Fair enough. I start to get grumpy at 24 but I grew up in the desert SW USA but have acclimated to our temperate PacNW weather. I’d say similar to Manchester and Liverpool but summers definitely get hotter.
Lmao exactly. I’m all for better public transportation but these comments seem like they’re from kids who don’t have people depending on them for a roof and food.
Let me lose my job so I can go yell into the void for better bus routes
If you don’t have a bus route, no one is here telling you to hitch hike or cycle in heat stroke weather for long commute or not go to work. Can you please point out where I or anyone here said so?
But “what can I do” was the question.
You can recognize the benefits of a good urban infrastructure and public transportation, highlight the lacking infrastructure in your areas, and support the goals of building that up by contacting your local officials or participating with groups who do organize.
This “child” lives within walking distance of his work office (for the few times I even have to to in) and on a bus route that can get me there as well (a bus system that is highly lacking in its own ways, to which I make note of to my local council).
I guess I should act like an “adult” and go “oh your work isn’t near a bus route. What can I do? Guess nothing.”
That is how we solve problems.
This post isn’t attacking you for your area’s lack of infrastructure.
Replace “love” with “don’t mind” and you’ve described a portion of us c/fuckcars subs in a nutshell.
I personally dislike car-dependent design, which forces the majority of people to purchase, insure, and operate an understatedly dangerous, but very convenient mode of transportation. Us as a society being numb to deaths caused by dangerous driving, but not to deaths related to motorbikes, pedestrians etc, kind of sums up how big of an exemption we’ve given these vehicles - both mentally and in infrastructure.
There’s no question that cars serve an essential mobility function in areas where public transport is an unrealistic possibility at present, but the same benefits don’t translate well to dense urban areas like cities, where entire blocks in some instances are dedicated just for accomodating vehicles, and road space is taken up by individuals in their own personal 5 seater bus (exc. Carpooling)
Urban sprawl prevents actual buses from being a viable alternative for out of city commuters, so it’s a tricky problem to solve. Trains are a nice alternative too, but most of those tracks were ripped out and the remaining ones are mostly owned by freight companies ☹️.
…although you didn’t ask for my opinion and I deviated a bit off topic here sorry 🤪
You literally didn't. You answered with a logical fallacy. I'm not even saying the conclusion is wrong or right. Just that your way to get there is brain dead. You literally argued "the most popular choice is the best choice." I weep at whatever schooling system you're a part of as you clearly are still in school based on your maturity level.
Lmao there is a certain category of people that always starts using emojis the moment they are copeing.
Trying to put up points with you looks particularly useless, like speaking to a wall, but I will say for whoever reads this that people using something doesn’t necessarily means they like it. Unless you are suggesting people like to go to the hospital or to their workplace.
Pretending they didn't respond again expanding on it is funny. Plus it was an argument against the given one. It wasn't explaining why it's not that way. It was explaining why it shouldn't. Since that's the structure of the given argument above.
When someone says we should do X and then you just respond with "no, people love y" you're explicitly arguing it's a reason against. We obviously know people have cars. There is no value add to the discussion if it's truly what you claim, that they are just pointing out the current state of affairs. That's ludicrous. You're basically saying "no, they're just stupid."
he isnt arguing that they’re not wrong for liking cars. he’s saying not enough people want this to happen to make it feasible, because people want cars. do you have a chip on your shoulder?
That's not what they said. At all. That's an entirely different argument. If you want to make that one, be my guest. Also take some lessons on reading comprehension.
What a bs take. Many people used lead but that doesnt mean lead is good. Many buildings were built with asbestos but that doesnt mean asbestos is good either.
You may be shocked to hear this, but the world is a far bigger place than inside your head.
People don’t like cars, people like freedom and convenience. The US is designed around cars, and it’s not impossible to live without a car, but very close. Your argument is like saying people like health insurance, that’s why they keep buying it. The issue is that there isn’t a different choice.
To be faaaaaair, there are certain politicians who claim that “people like health insurance”, but those ‘people’ might be politicians who get big donations from the private healthcare firms.
Yes. And also importantly, I live in a city that has an abundance of missing middle housing, meaning it’s probably the most affordable major city in North America, has a very high quality of life, has terrific walkability and bikeability, and punches well above its weight in terms of rapid transit.
The result is I live in a good quality apartment, in a very convenient location, without roommates, all for a surprisingly affordable price.
But because so many cities make it extremely hard – if not straight up illegal – to build anything but suburban sprawl, those cities are far more expensive and far more car-dependent.
