The point is that when a private company creates a "service" that stands in place of a public option, and that "service" worsens the infrastructure for the rest of the people using it, then it is a bad thing.
I agree with you entirely here, it just also absolutely goes for the cars that the twitter post doesn't seem to mind.
Rental bikes offer a service that no other public transport service can. Of course it'd be better if they were public owned but unfortunately they're usually not. Still, I'd rather they exist under private ownership than not at all. In places where they're implemented properly they're great, though I understand why you'd not agree if you've never actually seen them used well.
It's not like a public bikeshare system is going to pop out of the ground when all the private bikes are thrown on traintracks. Of course there are reasons to criticise these companies but I still feel their presence is better than a complete absense.
deleted by creator
Bad take. Welcome the bikes; private transport infrastructure is better than no transport infrastructure.
Shitty move to block DLR rails either way.
deleted by creator
What's the point here, that goes for all types of transportation?
deleted by creator
I agree with you entirely here, it just also absolutely goes for the cars that the twitter post doesn't seem to mind.
deleted by creator
Rental bikes offer a service that no other public transport service can. Of course it'd be better if they were public owned but unfortunately they're usually not. Still, I'd rather they exist under private ownership than not at all. In places where they're implemented properly they're great, though I understand why you'd not agree if you've never actually seen them used well.
deleted by creator
It's not like a public bikeshare system is going to pop out of the ground when all the private bikes are thrown on traintracks. Of course there are reasons to criticise these companies but I still feel their presence is better than a complete absense.