I think it is less. And more than 20% share is more. As in, we do left handed, and we also have a significant portion of our network that is multi track and therefore abides by that convention. As opposed to somewhere that is just left handed, but doesn’t have a mature/extensive use of that convention because their network is smaller/sparser
I’m not a lawyer, but it strikes me that this could be exactly what is happening. The ambulance company’s insurance wouldn’t pay the hospital directly, they aren’t health insurance. So instead, the cyclist’s health insurance footed the initial bill. Then they went after the cyclist for his deductible/copay/whatnot. Now he has to get the money from the ambulance company. If this was vehicle on vehicle violence, he would have gone to his auto insurance, who would have in turn went after the ambulance company’s insurance, but he might not have auto insurance or auto insurance might not be willing to get involved because he wasn’t driving. So he has to go direct to the company. Wouldn’t be shocking if the company pushed off any non-legal petitions from him because he doesn’t have the name weight of an insurance company with lawyers on retainer, so now he is seeking a legal remedy. Insurance doesn’t just work always, there is often a degree of negotiating and litigation involved in these exchanges, especially if one party disagrees with another on matters of liability
This passive language bullshit is so obvious sometimes. “Oh, I wonder what the cyclist did to get run over? And that poor SUV driver getting charged for murder because of this event, Paris is really going off the deep end finding ways to attack innocent drivers.” And yet, per the article, the SUV driver ran down the cyclist in a fit of road rage. That sounds an awful lot like an active choice by the driver, not some passive circumstance that the headline implies. If this person got angry and attacked someone with a knife, and the victim died, the headline wouldn’t be “Knife owner charged with murder after person stabbed”. But use the “right” weapon and all of a sudden we put the kiddie gloves on
The monkeys paw curls, everyone now has to drive from the perspective of a back seat passenger looking over the driver’s shoulder
It’s the money. Just at a surface level, if you compare the rockets that launched these missions (falcon 9, H-IIA, LVM3, Soyuz), theres just a lot less mass being sent to the moon with these landers, which means less margin for error. Apollo 11 was also predated by 10 test launches, including a full on dress rehearsal where they intentionally did the whole mission except the last 15 km of descent. Apollo also allowed itself to rely on human pilots to deal with the difficult problem of flying and landing a craft unlike any other in an environment unlike any other, which these machines have to do autonomously
Pedestrians very often get the green walk sign at the same time as cars in the same direction get the green straight ahead sign that implicitly allows right turns as well. In that scenario, the cars are often located just behind the pedestrian’s peripheral vision, and the cars are looking up and ahead at the light (or maybe to their left if they were previously hoping to execute a right on red and waiting for a gap in traffic), so it becomes basically exactly what you were talking about with bikes. Cars turning across a “lane” of pedestrian traffic with neither party having good visibility of the other. There are a couple of solutions/mitigations in use for this problem, dedicated “all-red” pedestrian cycles, protected intersections that move vulnerable road users further forward to be more visible, and advanced pedestrian greens that make cars wait until pedestrians are already in the intersection and more visible before getting the go ahead. Or, if your city is like mine and car-centric, they might stick up a yellow sign on the opposite light post across the stroad that says “pedestrians yield to turning vehicles” in text that is just barely legible from across the street at an intersection that has audible wait and walk indicators for blind people who definitely can’t read that sign and will thus be endangered for not getting the memo (not that car drivers are reading it either, so several considerate drivers will wave the pedestrians forward, further confusing the right of way situation). Fun!
In short, every turn you make as a driver should be accompanied by a check for vulnerable road users like cyclists and pedestrians because our infrastructure will not necessarily put them in a place that is easily visible to you
I reinforced Reagan’s precedent that workers’ right to strike is contingent on the effect to the economy that the strike would have, which is a blow to the strength of unions and to the possibility of a general strike, regardless of the results achieved for this set of workers. Not to mention that we don’t know if the unions could have got an even better deal if they had successfully engaged in the strike. Making good on his word helps to soften the blow, but it doesn’t erase it entirely
US unemployment rate is 3.8% as of August, so this guy is calling for roughly 70k people to die so that he can get back to his power fantasy and his pesky employees will stop having uncomfortable conversations with him about petty grievances like “feeding their families” and “keeping a roof over their head”
I’m assuming that is just their Dutch site. Kind of like bbc.com
Not by distance. But imagine doing it on a 0.5 meter strip of poorly maintained concrete slabs, with the occasional light post sticking up and forcing you into an even narrower space or onto the uncut grass. Now imagine that strip is surrounded by nothing interesting to look at, and just a couple meters away, there is a constant stream of large trucks going 100-120 km/h beside you. And every time you hit an intersection, you’re going to have to prepare to cross 6-8 lanes of that stream as drivers who don’t expect you to be there have their eyes glued to the green light they have as they turn into the crosswalk that the signal is telling you is safe to cross. Now you arrive at the parking lot and the last 200m don’t even have a sidewalk, you are just walking in the road through the parking lot as you pass empty spot after empty spot because an engineer in the 60s pulled the wrong number out of his ass when guessing how many spots grocery stores should be legally reguired to build. Oh, and the grocery store is structured for people who are buying in bulk, not for someone who just wants to grab a couple days of food that they can carry while they are walking. Yeah, it’s no less physically possible than the 800m stroll you were envisioning, but it becomes pretty clear pretty quick that nobody in charge wants you to do what you are doing in that environment.