Rennes' actual population is more like 220k, but that still is enough to be number 10 or 11 in France. It's the urban area that comes to around 360k, though there also is the metropolitan area with around 750k. But the city itself is 220k. By any of these means, it's not a megacity, but there are many, many much, much tinier places in the region, regardless of how you define "region".
Motorcycles aren’t actually uniformly more fuel efficient than cars despite the size. Many full sized ones will actually use as much fuel as a car on commuter trips. The engines are massively more wasteful. Mopeds or scooters will fare better. Maintenance can also be costly. But really, the whole efficiency difference is probably obsoleted by using electricity instead of gasoline.
Two wheeled vehicles aren’t that useful in actual winter snow and ice. They are completely unsafe if you have to ride in traffic with cars and lorries etc. On light traffic routes, bicycles do work, at slightly above walking speed. Quad bikes, trikes or light vehicles, barely doable, but the cost and parking is as bad as with cars and weather resistance is much worse. Safety is worse, though not as bad as two wheels.
Somewhere, for someone, maybe they are an economical option, but these observations killed the idea for me. If I can’t walk or cycle, because of distance and time mostly, or use public transport, a car is the only viable option for year round commute where I live. Electric preferrably.
Waymo has started to use my neighborhood to park their cars and it’s causing traffic in a freakin residential street. I’ve been thinking of using tape and white paper to cover their cameras
More lanes → more people driving + more people taking that specific route → problem gets worse.
Usually a better approach is to invest on mass transport; for example even if a bus takes the space of three cars (I’m guessing), it’s able to comfortably transport at least 20 people.
Sadly, any sort of mass transportation system is also prone to the same sort of vicious cycle; for example, if queue time for buses is too long, people will avoid taking them unless strictly necessary, so their usage is lower, so the companies put even less buses on those lines, so queue times increase even more. It’s basically what happened in my city (Curitiba), that used to have a fairly decent mass transport system.
I’ve heard the rule of thumb is that mass transit will basically always take about as long as driving there: because people will choose one or the other based on time.
So if you want your mass transit to improve it’s always worth it to do it at the expense of drivers: they’ll become your riders.
I’ve heard the rule of thumb is that mass transit will basically always take about as long as driving there
From personal experience this is true with some caveats - it doesn’t take into account waiting times, or that mass transport will never stop exactly where you want it to, or that sometimes you need take multiple ones to reach your destination. All those things add time that potential passengers take into account before deciding “I’ll take the bus” vs. “I’ll drive” or “I’ll take a uber”.
So if you want your mass transit to improve it’s always worth it to do it at the expense of drivers: they’ll become your riders.
Yup - and that’s what a mayor here did in the 90s, to encourage the usage of the bus system. For example certain central avenues got bus-exclusive lanes, and car transit in the leftover lines actually decreased because of that.
Same in my city, although mass transit was already terrible to begin with. Now, buses are often late or don’t arrive at all. Bus stops still have no shade which is miserable in this heat.
My main thing now why I go for cars/planes over train right now, is train is just expensive. For where I’m at most places I’ve checked itd sadly cost more to take the Amtrak then it is for a plane ticket. If trains were cheaper then I wouldn’t mind at all.
I’ve done overnight Amtrak trips in a “Roomette”. My way of looking at it is the journey is part of the vacation whereas flying is the means to get you where you’re going. A cross country train trip can take a few days requiring multiple overnights. If you factor in what a hotel would cost plusmeals (Amtrak includes two meals a day) then that offsets the cost. Besides that you can carry on drinks and snacks plus you don’t have to pay a fee for luggage. I’ve met a lot of nice people on the train, it’s definitely a more civilized way to travel compared to the airline cattle cars. Though it won’t appeal to everyone It’s more for older people with a lot of spare time that always dreamed of driving across the US.
Amtrak is on my bucket list. I’m in Europe so I’m more familiar with international trains here.
I quite love the relaxed mode of travel, though I’m yet to experience a night train though. I might hop on one of those new lines that are opening up across Europe. The ultimate dream of course is a system like China but with fewer human rights violations.
After riding Amtrak you may feel like your human rights have been violated LOL. I joke of course, just know some routes are notorious for being late. Unlike Europe our train terminals aren’t always located in the center of town and if you miss a connecting train the next one may not be until the next day. Most people in the US don’t get much vacation time so this is another reason they avoid Amtrak.
Yeah I just came back from a US trip a few weeks ago and considered NY to Washington, but ended up with a rental car for convenience. The DC metro system seems decent though.
fuckcars
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.