How Bicycles Are Changing Lives in Africa

 I totally agree with you, I also find myself doing that, sitting around whining here and there whether I should get that fork with all the abbreviations that I dont even know about or shedding grams on my bike which I dont even feel on the trail.

And its not only in Africa, Other third world countries, among the poor, bikes are very helpful. here in the Philippines for example. I was shocked to know that a family of 5 have to come down from the mountain early around 4AM just to get to the 8AM mass. 4 mile trek uphill, across rivers and such. I personally experienced their path too, and all I can say is that it took three days for the leg pain to go away. It was difficult and tiring.

They do it because they want to go to church and also during the time, they use it to go to the local market.

In some cases having a bike, and not even riding it still helps them. Talk about lifting items when you can put them on a bike, right? it makes things easier. The bikes here in the PH can go as low as $50 but quality is really bad (i know because I have one). broken shifters after 1 month, broken BB, and among other things)

surplus japanese bikes are plenty here too but twice the price at $100. They last hella longer and i wish the poor can afford those. the japanese surplus usually have shimano parts in them and alluminum frames too.

They should add a Paypal option, so i can donate. Anything for a good cause.

 I saw bikes in india for £35, everyone in india has a bike!

 Saw that one coming a mile away

 Me too, but decided not to reply.

 How come the wealthiest regions in the world tend to be the most screwed-up regions?

 I agree, my wife and I did several bike donations rather than favours at our wedding and it felt great knowing that people that needed bikes were getting bikes rather than wedding guests getting useless junk. There are lots of great ways to "rationalize" a donation.

 Let's start with the prosperity that brings education and food and then work on the riding.

 hear,hear!

 We should send you to school instead. To get educated. And to learn manners and the basics of economics. Just keep those uneducated, narrow minded and ignorant beliefs to yourself my dear friend.

 You're confusing inequality with poverty. They'd teach you that at school. Amongst other things like ability to see through front page titles and exaggerated facts taken out from the tourist information packs. Or understanding of GDP and international markets dictating the prices and wages. But what do I know with my 4 pints (I don't drink sorry), 2 Iphones (I use a BlackBerry sorry) and a better bike (I cannot afford it yet- I'm doing saving up doing overtime sorry). You see I address the issues surrounding me when you waste your time on seeking facts from the quite frankly debatable sources. Facts entirely irrelevant to the conversation.




Funny you mention the Eastern Europe Sir. Very funny indeed.

 At least I have those quite frankly debatable sources while you have no sources whatsoever.
You're not able to afford a bike and you're doing overtime? Who's supposed to believe this whining? In my first full time job in IRL I was earning slightly over €1500 net a month and I bought a second hand full suspension Giant (worth €650) from my first salary, no saving needed..
Not to mention that according to the descriptions in your gallery you already had a bike and you destroyed it.

Btw this is what my grandfather was riding until 2009 when he died: manik.sk/slovensko/den01/051.jpg - a 40 years old single speed "Ukraina" which was probably heavier than Bender's Karpiel and had a "brake" which was pressing a piece of rubber on top of the tire (I know, hipsters would kill for this bike).

 You cannot be serious my friend. If you're naive enough to think that the poverty (or lack of thereof) is proportionate to the minimum wage then you should really reconsider making any statements apart from what you had for breakfast.


You see I keep forgetting about this idyllic land that you constantly mention where people of all ages do nothing but harvest new Iphones straight off the pavements. All those kids lavishly rolling in marzipan. All the foreigners (including me for this matter) coming here and simply stashing their pockets with all those notes decorated with the picture of the Queen's face. I keep forgetting about all that...


What I see instead must be simply some kind of an alien subnation that is affected by the universal social, economic and political issues; led but not limited to homelessness, transport poverty, fuel poverty, educational system collapse, social crisis, poverty driven crime, drug and alcohol abuse, underage crime, NEET and many others. I must be bonkers.



You Sir amaze me with your naivety and ignorance quite frankly edging towards almost stupidity. But I'll leave you to it so you can focus on buying yet another used bike proving how amazingly easy it is to live in the western world... At least well done for recycling.

 Sorry but I don't have a clue what the f*ck are you talking about.

