What are the biggest flaws about Minneapolis that don't have to do with the weather? (Viking: buy, live)

[Thedosius]

Here is the reality of how roads are financed in Minnesota (I added the emphasis below):

https://www.twincities.com/2015/02/1...ain-its-roads/

"•The state-run highway system is about 29,000 lane-miles, or 10 percent of all the lane-miles in Minnesota. But these roads — the interstates, U.S. highways and state highways — carry about 58 percent of Minnesota’s traffic. These roads are paid for by drivers across Minnesota, with a healthy assist from the federal government.
•The local road system consists of 184,000 lane-miles, or 62.5 percent of the state total. They have only about 12 percent of the state’s total traffic. They’re paid for entirely by cities, counties and townships out of local revenue — frequently property taxes, along with vehicle registration taxes. Most of the smaller city and county roads fall into this category, along with all the township roads.
•Most of the remaining Minnesota roads are hybrids — funded partially by local taxpayers and partially by statewide taxpayers. These are the city and county “state-aid” roads, and are usually the bigger, more heavily traveled roads in a city or county. In St. Paul, for example, University Avenue is a state-aid street, while the adjacent side street Sherburne Avenue is the city’s sole responsibility."


Here's a look at how roads are paid for on a federal level-

https://www.citylab.com/transportati...-roads/393134/

[WoodburyWoody]

Originally Posted by Mr. E. Ryter

Yes. Cars pay for the roads. Not bikes. Bikes don't have to have annual tabs or taxes paid on them. And there are no regulations on what kind of bikes, the condition their in, any safety features, training or licenses for the rider, or even any safety gear or clothing that must be worn. Cars have these kinds of regulation and are held to them by law.

That's the information I have and it's factual. Just because you have a car AND a bike doesn't mean you have the right to ride your bike in the road. That's like saying golf carts and riding lawn mowers should be able to ride down the road, too. It's self-entitlement of the bicyclist and poor planning on the side of the city. Then people use "it's good for the environment" propaganda to justify it. Most bicyclists have cars, too. Some of them even more than one! When bicyclists give up their cars to live what they preach, I'll be more inclined to work with them. But, the way it's going, they'll be demanding bike lanes on freeways next. I guarantee it.

So, how do you propose fining bicyclists for their traffic law violations? They don't have any licenses to record for the police. No identifying information of any kind. If there's an accident involving a bike, it's always blamed on the car. There are just as many distracted bicyclists (with ear plugs in, unsecured cargo, riding hands free and playing on their phones, etc.,) as cars. Yet bicyclists claim no responsibility.

The only people who don't hate bicycle lanes in middle of city roads are bicyclists and city planners.

Actually - per Minnesota state law - bikes are allowed on roads, as long as they follow the rules:

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/169.222

To say otherwise, is just not factual.

[Mr. E. Ryter]

Originally Posted by old fed

"That's the information I have and it's factual. Just because you have a car AND a bike doesn't mean you have the right to ride your bike in the road."

bikes do have a right to the road even if one doesn't own a car. check your state laws. it's not up to me to figure out how to fine riders but i always carried my ID with me. take it up with your lawmakers.

where i live now bikes can indeed ride on the freeways in certain areas because there are few other roads.

good talk.

Roads were built for cars. Not bikes. It's been that way since roads were built. Bikes on the roads at any time was considered a privilege, not a right. Bike riders were only recently given this supposed "right," which (until they commute by the same laws drivers do and pay the same fees) is actually still just a privilege. You earn a right. Calling something a "right" doesn't make it one.

An "It's not my responsibility to figure it out" opinion doesn't help anything. That's the problem with bicyclists on city roads though. They want the "right" without the responsibility. And I just can't get behind that.

[Thedosius]

Originally Posted by Mr. E. Ryter

Roads were built for cars. Not bikes. It's been that way since roads were built..

Wow. The Romans sure had foresight when they built roads 2,000 years before the technology they were made for was invented.

[TheGrandViking]

Originally Posted by Mr. E. Ryter

Yes. Cars pay for the roads. Not bikes. Bikes don't have to have annual tabs or taxes paid on them. And there are no regulations on what kind of bikes, the condition their in, any safety features, training or licenses for the rider, or even any safety gear or clothing that must be worn. Cars have these kinds of regulation and are held to them by law.

That's the information I have and it's factual. Just because you have a car AND a bike doesn't mean you have the right to ride your bike in the road. That's like saying golf carts and riding lawn mowers should be able to ride down the road, too. It's self-entitlement of the bicyclist and poor planning on the side of the city. Then people use "it's good for the environment" propaganda to justify it. Most bicyclists have cars, too. Some of them even more than one! When bicyclists give up their cars to live what they preach, I'll be more inclined to work with them. But, the way it's going, they'll be demanding bike lanes on freeways next. I guarantee it.

So, how do you propose fining bicyclists for their traffic law violations? They don't have any licenses to record for the police. No identifying information of any kind. If there's an accident involving a bike, it's always blamed on the car. There are just as many distracted bicyclists (with ear plugs in, unsecured cargo, riding hands free and playing on their phones, etc.,) as cars. Yet bicyclists claim no responsibility.

The only people who don't hate bicycle lanes in middle of city roads are bicyclists and city planners.

The bolded part is NOT factual. The post is full of information that is either not factual or dubious at best.

Study: Cyclists, drivers equally to blame for crashes in Minneapolis - StarTribune.com

Crashes often occur because drivers don't see or yield to bikes, the study found, or when bikers behave unpredictably by ignoring red lights or riding against traffic.

Although investigators often were unable to determine a clear cause for accidents, the pattern differed by mode of travel. For example, drivers failed to yield in 32 percent of cases, often when making a right or left turn, compared with 13 percent for bikers. But bikers more often ignored signs or signals.

'It's all people."

[Chester Burnett]

Guys stop. You realize you're arguing with a DR. Z sock puppet? Don't feed trolls
Dude is a sociopath and can't be reasoned with.

[TwinsFan1975]

Originally Posted by WoodburyWoody

Actually - per Minnesota state law - bikes are allowed on roads, as long as they follow the rules:

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/169.222

To say otherwise, is just not factual.

That is true. You and I also know that they should mean that bicyclists get the #**& off said roads since perhaps only 2% of them follow the rules. Plain and simple, they're horrible people once they hop onto a bicycle and the city and the media only feed them to keep being that way.

[TheTimidBlueBars]

Originally Posted by TwinsFan1975

Moderator- can you please shut this topic down under the premise of trolling?

OP here. I 100% was not trolling - it's just a city I've only set foot in once (and only for a few hours) so I don't understand it very well, and everyone I know who's lived there has only good things to say about it, which made me suspicious.

[TwinsFan1975]

Originally Posted by TheTimidBlueBars

OP here. I 100% was not trolling - it's just a city I've only set foot in once (and only for a few hours) so I don't understand it very well, and everyone I know who's lived there has only good things to say about it, which made me suspicious.

Do you know Barney the Banker?

[duke944]

Originally Posted by Tyryztoll

Are the mods asleep? Why aren't they dealing with this treemoni character?

Wanting someone banned because they have a different opinion of your own, your MN roots are showing.
MN is not all bad, of all the places I've lived MN has by far the most physically beautiful people per capita, so it's got that going for it.