So, where I'm at, there's at least 2 months a year where it would be miserably hot to ride a bike for any distance. At least 3 weeks this summer, it's been dangerously hot. We get about 1.5 months total of days at or below freezing. Another 1.5 where you'd really have to bundle up. Then add in days when it's snowing or icy. Then add in days when it's pouring rain.

It would probably be possible to get away with a bike around here if you lived near everything you needed and really planned things out as far as getting places early in the summer and having an emergency plan if something happened and you were stuck somewhere in the freezing cold. At least you have some time in a vehicle cab before the temperature drops dangerously low.

There's definitely places where an ebike can replace a car. There's a lot of places where it would really limit your ability to get anywhere outside of walking distance.

Riding bikes in winter is normal in Scandinavia. If its too cold, you're wearing the wrong clothes.

Too hot, well, people are riding bikes in India. I'm going to have to disagree with you on this one.

Too far? That's an urban design problem. Nobody is suggesting rural people change their cars for bikes, although I do know some people who are loving their ebikes for property inspection...

Most people in India drive bycicle mostly because there is no other option the family can afford. It is an upgrade of being forced to walk everywhere.

Those that can afford it, quickly upgrade to motorbikes.

I rode bycicle for a couple of times in Norway and Switzerland during snowy Winters, no thanks.

I have a 20 minute commute on bicycle in Switzerland, and in winter it just means I need gloves, a jacket and maybe rain pants if it's raining.

Good for you, when I rode bycicle to CERN, for two years, it was because I did not have a choice, thus cycling with -15° C (in some bad days) it was.

I jumped of joy when I could get a green plates car, and wasn't an happy fellow when it broke down a couple of months later.

Are motorcycles somehow cooler than bicycles?

Yes, thanks to the wind when driving fast.

> Too far? That's an urban design problem.

It's also a scale problem. Inhabitants of dense, large cities like Paris or New York are famously considered generally rude, and I don't suppose there's anything special about those places other than density that would cause this.

Also real estate in dense cities is disproportionately more expensive.

> New York are famously considered generally rude

Unclear why people believe this, but it's absolutely not true. Spend a day watching people walk to work in Manhattan vs people sitting still on the freeway in LA and it's clear who's happier and friendly. Road rage is real, and cars make people miserable.

> Spend a day watching people walk to work in Manhattan vs people sitting still on the freeway in LA and it's clear who's happier and friendly. Road rage is real, and cars make people miserable.

Even taking your claim as true, you’ve confused unhappiness with rudeness in placing it here, without that conflation it's a non-sequitur.

> Inhabitants of dense, large cities like Paris or New York are famously considered generally rude

Eh, I moved from a rural farming town to inner London. People in dense cities aren't rude, they're busy. If anything, city people are much more willing to help out, they just won't make a deal out of it. This twitter thread basically sums it up: https://twitter.com/jordonaut/status/1352363163686068226

> Also real estate in dense cities is disproportionately more expensive.

That's not a law of nature. It's a result of deliberate choices made by city governments to restrict the supply of housing over the last few decades. Also the fact that it's so expensive and people keep moving there shows that it's an attractive way to live.

> That's not a law of nature. It's a result of deliberate choices made by city governments to restrict the supply of housing over the last few decades

Is it even possible to build new housing when the population density is already at 20k people per square kilometre, like in the cities mentioned?

> Also the fact that it's so expensive and people keep moving there shows that it's an attractive way to live.

Did you consider that not everyone has a choice in the matter and the alternative is often unemployment? There's a trend towards urbanization because people move to where the jobs are. That alone doesn't make any place more livable.

If you have that kind of density, you can build out and each part of the city is like its own mini city that is perfectly reasonable to live in. If you need to go to another mini city you can bike or jump on public transport.

In Berlin these are refereed to as Kiez for example.

Very large cities don't really have a city center as such, or at least not for most people. And you can have reasonably priced apartments or townhouses in a well connected Kiez that has everything you need to live.

> Did you consider that not everyone has a choice in the matter and the alternative is often unemployment?

And about far more often its the case that people would prefer to live in the city but are forced to live some-where on the far edge and then having to buy a car to drive into the city.

This is what the real problem with the kind of low-density city surrounded by sprawl. The actual city centers are tiny to non existent and lots of cars.

> Is it even possible to build new housing when the population density is already at 20k people per square kilometre, like in the cities mentioned?

Absolutely. The most expensive parts of Manhattan have tons of 3-4 story townhomes that would become 12+ stories practically overnight if the zoning allowed it. Not to mention all the single-family detached homes near subway, PATH, and LIRR stations nearby.

> There's a trend towards urbanization because people move to where the jobs are.

Look at how many people stayed in or moved into NYC after their jobs became fully remote in the last 2 years. It's a lot.

I too do not like bicycles because people in Paris are rude.

dangerously hot on an ebike!! I live in an extremely hot place, it may be mightily inconvenient, or gross reaching all sweated to office, but not dangerous.

It's not harmful. Points of view are not harmful.

And this is a bit of a theme: anywhere close to a school - even close enough to cycle - costs more to live in. It's fine if you have a good job and can cycle the kids to school and then cycle back and work from home, or you've got enough money to buy somewhere near work and school (because you were fortunate enough to work and live on the same side of the same city) but this will not be the case for huge numbers of people. Huge numbers of people don't have that luxury.

This is exactly what we (my family and me) do. We don't currently own a car and don't plan on buying one but instead use our Babboe Big-E as mentioned. If we - on some rare occasion - require a car/van I can rent one rather cheaply from the local car sharing initiative, called StattAuto.