I'm comparing the purchasing power parity (PPP) which says, what are people in different countries able to afford for their minimum/median/average wage. And people living in UK are able to afford significantly more than for example eastern Europeans, that's a fact. If you don't trust me, grab €300, go there and try to survive for a month.

 They are actually do great work in 15 countries in Africa.

 I know what you mean, but yeah in this case they do alot of great work in many countries.

 Guessing it has to do with where their family has land. Land/crops/grazing = food... They cant just up and move to where the school is since they'd be without their own land. These are rural areas dont forget, agriculture and animals is probably what most people do. This is my guess, not sure if I´m right! but is was a fair question.

 Cheers for your answer. I never thought of that before, that could indeed be a logical explanation (even if it wouldn't be for all of them, I'm sure it is for a certain percentage of the group).

 Kids are always slow when they go to school

 I totally disagree. I see a similarity of two faces. What is ever racist about it?

 www.fansshare.com/gallery/photos/10769168/eddie-murphy-smile-house/?displaying
www.pinkbike.com/photo/11627132
I see a clear similarity and I comment on it. It does not have anything to do with racism.

 Relax bra it was a joke. I totally see what you're saying.

 One fact I am now sure of is five blind Pinkbike users.

 why so angry?

 He got neg propped into oblivion for being honest and not racist at all. I could see getting mad about that. If a rider looked like Matt Damon no one would say he was racist, which is actually racist.

 I live in the free part of the World where pointing out similarities of two faces has nothing to do with racism.

 You live in the part of the world where you can be sent to jail for ripping a Bible, congrats to your "freedom" (Not saying that Ireland is better...)

 In my country if the president decides you are an enemy of the state you can be executed without a trial. They call it the terrorist kill list, and there is no set of parameters outlining what you have to do to get on it. It is all executive discretion. The crazy thing is, it isn't limited to US citizens. You can get on it too! But this is a conversation for the political forum.

 Why would I rip a Bible? There is no chance to do it accidentally and be prosecuted because of this. Ripping a Bible on public stage is like pissing on Buddha statue or the White House. If it is done on purpose and in public, there is penalty for it. It occurs I am now an accidental rasist just becuase I noticed similarities between two faces. What if I compared two Asian faces, or two White faces. I see no difference. People who neg me have more rasism in their interpretation than me in my thoughts and comment. In fact I don't understand any rasism in the situation. This is why it is not a free world if I am occused of commiting something just on the basis of wrong interpretations resulting from ocean of prejudice.

Majority of young and middle aged Poles behave like atheists, not practicing any religion except for all the family customs like Xmas, Easter etc. People don't even go to church during the occassions, so it is another seterotype. People say Poland and think Christrians. Yes, but only if you consider Poles over the age of 60 or more. The religion system claimed too many sins to attract the attention of educated young people. The only argument the church has left is the time before death syndrome of people who fear of the unknown. It is definitely crisis time for the church and I am not sure if it is so good. Chrystianity or any religion is also about some moral aspects and ethics, so lack of this is very vsisible among society and this is not good at all.

 Wow, this escalated quickly. It was a joke @jedrzeja There was nothing racist about your comment.

 Sorry, it was not funny to me.

 "Why would I rip a Bible?"

Why not? Why is there no penalty if I rip for example Harry Potter of 50 shades of grey? A book is a book, nothing more, nothing less.

 seriously take it to a different forum

 There is no serious Harry Potter religion in the world. Ripping a Bible can be perceived as a deed against the religion. Although it should not be, it is very likely. Religion is the first thing in the world to cause a war. Any radical act in public against any religion is protected by law and penalties to stop wars from happening. You can burn your Bible at home if you wish too. The Harry Potter too. There is nothing more to say and this should be end of topic. We can continue about some spokes.

 There is no serious religion in the world - I don't see any reason why should a book full of 2000 years old Jewish fairy tales be taken more seriously than a book full of 20 years old British fairy tales. After all, it's possible that in 2000 years someone will take Harry Potter seriously and teach it as a part of human history.

"Religion is the first thing in the world to cause a war."
That means that it's the religion which should be banned.

