People also like to choose whatever they think is fun, if you want to play tennis instead of riding a bike, because you think that's more fun, you should be able to do so.
Your fun is at the expense of other people's mobility, why can't you just use some of the other million ways of getting exercise and having fun, where you don't have to be in other people's way?
It's better to be a driver. It's no fun. You don't get any exercise. It drives up infrastructure costs, kills and maims people, destroys the planet, and takes up even more space on the roads.
Bikes are often used in combination with subways. Bikes can also be used in cities that don't have subways and cycling infrastructure is far cheaper to build.
Bikes solve the problem of the last-mile. Subways are expensive to build and dig, bikes gets you much further and literally anywhere. Add a bike station at your subway station and you have both working together.
Yeah well, in this example and many similar big cities in europe, you have subway and buses that will take you to any street corner. Sure, in a small town in australia or the US, not the case, but I highly doubt bike lanes will be any viable alternative there anyway.
My point is that it's not a good idea to expand bike lanes in big city centers where you already have public transport, especially not in places that doesn't have a bike friendly climate. It's simply not a good use of the space, can't really make any good case for it except some people think it's fun, which is extremely weak. And I don't understand why it makes cities such as Amsterdam and Copenhagen so much better, people just get randomly happy from the joys of riding a bike, or what? I'd rather have many more practical solutions with tangible results such as actually reducing the time and energy we spend on commuting, not increasing it.
> My point is that it's not a good idea to expand bike lanes in big city centers where you already have public transport
I don't know what is your background, but many cities are doing it and it's not only about enabling bikes but also to disable passenger cars, and the main reason is it makes the places more livable and enjoyable: it's quieter, the air is cleaner, the streets are safer, people actually spend more time outside. So this is a practical solution to a problem people have: noise, pollution, loss of public space to car infrastructure.
Oh and I should add: outside of my house they have blocked one whole lane of the road from cars and designated it for cyclists. There was already a smaller bike lane. This new lane is now mostly empty and the remaining two lanes have traffic jams now with sirens all the time because emergency vehicles can't pass anymore. And I just think it's stupid and annoying. There was already a perfectly fine bike lane. There is also a tram. Why expand that bike lane now and cause traffic jams, I don't understand. Seems like it's just for virtue signalling, oh look how modern we are and such good people, when in practice it's barely used, not needed and cause traffic jams.
"Barely used", citation needed. Even in not-very-friendly cities for bike like Toronto, most bike lanes have higher amount of bike riders than the cars on the street.
My background is that I've cycled my whole life, all of childhood in rain and snow and later I've cycled for a few years in a big city. But I started to use it less and less, and now it's just parked and unused. And the reason is that there's always a better alternative. If the weather is nice, I drive an electric moped, it's not noisy or polluting, and it doesn't take up much space. And it's so so much better than cycling, I arrive much quicker and with more energy anywhere I go, and I can use the whole existing road network. And when the weather is bad, obviously public transport wins. I think the future is electric and self driving vehicles, not cycling, and being forced to propel yourself manually like that for basic transportation has no place in a modern world except for enjoyment, and this can be done in designated areas.
If you just want to avoid cars and have a more leisurely space, why not designate pedestrian zones like traditionally done in city centers, and use the space for cafés, market stands etc.
I'm simply talking about cycling in a big city from a practical point of view, based on facts and my own experience, and pointing out the limitations. As opposed to using cycling as some kind of protest, and people get triggered when I'm challenging the latest virtue signalling trend.
Your fun is at the expense of other people's mobility, why can't you just use some of the other million ways of getting exercise and having fun, where you don't have to be in other people's way?