Cycling in Waterloo Region

[bravado]

Call me paranoid but it's utter nonsense that The Record uses a picture of bike lanes when talking about capital expenses and "big ticket items".

[ijmorlan]

Call me paranoid but it's utter nonsense that The Record uses a picture of bike lanes when talking about capital expenses and "big ticket items".

The top several road projects are probably each more expensive than all the bicycle projects put together.

[bravado]

Call me paranoid but it's utter nonsense that The Record uses a picture of bike lanes when talking about capital expenses and "big ticket items".

The top several road projects are probably each more expensive than all the bicycle projects put together.

Meanwhile every non-car spending item is listed as "Controversial" in every damn headline.

[ac3r]

Hint: Stop reading that old rag, it's shite. Their main customer base are boomers, so of course half the stuff they publish is against anything "progressive" and modern.

[Acitta]

Hint: Stop reading that old rag, it's shite. Their main customer base are boomers, so of course half the stuff they publish is against anything "progressive" and modern.

What do you have against boomers, kid?

[SF22]

Thank you!! Feels pretty wild that the only bike parking at the entire mall is by the Walmart, though!

Even when you find a bike rack at a mall, it is usually the most useless kind, or sometimes there are a handful of post and rings. This Walmart is an exception.

Sounds like it's time for me to get my email-writing hands ready to bother all the local malls about their bike infrastructure. It boggles the mind that the city is putting all this work into the bike grid, and yet doesn't seem to be encouraging local businesses to install a couple spots of bike parking.

[bravado]

I was going to do the same in Cambridge, but I’m actually just hoping the entire place is bulldozed for housing some day and don’t want to encourage more people to go there - bike or otherwise…

[Chris]

Even when you find a bike rack at a mall, it is usually the most useless kind, or sometimes there are a handful of post and rings. This Walmart is an exception.

Sounds like it's time for me to get my email-writing hands ready to bother all the local malls about their bike infrastructure. It boggles the mind that the city is putting all this work into the bike grid, and yet doesn't seem to be encouraging local businesses to install a couple spots of bike parking.

Definitely an issue. Reminds me of this recent video I watched on winter cycling in Calgary vs Oulu, Finland. Despite good bike infrastructure, they don't have decent parking options when you get to your destination. An entertaining 30 mins helped kill time on the bike trainer.

https://youtu.be/_KeOnZgQWjA
Winter urban cycling showdown compares cities in Canada and Finland. Who will win Plus 1 Minus 2?

[ac3r]

Hint: Stop reading that old rag, it's shite. Their main customer base are boomers, so of course half the stuff they publish is against anything "progressive" and modern.

What do you have against boomers, kid?

Nothing? It's a very common figure of speech commonly used to illustrate stark differences in the mentality, needs, wants, goals and beliefs between generations. It is especially nascent now as younger demographics exist in a world that was, ultimately, unfathomable to people born in the baby boomer era (1940s-1950s). The priorities of older generations are much different than those of the now. Not always, but it is true in a lot of situations or even simply in the rhetoric.

Anyway, The Record is a bad paper, that's all that matters.

[Acitta]

What do you have against boomers, kid?

Nothing? It's a very common figure of speech commonly used to illustrate stark differences in the mentality, needs, wants, goals and beliefs between generations. It is especially nascent now as younger demographics exist in a world that was, ultimately, unfathomable to people born in the baby boomer era (1940s-1950s). The priorities of older generations are much different than those of the now. Not always, but it is true in a lot of situations or even simply in the rhetoric.

Anyway, The Record is a bad paper, that's all that matters.

My only priority is economic survival.

[ac3r]

Nothing? It's a very common figure of speech commonly used to illustrate stark differences in the mentality, needs, wants, goals and beliefs between generations. It is especially nascent now as younger demographics exist in a world that was, ultimately, unfathomable to people born in the baby boomer era (1940s-1950s). The priorities of older generations are much different than those of the now. Not always, but it is true in a lot of situations or even simply in the rhetoric.

Anyway, The Record is a bad paper, that's all that matters.

My only priority is economic survival.

Likewise, and for every citizen. That's a primary reason why many dislike how much power older generations have in or over decision making and influence in the media. All too often there is disregard to long term needs and goals of those still growing up (millennials to Gen Y) by those who were born decades prior. It's why people find so much absurdity in the fact the most powerful nation on this planet is run by an 80 year old man who can't walk up a flight of stairs without falling down or why mainstream media whether it is Fox News/CNN or local/hyperlocal stuff like TorStar/The Record holds. When a demographic so old holds so much power over the voting processes, journalism and the public discourse - be it over national/geopolitical affairs or something as local as bike lanes in Waterloo Region - it creates for a lot of disconnect. These are incredibly dire times for everyone right now.