 You are mostly right. The Bibile was written 70 years after Jesus. It is like I was to write adolf hitler's biography, just on the basis of gradfathers' stories. There were many more Gospels, than the four and hardly anybody remembers that the Vatican banned reading the Bible all the time up to the year 1962. These are facts. I am a Chrisitan, born in Christian family in Christian country. There are many other facts about the system, but it does not change the history of humanity. It has been 2000 years of bulding cities, churches, cathedrals, societies and TRADITION, without which there would not be the World as we know it now, including the USA and the invention of mtb, which belongs to USA. The Columbus discovered the land with a Christian mission to complete. So without the Bible, the religion and the Columbus, you would not ride your bike now. Just because our ancestors believed in fairy tales and prolonged the tradition into the worldwide religion, with all its customs and heritage, does not mean they and it should be neglected. So it is enough to say that just because the "fairy tale" lasts for 2000 years and has milions of followers, it deserves respect because it built human history. This way ripping the Bibile equals to disrespect to all of this, including feelings of the milions of people, who cherrish it like a Holy Book. It is a matter of a simple human politeness, and if it does not speak to you, a matter of respect to history of all humans one way of the other. Banning something that lasts 2000 years is impossible. As you can see, conversations like our can evolve into wars, provided that it is between poorly educated people.

 It is not about Christianity only, but all the religions existing, which are about ways to peace and harmony/ It is human eagerness and wrong interpretations that bring wars. Chrystians had their bloody crusades hundreds of years ago. The Muslims have their own interpretation of the Jihad now. I studied the Islam and the idea of Jihad does not say anything about killing everybody around in the name of God, treating women bad, as well as the Bible does not say anything about forced Christianisations with the help of a sword. Any religion, or any system giving rules of World, llike the idea of money making and worldwide trading has one purpose: to organize the society. It is always invented or controled by people who cannot live without organizing society. It is clear that they have private benefits being the leaders. The person of Jesus living 2000years ago is a historical fact. He was a good Man, with talents of teaching people how to live in love and peace. This is definitely worth believing in. Christianity is based on the Bible which claims Jesus walked on water. The way the Bible descibes it, it is obviously impossible from the perspective of modern science, but it does not really matter. There are similar apsects in all the religions. I studied Buddhism and Hinduism as well. Holy texts were written long time ago for people living long time ago, so there had to be fairly tales to speak to the people in the past. They trully believed in it. Apart from the rulers and all their sins, all religions claim about peace and harmony and this is why it is worth to believe in something. Just pick the facts that speak to you, and make it work for you. Ripping a holy book, or any book, won't help you with anything. Harry Potter won't become a religion, because it was never meant to be one, has no desciption of any system in it, so ripping the Harry Potter book can only be impolite to its author and people who enjoy it.

 Pile of bullshit and religious propaganda...
2000 years? 2000 years ago the Christians were a small Jewish cult that nobody cared about. In the same era the pagan Rome controlled a substantial part of Europe, north Africa and Middle East.
The main sources of European culture are ancient Greece and Rome - both pagan cultures much older than Christianity.
When the Christians came to Europe (it's an Asian religion) they were more often destroying than creating.

When it comes to America, it has been discovered vikings (=pagans) long before Columbus. In fact it has been discovered about 170 years before the last Slavic pagan temple (Arkona) has been destroyed by Christians.
Most of the so called "Christian traditions" are nothing but rebranded pagan holidays (including Easter and Christmas).

The only thing I agree with is the statement that "there would not be the World as we know it now" - that's true, the world (or at least Europe) would be much better without Christianity. Christianity is a plague. It's no coincidence that the era after the arrival of Christianity to Europe is called "The Dark Ages". One can not respect the European culture and be a Christian at the same time - being a Christian is a sign of disrespect of the original European culture and a spit into the face of our pagan ancestors who often sacrificed their lives when fighting the Christian invaders.

 Jesus was (and in some parts of the world still is) a pretty common name, so I'm sure there was not one bud hundreds of people named Jesus who lived in Judea about 2000 years ago. But that doesn't make any of them any special.

Btw:
"Religion is the first thing in the world to cause a war."
"with talents of teaching people how to live in love and peace"

If religion is the most common cause of wars, then he wasn't very talented teacher, was he?

