You've gotta be pretty naïve to think everyone should stop driving to the gym.
Because people have plenty of perfectly legitimate reasons for driving to the gym. Isn't that obvious?Why? It is a classic case of using a transport option unwisely if the gym is within a couple of miles.
I do that. I live in London and its 10 miles unitl it gets nice. I could use up 20 miles of my cycling getting through the urban sprawl but sometimes I drive out and go for a longer ride in the counrty lanes.or why people put bikes on the back of their cars to go for a bike ride,
Because people have plenty of perfectly legitimate reasons for driving to the gym. Isn't that obvious?
That theory works right up until you realise EVERY way you get to the gym has external consequences which need to be factored as additional costs of getting there. In fact requiring a gym to go to has a huge external cost factor... there is also external costs involved with having your own equipment or even doing non-equipment based exercise.
Usually it's time.TP, it does seem sensible to take exercise to get to and from a gym when it's within easy walking/ running/ cycling distance especially if the roads are constantly blocked with traffic when you have the time to go there, as in the OP's illustration.
Mind you I don't understand why people take their dogs in cars to go for a walk or why people put bikes on the back of their cars to go for a bike ride, so I'm not really able to appreciate the reasoning.
If you click this link, you'll see that they all swam into the Venomous Bight.Re the OP.
What happened to the popular image of a land peopled by Crocodile Dundee type characters?
Only flaw in your example is that the traffic-choked streets [to which your person contributes] prevents your person getting to any of their appointments on time... whereas if they walked they could: spend time with their children on the walk to school, walk to the hairdressers and to the gym without all the stress of being held up in queues.... if they all did that it's a plan without fault!Usually it's time.
For example, a woman might drop the kids off at school 09:00 and need to get to the gym fast to join a 9:30 class. Maybe she has a hair appointment at 11:00 and wants to be well dressed when she gets there.
Maybe she isn't runner, or cyclist but likes Body Pump class with her friends?
Extra points for first the person to argue with my choice of example, rather than the point it makes.
I train between four and (albeit rarely) eleven hours a week, the one hour that is at the gym is after work, and I always drive for the convenience. I can see why it would be a huge hassle for others.
Your poor transport choices help kill 29000 people a year. Well done.Usually it's time.
For example, a woman might drop the kids off at school 09:00 and need to get to the gym fast to join a 9:30 class. Maybe she has a hair appointment at 11:00 and wants to be well dressed when she gets there.
Maybe she isn't runner, or cyclist but likes Body Pump class with her friends?
Extra points for first the person to argue with my choice of example, rather than the point it makes.
I train between four and (albeit rarely) eleven hours a week, the one hour that is at the gym is after work, and I always drive for the convenience. I can see why it would be a huge hassle for others.
Only flaw in your example is that the traffic-choked streets [to which your person contributes] prevents your person getting to any of their appointments on time... whereas if they walked they could: spend time with their children on the walk to school, walk to the hairdressers and to the gym without all the stress of being held up in queues.... if they all did that it's a plan without fault!