New York City's productivity levels are backpedaling to the point that we'll soon be less efficient than Los Angeles, all thanks to Citi Bike. This is the only conclusion one can draw from the NY Post's hard-hitting coverage of Citi Bike Day Two, The Bikening. It was a day that will be remembered by Post readers as the day that two area employees blamed the day-old program for their tardiness. Be sure to pick up a copy of tomorrow's Post for an EXCLUSIVE look at how Citi BIke seats are becoming a popular nesting place for subtropical scorpion colonies.

“The first station at Montague and Clinton isn’t operating yet so I rushed over here and now I’m late,” Justin Hugh, 27, told a totally unbiased Post reporter who had not been frantically interviewing three dozen people already in search of the perfect smear quote. Hugh made his remarks at the station at Montague and Hicks streets, which is TWO BLOCKS AWAY from the first station he tried. The Post reports that those two blocks made Hugh "15 minutes late to his Union Square tech job," presumably because he paused to enjoy the world's tiniest violinist performing on Henry Street.

Hugh added that the Citi Bike program, which had been live for 24 hours, was "cool but it is not up to speed yet." Other sporadic glitches were reported in the Post, including another man who says Citi Bike made him 20 minutes late for his job in advertising (which in the advertising world is generally considered "on time"). It's unclear why the largest bike share system in the nation wasn't functioning without any flaws on its second day of operation, but it goes without saying that all the docking stations should immediately be doused in kerosene and set ablaze.

The New York Observer, New York's finest cuff link-coddling publication owned by Donald Trump's son-in-law, agrees. In an editorial titled "How Come More People Don't Just Own Stuff?" "Just Buy A Bike," the Observer argues:

Cycling is a wonderful option for those energetic souls who prefer pedaling to a bus, cab or subway. The cost of a bike is relatively cheap as well—you can get a decent bike, one that will last you many years, at a local shop for less than the price of dinner for two at some of the city’s finer dining establishments.

So why, then, do we have to share bikes?

In other words, who is John Galt? Sure, you could argue that the Observer is sore on sharing given that their readership shares a single print edition every week (catch it while it's still crisp in Kushner's lobby before it's moved to his bathroom).

But doesn't everyone see that if the government starts letting the lower orders share bicycles, it's only a matter of time before they start expecting more things to be shared, like maybe the vast mountains of wealth that are being kept concentrated and safe by the ever-responsible subscriber(s?) to the New York Observer? While we're on the subject, don't you hate the way elitist cyclists think they're better than everyone? Quoth the Observer:

The bike-share program, however innocent its intent, represents another governmental incursion into the private marketplace. Rather than encourage business to develop creative solutions to gridlock, the government has imposed its own solution.

But what does that matter, if a few people can feel superior to the rest of us?

In other pressing Observer questions, should you buy your chauffeur sushi from Nobu if he helps take care of your children on the weekends when you're in St. Barths?