 It is hard to talk with you when you are rude. Again you are mostly right, but I see you didn't get the idea I am trying to explain. I studied Greek and Roman history and mithology as well. It is all definitely older than Christianity. Chrystianity copied the system of Egiptian religion and this is even older than Rome and Greece, which were also partially based on Egiptian believes. Yes Chrystians came to Europe from Asia, exactly from the part near to the ancient Egipt. Each religion was introduced mainly by destroying the existing one, together with inventions of civilisation. Vikings didn't colonise the North America on any similar scale. Yes Chrystianity rebranded traditions, including Egiptian traiditions and the pagan Slavic traditions of my ancestors, who lived in "Poland" for 5000 years before it became a Christian country in 966. I am not defending Christianity, but not every age under Chrystianity was called the dark ages. (e.g. Renaissance). Notice dark ages of dumb people who could and can be ruled easily. Although I understand you, you should not claim that Christianity is a plague, just because of the heritage I was speaking before. Again, to the point. Each religion, or system, like ancient Egipt, Greece, Rome, Chrystianity, generally speaking each and every social system in the world, including Vikings, Pagans, Eastern religions etc, has one main purpose. To organize the society into any kind of organism that is ruled and controlled. That is it. Ever since there are so many people living near each other, there had to be any system like a religion. To organize. The leaders who organize the society using any kind of religion and believes, have their aims in ruling and living wealthy. The more parts of the world they invaded the wealthier and more powerful they were. It includes every religious system. Period.

 Being a modern citizen of the modern world you can either shout your claims out against everything and rip all the books, or pick some religion and follow it. It is impossible to stay atheist since I claim the modern religion is money. As sad as it could ever become. No sentiments just money. So if I could choose, I would prefer to believe in a fairy tale that speaks of peace and harmony, even if it was also about money and power. Just because the terms were prettier than the bank names.

 "Religion is the first thing in the world to cause a war."
"with talents of teaching people how to live in love and peace"

If religion is the most common cause of wars, then he wasn't very talented teacher, was he?

Either you are pretending to be, or simply stupid.
Historical fact again: Jesus, the one described in the Bible, lived and died 70 years before the Bible was written. So the Chrystianity which you are criticising and which I was born in, differs from what Jesus taught. It was clearly changed by iterpretations of people who wanted to organize society and succeded. Modern research confirm Jesus life as it is described in the Bible. Now He must have been a good Man with many followers since chosen for the main role in the fairly tale you are laughing at, right? Seems logical to me. Many, many people introducing Christianity through the 20 ages based on his lessons, but used it in worng way, that resulted in many deaths and the change into modern civilisation. If it was not Christianity, it would be something else behaving in the same or worse way. Killing everybody who did not believe.

I think you should study more, think more, and take you own conclusions without speaking them aloud. Especially in the risky way, you do it. Since it is not that you don't appreciate a religion, it is the way you do it. Offending others. This is how wars are initiated, because of people like you.

I have nothing more to say, so thank you for the conversation.

 "Each religion was introduced mainly by destroying the existing one"
Not true, the Romans didn't prevent other tribes from worshipping their own gods. They actually did the opposite - they "adopted" the gods of the conquered tribes into their own pantheon. This is what deserves respect.

"Renaissance"
Was the era when the influence of the church declined.

"Ever since there are so many people living near each other, there had to be any system like a religion. To organize."
So in other words you're saying that the religion is a system to control people. I agree with that. But that's called politics and it has nothing to do with traditions or culture.

"I claim the modern religion is money"
Are you now talking about the Vatican Bank and their gold reserves? Or about the pope's M-Class Mercedes? The basic model of that car is worth $50,000, some of his sheep don't earn that kind of money during their whole life...

"Historical fact again. Jesus..."
What makes it a historical "fact"? That one book written by f*ck knows who and when?

"Chrystianity which you are criticising and which I was born in, differs from what Jesus taught"
Exactly, what the church represents today has nothing in common with what's written in the Bible. So where's your 2000 years old tradition if the only thing that's 2000 years old is the name? When molecules of hydrogen monoxide evaporate, we stop calling it water and start calling it steam. When people stop doing what Jesus was teaching, they should stop calling themselves Christians and pick a new more appropriate name.

