You're viewing a single thread.
Some things which have always annoyed me about the original panels:
- People walking cannot go nearly as far as they can on a bus or in a car, and any kind of real distance travelled is very slow.
- Public transit is also much slower than a car, door to door, when taking into account the first and last legs to get you from your start to public transit, and from public transit to your destination.
- People on a bus must all go along the exact same route.
- Most people in the US do not live where there are robust public transit options.
- In dense urban areas, lots of people from all walks of life make use of public transit.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all in favor of public transit, more of it, and in more places. But, fuck, it's not the travelers' fault that it's not always the best option (or in suburbs and rural areas, often not an option at all).
Most of these issues are a funding and infrastructure problem. More funding + better infrastructure to handle it = more direct routes with fewer stops to handle more demand.
Exactly. I haven't met a single person who simultaneously thinks "fuck cars" and "we should get rid of cars tomorrow"
At the moment, there's no way most people could get rid of cars.
I say this as someone who has never had a licence (too disabled to drive), I've always relied on walking, cycling or bus/train.
The way most places in my country (Australia) are set up, you need access to a car. Ideally, your own car or a shared family car.
I don't have that luxury, I've built my life around making that work for me. I've chosen my career based on it, I'm forced to choose where I rent based on it, I have to turn down invitations to events I want to attend because of it, unless a driving friend is attending, or it's not ludicrously expensive to uber - but neither is the solution to our current infrastructure'a dependency on cars.
There are so many options for good infrastructure and systems of public and private transport, but the current rate of implementation means those who can drive are practically forced to, and those that can't are at a genuine disadvantage compared to driving peers.
Are the original panels disputing any of that?
It’s just to give some perspective about how efficient public transport can be when compared with the number of cars required to transport the same number of people.
The subtext is that all the people in the cars (and only one per car, for that matter, which is definitely common, but not universal) are going to the exact same destination from the exact same starting point, at the same time, and that there is a public transit route that travels between the two places at the time everyone wants to travel, because that's the only way the comparison is honest.
As above, I want more public transit in more places, as well as more mixed residential/light commercial so that people don't have to travel as far. But the fact remains that private automobiles and public transit serve two very different purposes, only really overlapping in that they transport people from one place to another. The other details matter, and they're different for each. "Hurr durr cars bad buses good" is so oversimplified as to be not even wrong.
It's also missing the panel showing the same number of people on motorcycles, which have all the same multi-destination advantages of cars while being able to fit 2x to 3x more of them and their riders in the same space.
This is even more relevant in "developed" countries where most of the cars only have a single occupant anyway.
That's what was missing - I knew it was something. Yeah, small displacement motorcycles and scooters would go in the direction of helping a lot, at least in parts of the US which don't suffer difficult winters.
I hope the day comes that motorcycles are seen by the law and public opinion as a commuting option and not as a hobby... owning a motorcycle and living in a large metro area is great. I get to park for free instead of paying $15 per day.
The subtext is that all the people in the cars (and only one per car, for that matter, which is definitely common, but not universal) are going to the exact same destination from the exact same starting point, at the same time, and that there is a public transit route that travels between the two places at the time everyone wants to travel, because that's the only way the comparison is honest.
Hmmm
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm
The cars will be much slower than the buses because the absurd amount of cars will eventually cause terrible traffic jam. And the environmental damage caused by the huge amount of cars is enormous (air pollution + require a huge amount of land to build one more lane & parking space)
Most people in the US do not live where there are robust public transit options.
Don't live in the US, got it.
I live in Europe and it’s pretty bad here as well.
Great. I'll take that advice. Now who's going to pay for my family to move, get us new citizenship and find us new jobs? You?
Are we on a US sub?
Why? Does that change your advice not to live in the US?
For most of the world, yes, me included.
I see... So your advice is: don't live in the U.S. unless you live in the U.S.
I'm sure we'll all take that to heart.
Have a cookie.
No thank you, but I look forward to other pronouncements from you like 'don't eat meat unless you eat meat' and 'don't set fire to buildings unless you set fire to buildings.'
Hey, i can't help a random stranger more than to tell you to vote and unionize.
-
Assuming theres no traffic jams, yes
-
Depends whether the area implements things like bus lanes
-
Yes, but you can get off at different spots
-
They have infrastructure problems with that
-
Yes
-
Electric bicycles is the best alternative surely? Mild excersise, still decently quick and it's quite portable too.
Yes! Also a good partial solution, along with motorcycles. Weather and other passenger/cargo/distance needs are still going to require many people to also own and operate cars, but I don't think anything is going to be a silver bullet anyway.
Hear me out: motorcycles.
🤔
I have two in my garage right now, I'm all for it. Small displacement motorcycles can easily take over a large amount of trips that are currently done in cars. Except that winter weather conditions in the US preclude motorcycling for a lot of people for a good portion of the year. This means that many motorcyclists will have to trade a motorcycle ride for some other form of transportation quite often, which further means that a lot of motorcyclists are going to also need a car. The individual cost of parking, owning, and operating two vehicles is going to be prohibitive for many people.
Yes, small displacement motorcycles should be part of the solution. We have to recognize that they are not going to be a complete solution. That said, don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.