WSJ Logic On Bicycles

Yesterday, I expressed puzzlement at the Wall Street Journal's rant about New York City's new program to make it easier for visitors to rent bicycles. "The logic escapes me," I wrote. It seems such a good idea to have more bicycles and fewer automobiles. I have long thought that driving a car to get where you want to go provides only the illusion of freedom, not the real thing.

Travel in Europe, where you can get to where you want to go using high quality, readily available and frequent public transportation, frees commuters and tourists alike from a lot of aggravation. Not to mention expense. It also frees young people not old enough to drive as well as their parents from needing or providing family taxi service. This seems a good thing. Before I was old enough to drive, I was able to get around perfectly well on my bicycle. In those days, the mid to late 40's, my family had only one car.

Paul Krugman has cleared up my confusion. The Wall Street Journal, he explains, isn't defending the rights of those who want to drive themselves from place to place, but to prevent annoyance to those who are routinely driven from place to place. It's a class thing. It's about wealth, power and deference.

Bicyclists don't respect their betters.

Now I understand.