"If it was not Christianity, it would be something else"
So basically you're saying that Christianity is no better than other ideologies. Then what exactly makes it so special or worth following/respecting? Your opinions are full of contradictions, you're destroying your own arguments

 Again and relentlessly, you are mostly right.
Romans did exactly what you are saying, but this is what enabled them organizing and controlling the tribes, right? It does not matter what the system was, as long as they approved the emperor and payed taxes. Introducing Roman religion would cost building temples and schools, just like Chrystians did almost everywhere, calling it "missions".

"Renaissance"
Was the era when the influence of the church declined. - please check it again. Just for a good example. What did the Michal Angelo painted on that famous seilling? The age wasn't very proud for Vatican as it occurs now, but it was the best for them back then. Popes in Renaissance where awfully influencial and rich and behaved really ugly.

Yes just like every social system it is to control people. There is no difference between politics and a organization of milions of followers. The best example = Islamic country, or Vatican the country. Tradition, culture, politics and religion merge together so much that it is almost transcendental to state any difference between them. Another example? Who stopped comunism in Poland? Why Poland accepted Chrystianity?

 Vatican Bank and all their limusines are facts that repel most young people, including me, from following Christianity. The previous Pope rulled for two years. He suspended 400 priests and resigned. So there are more people seeing the facts, also in the Vatican. It was even worse in the past. The Vatican admits all that and still claims that they are only people. This does not convince me either. btw The Polish Pope saw this too, but believed in something more. Leaving the residence of Vatican and travelling the world, he was the first Pope to do something good instead of enjoying wellness.

The person of Jesus described in the Bible is the historical fact confirmed by archeological research. The Bible is something else. For example the Bible says that the sea backed off in front of Moses and the historical fact is that there was a low tide of the red sea. There is a chance Moses was clever enough to know the water would back off and he didn't tell anyone.

Yes exactly. Just look at me. I am an adult now and I've spent my life mostly on education. Even after finishing schools and universities I still study things. I was born in Christianity and nobody asked me when I was a small child. Now I know that the Jesus most probably did not use the word Christianity, and certainly meant something else, BUT I cannot deny the modern Europe which results from Christianity. This is why I respect it. Faith and the idea of God is somewhere deeper than religion, isn't it? I noticed it first observing some priests. They know it too that the system is not perfect, because it is made by humans. Faith and God (whatever the religion is) is just a human need. You just pick a name if you need one.

 Yes I am basically saying that there are no better and worse religions. I am not an eager Christian. Most of people in Poland aren't. There are no better or worse religions. There are better and worse human behaviours. So why should I change my religious traditions surrounding me all around? It would only alienate me from the society I live in. I believe in God, but I don't go to church and this is what 90% of Poles confess. A human needs to believe in something. Religion is a fairy tale to make it easier. If you feel like, than you go to church, and if you don't, you don't. Nobody knocks on my door forcing me to go to church. That's the healthiest solution. Definitely healthier than critisizing every other religion and killing all who don't believe.

 "In order to be an immaculate member of a flock of sheep, one must above all be a sheep oneself"
Albert Einstein

"So why should I change my religious traditions surrounding me all around?"
Why not? You would be different than the majority, so what? After all, christianity is not an European tradition, it's an alien culture imported from Asia, it's no more European than judaism or islam.
Believing in a god doesn't automatically make the person a christian. A god and a christian god is not the same thing. Christianity is one specific religion with certain history and rules and by calling yourself a christian you're making yourself a member of a certain group of people and basically approve what they do. If you need to believe in something, just create your own god, name it for example Zloty Kutas and worship it without supporting an ideology responsible for suffering of your ancestors.

 Thank you for your recommendation. You can use your Zloty Kutas as long as you wish. Let me live my life.

 www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2842948/Winnie-Pooh-banned-playground-logo-councillors-declare-hermaphrodite-dubious-sexuality-Poland.html

"Councillors in a small town in Poland have banned Winnie the Pooh claiming the bear is of 'dubious sexuality', is 'inappropriately dressed' and is 'half-naked'."

HAHAHAHAHA ROFL holy f*cking shit!!! This is unbelievable, the Polish catholic taliban never stops amusing me with their ridiculous statements. I'd expect this kind of ban in Afghanistan or the Islamic State, not in European Union. What year is it in Poland, 1514?