5 bougie fucks being annoying in one particular situation does not justify this bullshit:
You aren't a car, darwin frowns upon you.
you are literally doing the carbrain thing from the meme here, and the vast majority of bikers on the road and cars crashing into them is a direct result of not having safe or useful paths, lanes, shoulders, anything, and car maximalism like yours.
I see people vaguely like the stereotype you describe maybe every couple months, even in an area where I'm surrounded by bikes. And they're essentially always a minor annoyance at worst. For the other 99.9% of people on bikes, the only reason they wouldn't be using a path is if it's severely compromised in some way or does not exist or go where they need to go. Nobody wants to be in the street with cars for no reason, you just don't know the reason and are imagining it's pure malice/elitism. I'm sure some fucking rich exurb in california has legit problems like the one you describe but it's not representative of anyone else's experience of cycling in america
idk this pulls out all the tropes, i genuinely can't tell if this is satire or serious
laws of physics (I FUCKING HATE YOU AND I HOPE YOU DIE)
elite rich cyclists
get off the road
i paid tax money for this road
i hate the runners too
In defense of the "elite rich bikers" who "spent $10k" (did they? or did they just spend $1k on an imitation) on sports gear (ignoring the real elite who spend $400k on gt3 rs to occasionally drive on sundays), when else are they going to bike if not at dawn? At rush hour? It's not like they dont have jobs lol.
Also why are the runners bourgeois? They're literally just running. On their feet. Is that bourgeois now?
I don't know what path or what road you're talking about, but that path is probably better without racers zooming around at 30mph. Plus, they paid taxes for that road too. Please don't think that your gas tax comes anywhere close to covering the cost of the roads, the whole of society has to suffer to subsidize the car addiction of urban planners.
Or the "jogger" at the bottom of the hill running opposite of traffic in the middle of a lane wth opposite traffic oncoming on 55 and 1.5 seconds for me to slam on the breaks and sound the horn to get off the road because physics won't allow my car to stop even though I am following the rules
being aware that at pre dawn morning work hours they aren't visible on a 55mph hill side
Is "assured clear distance ahead" not a rule where you are?
No. Which is why I'm required to slow down. In case there's something on the other side. Which I can't see. And I need to be able to stop without hitting it.
100 years ago, no mode of transportation dominated the roads. Pedestrians, trams, bicycles, cars, and animals all shared the road together. It's only a recent development that all the roads in the country have become dominated by the products of the automotive industry. This is not going to last that much longer. The roads will eventually return to being shared between different modes of transportation, with no individual mode dominating the road.
You are not entitled to the road because you purchased the deadly, inefficient, expensive, and environmentally destructive product of the automotive industry. You live in a city, and that means that people are going to get in your way, whether they're in a car, on foot, or on a bike. You're just going to have to live with that.
Some moron is not entitled to dance in a 55mph street and cry foul when they get smacked just because they wore expensive spandex at night at the bottom of a hill. But I see I have offended the religion of privileges and had my comment removed so why bother any more.
bicycle: most proletarian mode of transportation, Maoist China approved, the poorest people in the world all ride bicycles
car: literally created by the bourgeois industry, most people in the world can't even afford one, environmentally destructive and selfish, considered "proletarian" by global north labor aristocrats eating the blood of brown children, car drivers always fantasizing about murdering others
I'm just arguing against the notion that everyone who bikes for sport is bourgeois. People like to show examples of top-tier racebikes costing $10k to say that bikers are bourgeois, when most people are riding around $1k imitations that look similar but are way cheaper.
I don't think you have to spend $1000 to get a good bike but I also don't think it is too much to be honest. I use my bicycle as my primary mode of transport and I really love my trek fx1. Edit to put it in perspective most people in my country would have two cars for the size family I have. We have one old paid off one we almost never use and the cost of this thousand dollar bike was less than the cost of insurance, registration and basic maintenance for one year on a second car we don't have to pay for at all.
For a commuter bike, it's certainly too much, but as a piece of sports equipment, it's not. It's not like it's a yearly purchase, a bike can easily last 10 years of riding. I hope that food delivery workers are not bourgeois for buying $2500 ebikes.
Better not be, because I totally get it. Feels like cheating though when I try to outpace one in my imaginary race that they're unknowingly participating in; pedaling my damnedest with a $100 pos bike with broken gear teeth, no lights, no reflectors, and fucked up brakes that I ended up just disengaging permanently.