This area of Canada has always been seen as progressive: it has 2 universities and a very reputable collage that hold prestige over the world, not to mention the plethora of tech companies (former BlackBerry, Google, Shopify etc) who dominate this planet be it search engines or unmanned drones and weapons (Aeryon, Colt Canada). It isn't really an ageist thing to point at older demographics for holding things back or stifling the rhetoric of discussion...it's just a reality. And even if you're older, that discontent shouldn't be seen as "ageist" unless IMO it's from the view of "why cannot other people of this older age bracket see the value in progressive policies?" Frankly, the majority here are progressive no matter when they were born otherwise you'd see more conservative policies in place preventing things, but we really seem to shine the spotlight on the older few that say No for some strange reason. I linked a The Record article in a thread regarding an Ainslie Street development that had the typical meme of the angry (usually old, white) people in local news meme treatment which is an actual phenomenon in journalistic media, not just a funny meme.

The Record likely wouldn't publish the content it does or hold the editorial slant it does if it had an equal balance of young voices on its editorial staff, right? But a few articles saying "This project will create too much traffic/too many shadows/overflow sewers" can totally derail a major project (i.e. Victoria & Park) whereas if younger people were given more encouragement to voice their opinions and chances to voice them, you'd probably find that project would have been approved with ease if we are to trust the democratic process. Instead, council listened to some tiny group of old home owners in the area who had "concerns" and cancelled hundreds of new homes when a 5 minute walk away you can find a few homeless shanty towns. It's stuff like that why people meme with "OK boomer" and it isn't meant to be offensive, but simply to point out the absurdity and urgency of things. That's why younger people communicate that way. Hopefully this doesn't seem irrelevant but I got temp banned on this forum not that long ago for linking to a meme that is run by academics and professionals who teach/work in some of the highest levels of architecture (and total nobodies) simply because people here failed to get the criticism and thought it was homophobic. As Dezeen writes, it's this sort of conversation that ampli[es] narratives that are excluded from architecture's official consensus so I don't want you to think I'm blaming old people (except when they are at fault hah...). Young people just like to joke about their priorities and hardships by joking about stealing the catalytic converters from their company vehicles since they don't get paid enough or by not wanting to see bike lanes demonized as frivolous expenses. Make sense?

[Acitta]

My only priority is economic survival.

Likewise, and for every citizen. That's a primary reason why many dislike how much power older generations have in or over decision making and influence in the media. All too often there is disregard to long term needs and goals of those still growing up (millennials to Gen Y) by those who were born decades prior. It's why people find so much absurdity in the fact the most powerful nation on this planet is run by an 80 year old man who can't walk up a flight of stairs without falling down or why mainstream media whether it is Fox News/CNN or local/hyperlocal stuff like TorStar/The Record holds. When a demographic so old holds so much power over the voting processes, journalism and the public discourse - be it over national/geopolitical affairs or something as local as bike lanes in Waterloo Region - it creates for a lot of disconnect. These are incredibly dire times for everyone right now.

This area of Canada has always been seen as progressive: it has 2 universities and a very reputable collage that hold prestige over the world, not to mention the plethora of tech companies (former BlackBerry, Google, Shopify etc) who dominate this planet be it search engines or unmanned drones and weapons (Aeryon, Colt Canada). It isn't really an ageist thing to point at older demographics for holding things back or stifling the rhetoric of discussion...it's just a reality. And even if you're older, that discontent shouldn't be seen as "ageist" unless IMO it's from the view of "why cannot other people of this older age bracket see the value in progressive policies?" Frankly, the majority here are progressive no matter when they were born otherwise you'd see more conservative policies in place preventing things, but we really seem to shine the spotlight on the older few that say No for some strange reason. I linked a The Record article in a thread regarding an Ainslie Street development that had the typical meme of the angry (usually old, white) people in local news meme treatment which is an actual phenomenon in journalistic media, not just a funny meme.

The Record likely wouldn't publish the content it does or hold the editorial slant it does if it had an equal balance of young voices on its editorial staff, right? But a few articles saying "This project will create too much traffic/too many shadows/overflow sewers" can totally derail a major project (i.e. Victoria & Park) whereas if younger people were given more encouragement to voice their opinions and chances to voice them, you'd probably find that project would have been approved with ease if we are to trust the democratic process. Instead, council listened to some tiny group of old home owners in the area who had "concerns" and cancelled hundreds of new homes when a 5 minute walk away you can find a few homeless shanty towns. It's stuff like that why people meme with "OK boomer" and it isn't meant to be offensive, but simply to point out the absurdity and urgency of things. That's why younger people communicate that way. Hopefully this doesn't seem irrelevant but I got temp banned on this forum not that long ago for linking to a meme that is run by academics and professionals who teach/work in some of the highest levels of architecture simply because people here failed to get the criticism and thought it was homophobic. As Dezeen writes, it's this sort of conversation that ampli[es] narratives that are excluded from architecture's official consensus so I don't want you to think I'm blaming old people (except when they are at fault hah...).

