Bullshit. These e-scooter sharing services operate on cities already covered by all sorts of public transportation services, including municipal e-bike services.
The key difference is that municipal services address and avoid the problem of abusive occupation of public space by employing networks of pickup/dropoff spots.
> Hey, Citizen, if you don't have the means to buy, store and charge your own and occasionally would need one to deal with the craziness and unreliability of public transport, we are going to make it harder on you.
Bullshit. These escooter sharing services operate in cities where public transportation is highly subsidized and monthly fees are mostly symbolic, with some cities being even totally free.
Also, a cursory search for escooters shows that there are scooters in the market for 120kg/13km autonomy for less than 300€, and they can be charged by simply plugging them onto any regular electrical socket.
> Many countries in Europe keep punishing people who don't own cars or other vehicles while pretending they care about the environment. They do the same with bikes or e-bikes.
You have zero insight or basis on reality to support any of your personal assertions. You've managed to be entirely wrong in each and any assertion you made.
Bullshit. Specially at night.
> The key difference is that municipal services address and avoid the problem of abusive occupation of public space by employing networks of pickup/dropoff spots
Bingo! Thanks for making the point for me. You want to ban e-bikes/bikes that can be left freely like e scooters can. It's not the scooters but the parking that bothers you and though you pretend to be for bikes you aren't. NIMBY and disingenuous and I'm done with pretending you're anything but.
These stations won't feature in less affluent neighbourhoods, these stations won't be as many, these stations won't be as convenient. You're screwing the usefulness because YOU don't use it.
> Bullshit. These escooter sharing services operate in cities where public transportation is highly subsidized and monthly fees are mostly symbolic, with some cities being even totally free
Bullshit generalization. Paris isn't like that. London isn't like that. Madrid isn't like that. Dublin (which has no e scooter rental but does bike rental) isn't like that.
Every thing you say exposes you further.
> Also, a cursory search for escooters shows that there are scooters in the market for 120kg/13km autonomy for less than 300€, and they can be charged by simply plugging them onto any regular electrical socket.
Which a) implies you have a place to store it (privileged NIMBY) and b) implies it covers the same need of being somewhere and renting it on the spot (such as at night after an event, where you couldn't take a scooter or bike and leave it there).
> You have zero insight or basis on reality to support any of your personal assertions. You've managed to be entirely wrong in each and any assertion you made.
I've actually supported with specifics what I said while you have been a rude disingenuous actor who uses political generalizations.
You're a great example of what I talk about. HN always pretended to be polite and encourage discourse but when someone from reality came in an exposed a narrative, morally corrupt people like you would come down with the entitled arrogance and rudeness that can only be gained of not having to face reality.
That's the whole point: they can't.
You cannot dump your crap on the street and expect that to be ok.
If you can't just park your car on any random sidewalk or dump your bike in the middle of the street, what leads you believe that it's ok for a multinational to dump their crap all over a city?
Construction companies have to file for permits and pay all kinds of fees to temporarily park a trash bin on the sidewalk. People have to pay fees to get the trash company to take care of furniture you want to throw out, and you still can't just leave it on the sidewalk. What leads you to believe that it's ok to dump all sorts of crap on a sidewalk, specially when they are mainly used for joyrides?
Meanwhile, there are countless solutions for personal mobility that have been around for ages. Hell, is a bicycle an alien concept? Let's not fool ourselves into believing that a multinational's abusive business model is the only way anyone can move from point A to B.
European countries are in aggregate extremely pro bike/pedestrian.
The scooter issue is particularly in focus, because in big cities the competition to become the main player has created a ton of competing companies trying to place their scooters all over the place. I don't mind it myself - I use them in the summer. But I have had to literally step over, or move around a pile of scooters on more than one occasion.
> European countries are in aggregate extremely pro bike/pedestrian
Lol. This is just an ignorant talking point from someone who compares everything to the US. It's like saying healthcare is good (and generalizing as if every country in Europe belonged to a monolith) just because healthcare in the US sucks.
The reality is that having options like these empowers people who don't belong to the tier that owns cars and has sheds or places to store their e-vehicles.
In many cities, these non car options keep getting worse and more expensive and everything seems geared to those who have more money and privilege and people just have to 'take it'.
But hell, let's call it a rant, simplify the issue and outright ban stuff so that people who don't benefit from something can feel more comfortable.
With that logic, Let's ban motorcycles. I don't like their noise and don't have one. They're definitely unsafe and cause accidents. Oh, but we're not going to that.
So there's bad etiquette around scooter placement and you ban it. The same thing can happen with free parking e-bikes. Why can't you find a solution that doesn't ban e-scooters?
You just admitted use them "on occasion" so they're not really useful to you, so you're fine with removing them from others that actually might take advantage.
It's the thing I keep pointing out. People from certain positions screwing over others because they're inconvenienced instead of requesting the gov to do better if they want better order or something.
It's all rather classist but it happens with everything.
Lesson for people: have more money, have cars, live in suburbs, have spaces where you can store your vehicles. Or get screwed by decreasing quality of public transport.
It's a very NIMBY type of thinking.
Hey, Citizen, if you don't have the means to buy, store and charge your own and occasionally would need one to deal with the craziness and unreliability of public transport, we are going to make it harder on you.
Many countries in Europe keep punishing people who don't own cars or other vehicles while pretending they care about the environment. They do the same with bikes or e-bikes.
See also the insane cost of train tickets Vs flights.
If govs were honest about the environment they would create incentives (positive, not punitive) to foment good forms of transport with good quality of life.
Instead, it's a very classist system.
HN will probably not get this due to the demo that either owns cars in the US or is on a more privileged class in Europe and likely also owns vehicles and property.