Removed by mod
5 bougie fucks being annoying in one particular situation does not justify this bullshit:
you are literally doing the carbrain thing from the meme here, and the vast majority of bikers on the road and cars crashing into them is a direct result of not having safe or useful paths, lanes, shoulders, anything, and car maximalism like yours.
I see people vaguely like the stereotype you describe maybe every couple months, even in an area where I'm surrounded by bikes. And they're essentially always a minor annoyance at worst. For the other 99.9% of people on bikes, the only reason they wouldn't be using a path is if it's severely compromised in some way or does not exist or go where they need to go. Nobody wants to be in the street with cars for no reason, you just don't know the reason and are imagining it's pure malice/elitism. I'm sure some fucking rich exurb in california has legit problems like the one you describe but it's not representative of anyone else's experience of cycling in america
is this satire
idk this pulls out all the tropes, i genuinely can't tell if this is satire or serious
In defense of the "elite rich bikers" who "spent $10k" (did they? or did they just spend $1k on an imitation) on sports gear (ignoring the real elite who spend $400k on gt3 rs to occasionally drive on sundays), when else are they going to bike if not at dawn? At rush hour? It's not like they dont have jobs lol.
Also why are the runners bourgeois? They're literally just running. On their feet. Is that bourgeois now?
I don't know what path or what road you're talking about, but that path is probably better without racers zooming around at 30mph. Plus, they paid taxes for that road too. Please don't think that your gas tax comes anywhere close to covering the cost of the roads, the whole of society has to suffer to subsidize the car addiction of urban planners.
Removed by mod
Is "assured clear distance ahead" not a rule where you are?
Are hills transparent where you are?
No. Which is why I'm required to slow down. In case there's something on the other side. Which I can't see. And I need to be able to stop without hitting it.
Maybe they should do a city, rural poll. Driving mentality is very different.
Why dont you drive slower if you're going to crest a hill and have no visibility lol, or is the maximum speed the minimum speed to you
100 years ago, no mode of transportation dominated the roads. Pedestrians, trams, bicycles, cars, and animals all shared the road together. It's only a recent development that all the roads in the country have become dominated by the products of the automotive industry. This is not going to last that much longer. The roads will eventually return to being shared between different modes of transportation, with no individual mode dominating the road.
You are not entitled to the road because you purchased the deadly, inefficient, expensive, and environmentally destructive product of the automotive industry. You live in a city, and that means that people are going to get in your way, whether they're in a car, on foot, or on a bike. You're just going to have to live with that.
Some
moron is not entitled to dance in a 55mph street and cry foul when they get smacked just because they wore expensive spandex at night at the bottom of a hill. But I see I have offended the religion of 
privileges and had my comment removed so why bother any more.
bicycle: most proletarian mode of transportation, Maoist China approved, the poorest people in the world all ride bicycles
car: literally created by the bourgeois industry, most people in the world can't even afford one, environmentally destructive and selfish, considered "proletarian" by global north labor aristocrats eating the blood of brown children, car drivers always fantasizing about murdering others
Bougie bicyclists certainly exist and a few have given me looks when I would use the same bike paths to get to my old dishwashing job.
I'm just arguing against the notion that everyone who bikes for sport is bourgeois. People like to show examples of top-tier racebikes costing $10k to say that bikers are bourgeois, when most people are riding around $1k imitations that look similar but are way cheaper.
$1000 is still too much to pay for a regular bike
I don't think you have to spend $1000 to get a good bike but I also don't think it is too much to be honest. I use my bicycle as my primary mode of transport and I really love my trek fx1. Edit to put it in perspective most people in my country would have two cars for the size family I have. We have one old paid off one we almost never use and the cost of this thousand dollar bike was less than the cost of insurance, registration and basic maintenance for one year on a second car we don't have to pay for at all.
I spent like $600 on one that was marked down from higher. Way cheaper than a car+upkeep.
For a commuter bike, it's certainly too much, but as a piece of sports equipment, it's not. It's not like it's a yearly purchase, a bike can easily last 10 years of riding. I hope that food delivery workers are not bourgeois for buying $2500 ebikes.
If you have an ebike for work that's literally an investment
If you are just riding a bike to work spending $200 on Craigslist will do ya
Better not be, because I totally get it. Feels like cheating though when I try to outpace one in my imaginary race that they're unknowingly participating in; pedaling my damnedest with a $100 pos bike with broken gear teeth, no lights, no reflectors, and fucked up brakes that I ended up just disengaging permanently.