This might be an interesting article, but I feel that there are some key elements in need of exploration to make this a journalistic piece, rather than a piece of marketing copy.
Firstly, the above fact was presented to the SMH by the Cycling Promotion Fund. The CPF is an organization which only includes companies involved in the bicycle industry in Australia, so we can only be correct in the assumption there is a *tiny* bit of patting their own backs here. That's fine and dandy.
Secondly, let's look at the pure economics. The Morning Herald says:
The CPF's Rosemarie Speidel said sales of 1,120,337 bicycles in Australia last year were 13 per cent ahead of motor vehicle sales, which came in at 988,269.
That's cute. But let's say an average new car costs $25,000 (I'm being conservative here).
988,269 new cars x $25,000 a pop = $24,706,725,000
And let's say the average bicycle - and I know this is too high - costs $1000.
1,120,337 bicycles x $1000 a pop = 1,120,337,000
Not bad! A billion dollar industry versus a 24.7 billion dollar industry. Cars make, produce, and consume a lot more money, and are certainly a bigger economic driver than bicycles in all aspects. They're also integral to keeping a country like Australia (or the US) running well. But it's interesting to look at pure sales figures (albeit my figures are manufactured). I would love to know these figures for the US, and also for China. Anyone have any idea?
I have no real opinion here in terms of the old political bike vs. car argument. I like to keep politics out of my cycling. As politically charged as I am, I like to try to think of my bike as the great equalizer with my political foes. My cars have their place as tools in my life, and I use them as such. But this is an interesting topic, and one that deserves more exploration.
Well, time for my Sunday ride.