your insights. Alex… I’m always interested in your insights.

]]> By: Alexander http://isocrates.us/bike/2009/07/the-fat-argument/comment-page-1/#comment-3902 Alexander Fri, 24 Jul 2009 01:49:36 +0000 http://isocrates.us/bike/?p=1574#comment-3902 The sad thing about these red-state/blue-state debates as well as conservative vs. liberal is they serve as tools to distract us from substantive issues. People get involved in hate matches over whether it's global warming or climate change, completely missing the point that pollution doesn't have to risk the existence of all humans everywhere to be a really bad thing :-) The fat map is cute, but the civil rights / ideology implications here I feel are in moderately poor taste. Living in a "fat" state, many many people are height/weight proportionate, and poverty plays a large role... does this mean that places like RI take better care of their poor maybe? Not in my experience, they simply have priced living in that state out of reach of the poor, thus eliminating large poverty pockets seen in places like LA, TX, MS... so we can blame them for being cheap places where poor populations make a life (albeit not always a health-conscious) Just a rant... please ignore.. :) The sad thing about these red-state/blue-state debates as well as conservative vs. liberal is they serve as tools to distract us from substantive issues. People get involved in hate matches over whether it’s global warming or climate change, completely missing the point that pollution doesn’t have to risk the existence of all humans everywhere to be a really bad thing :-)

The fat map is cute, but the civil rights / ideology implications here I feel are in moderately poor taste. Living in a “fat” state, many many people are height/weight proportionate, and poverty plays a large role… does this mean that places like RI take better care of their poor maybe?

Not in my experience, they simply have priced living in that state out of reach of the poor, thus eliminating large poverty pockets seen in places like LA, TX, MS… so we can blame them for being cheap places where poor populations make a life (albeit not always a health-conscious)

Just a rant… please ignore.. :)

]]> By: Andy Cline http://isocrates.us/bike/2009/07/the-fat-argument/comment-page-1/#comment-3889 Andy Cline Wed, 22 Jul 2009 21:07:06 +0000 http://isocrates.us/bike/?p=1574#comment-3889 Robert... We in Springfield refer to them as MOCAR :-) Robert… We in Springfield refer to them as MOCAR :-)

]]> By: robert http://isocrates.us/bike/2009/07/the-fat-argument/comment-page-1/#comment-3881 robert Wed, 22 Jul 2009 14:50:16 +0000 http://isocrates.us/bike/?p=1574#comment-3881 Andy, I agree with you 100%. A few months ago a headline flashed across every bicycling blog in the country, "Republicans want to cut non-motorized transportation and SRTS!!!!" I was outraged like everyone else until I actually read the paper that they released. They made a point to note that projects like Columbia's non-motorized grant should be left up to states. In theory I agree with that statement but it is a complete joke considering our state DOT finds that non-automobile transport does not fit well in their "practical design." Andy,

I agree with you 100%.

A few months ago a headline flashed across every bicycling blog in the country, “Republicans want to cut non-motorized transportation and SRTS!!!!”

I was outraged like everyone else until I actually read the paper that they released. They made a point to note that projects like Columbia’s non-motorized grant should be left up to states.

In theory I agree with that statement but it is a complete joke considering our state DOT finds that non-automobile transport does not fit well in their “practical design.”

]]> By: Steve A http://isocrates.us/bike/2009/07/the-fat-argument/comment-page-1/#comment-3876 Steve A Wed, 22 Jul 2009 00:15:31 +0000 http://isocrates.us/bike/?p=1574#comment-3876 Like a lot of things, I'm not convinced that good things happen when government gets involved with cycling. I was born and raised in Seattle, and I can't say it's a better place to cycle than it was when Republicans were more than a fringe element. I guess I reach opposite conclusions - for the exact same reasons as Andy. In my book, there are MANY worse things than benign neglect. I see some of them every day on the ride to work. That may no longer be a "Republican" observation, but it is definitely a "small government" one... Like a lot of things, I’m not convinced that good things happen when government gets involved with cycling. I was born and raised in Seattle, and I can’t say it’s a better place to cycle than it was when Republicans were more than a fringe element.

I guess I reach opposite conclusions – for the exact same reasons as Andy. In my book, there are MANY worse things than benign neglect. I see some of them every day on the ride to work.

That may no longer be a “Republican” observation, but it is definitely a “small government” one…

]]>