Well, as a 69-year-old boomer who has never owned any property or a car, I think that I share more opinions with the younger people on this forum than I do with the NIMBYs who complain about new developments.

[panamaniac]

Likewise, and for every citizen. That's a primary reason why many dislike how much power older generations have in or over decision making and influence in the media. All too often there is disregard to long term needs and goals of those still growing up (millennials to Gen Y) by those who were born decades prior. It's why people find so much absurdity in the fact the most powerful nation on this planet is run by an 80 year old man who can't walk up a flight of stairs without falling down or why mainstream media whether it is Fox News/CNN or local/hyperlocal stuff like TorStar/The Record holds. When a demographic so old holds so much power over the voting processes, journalism and the public discourse - be it over national/geopolitical affairs or something as local as bike lanes in Waterloo Region - it creates for a lot of disconnect. These are incredibly dire times for everyone right now.

This area of Canada has always been seen as progressive: it has 2 universities and a very reputable collage that hold prestige over the world, not to mention the plethora of tech companies (former BlackBerry, Google, Shopify etc) who dominate this planet be it search engines or unmanned drones and weapons (Aeryon, Colt Canada). It isn't really an ageist thing to point at older demographics for holding things back or stifling the rhetoric of discussion...it's just a reality. And even if you're older, that discontent shouldn't be seen as "ageist" unless IMO it's from the view of "why cannot other people of this older age bracket see the value in progressive policies?" Frankly, the majority here are progressive no matter when they were born otherwise you'd see more conservative policies in place preventing things, but we really seem to shine the spotlight on the older few that say No for some strange reason. I linked a The Record article in a thread regarding an Ainslie Street development that had the typical meme of the angry (usually old, white) people in local news meme treatment which is an actual phenomenon in journalistic media, not just a funny meme.

The Record likely wouldn't publish the content it does or hold the editorial slant it does if it had an equal balance of young voices on its editorial staff, right? But a few articles saying "This project will create too much traffic/too many shadows/overflow sewers" can totally derail a major project (i.e. Victoria & Park) whereas if younger people were given more encouragement to voice their opinions and chances to voice them, you'd probably find that project would have been approved with ease if we are to trust the democratic process. Instead, council listened to some tiny group of old home owners in the area who had "concerns" and cancelled hundreds of new homes when a 5 minute walk away you can find a few homeless shanty towns. It's stuff like that why people meme with "OK boomer" and it isn't meant to be offensive, but simply to point out the absurdity and urgency of things. That's why younger people communicate that way. Hopefully this doesn't seem irrelevant but I got temp banned on this forum not that long ago for linking to a meme that is run by academics and professionals who teach/work in some of the highest levels of architecture simply because people here failed to get the criticism and thought it was homophobic. As Dezeen writes, it's this sort of conversation that ampli[es] narratives that are excluded from architecture's official consensus so I don't want you to think I'm blaming old people (except when they are at fault hah...).

Well, as a 69-year-old boomer who has never owned any property or a car, I think that I share more opinions with the younger people on this forum than I do with the NIMBYs who complain about new developments.

You are also old enough to remember "don't trust anyone over 30".

[danbrotherston]

I'm not sure a digression into generational policy is on topic here, but why not.

Generations are an artificial construct, we assign them values and priorities, but pretend instead they are defined by year of birth.

Frankly, this is strongly revealed by the frequency to which young people, even into their teens are referred to as "millennials" despite the youngest millenials are approaching their mid 20s.

So, I like to lean into this. Boomers aren't defined by age as much as they are by attitude and life status (well established and in power, protective of the power structures in place). Millennials also not by age, but by attitude and life status (economically disadvantaged, but unwilling to meaningfully challenge the power structures in place) and Gen Z (even more economically and environmentally disadvantaged, and very willing to challenge the existing power structures).

But obviously not everyone sees it that way, which means any time you use identity labels for large groups of people, people will get offended and hurt, but at least defining generations in this way is at least remotely aligned with how they are actually treated, even though such definitions erase a ton of people.

[ijmorlan]

It's why people find so much absurdity in the fact the most powerful nation on this planet is run by an 80 year old man who can't walk up a flight of stairs without falling down or why mainstream media whether it is Fox News/CNN or local/hyperlocal stuff like TorStar/The Record holds. 

Less absurd than a democracy being run by a fascist.

Also, ableist much? Not too many stairs being walked up by FDR.