Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Once seniors are too old to drive, our transportation system fails them

vox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 324 posts

Re: Once seniors are too old to drive, our transportation system fails them

#171

Post by pravda »

revelation wrote: post #58

That's because prior to being too old to drive, they didn't give a fuck about the public transportation system. Actually, even after being too old to drive, they happily continue to vote against public transportation. It's bizarre to suggest our transportation system is failing them. It's exactly the transportation system they voted for, the transportation system a good bunch of them built, designed, railroaded throu…

Well, it wasn't really "them". It was General Motors, and Firestone Tires, and the oil companies. [1]

In other words, giant corporate interests working together to shape the country in the way that benefited them.

"What's good for GM is good for America"

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_consp...

Re: Once seniors are too old to drive, our transportation system fails them

#172

Post by Cd00d »

blondie9x wrote: post #147

Cars are exploitation. Driving isn't freedom it's the most dangerous and isolating way to move people that exists. The automobile companies have trapped us into debt and traffic laden commutes that waste hours of our short lives on this planet and cause roughly 30% of climate change. Do something. Get rid of your car and push for better mass transportation and development near train stations and major urban areas. Ca…

That's extreme.

I have a car in NYC. The subway system here is amazing, while also being an embarrassment.

But, the car provides the freedom to visit friends and family for a day or weekend. The cost is $200 per month parking and $150 per month insurance, plus the cost of the car, which is relatively low as we drive less than 500 miles per month.

We can visit family in 45 minutes or 2 hours (depending on destination), instead of 3 hours or 5 hours by rail. And, we can make all our departures at will.

I can't imagine giving up car ownership, and I don't think I'm deluded.

Re: Once seniors are too old to drive, our transportation system fails them

#173

Post by souprock »

Qwertious wrote: post #168
souprock wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On public transit, wouldn't you be unusually vulnerable to crime? Why would you want a service that isn't safe for you?

On the footpath, wouldn't you be unusually vulnerable to crime? Why would you want a service that isn't safe for you? That is how your comment sounds to people who use public transport. It sounds ridiculous .

Are you suggesting that a footpath is safe?

My father got mugged at knifepoint on one. That is 100% not acceptable. It is a major reason why normal non-poor people encase themselves in cars.

My father wasn't even blind. He was just slightly old, maybe 50 years old. At that age, he could no longer sprint away.

The comment might sound ridiculous to the people who voluntarily use public transport, but your sampling bias is gigantic in that case.

Re: Once seniors are too old to drive, our transportation system fails them

#174

Post by elliotlarson »

adrianN wrote: post #152
souprock wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On public transit, wouldn't you be unusually vulnerable to crime? Why would you want a service that isn't safe for you?

What an American comment to make. Public transit works in many cities perfectly well and you can use it without fearing for your life, or your wallet. Children in elementary school take public transit unattended.

I live in San Francisco. I don't take public transit regularly but I've lived in this area for 17 years and have personally witnessed several incidents on BART, Caltrain, and Muni. I also lived near Koln Germany for four years where I took public transit hundreds of times without issue. I think it's fair to say that some places have public transit that is just safer than others.

Re: Once seniors are too old to drive, our transportation system fails them

#175

Post by sampo »

souprock wrote: post #170
adrianN wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What an American comment to make. Public transit works in many cities perfectly well and you can use it without fearing for your life, or your wallet. Children in elementary school take public transit unattended.

Well, I'm an American. I might feel differently if I were Japanese. Here, children are driven to school by their parents. When school ends, the parents are there waiting in their cars. Kids mostly don't even play outside anymore. Those of you thinking public transport is fine are likely at least a little bit physically imposing and/or you are in relatively fancy locations.

> Here, children are driven to school by their parents. When school ends, the parents are there waiting in their cars.

Do parents get out of their work in the middle of the afternoon to drive their kids from school to home? Do they go back to work for the last couple hours after that? Or do kids have 8-hour schooldays?

Re: Once seniors are too old to drive, our transportation system fails them

#176

Post by dagw »

tim333 wrote: post #151
souprock wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On public transit, wouldn't you be unusually vulnerable to crime? Why would you want a service that isn't safe for you?

In terms of safety a lot of people die in car crashes, less so on trains and busses.

Saftey in this case doesn't refer to the risk of dying in a crash, but rather the risk of being mugged/robbed or even just harassed.

Re: Once seniors are too old to drive, our transportation system fails them

#177

Post by souprock »

sampo wrote: post #175
souprock wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I'm an American. I might feel differently if I were Japanese. Here, children are driven to school by their parents. When school ends, the parents are there waiting in their cars. Kids mostly don't even play outside anymore. Those of you thinking public transport is fine are likely at least a little bit physically imposing and/or you are in relatively fancy locations.

> Here, children are driven to school by their parents. When school ends, the parents are there waiting in their cars. Do parents get out of their work in the middle of the afternoon to drive their kids from school to home? Do they go back to work for the last couple hours after that? Or do kids have 8-hour schooldays?

I'm sure it varies by family.

Some people have fully flexible time. Some people have a part-time job or two, so they simply don't agree to work shifts during the times they need to drive the kids around. Some people don't work, often because a single income is supporting a two-parent household.

Re: Once seniors are too old to drive, our transportation system fails them

#179

Post by sampo »

goerz wrote: post #87
ghaff wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>optimal way to connect major cities Major cities that are relatively close together. The Northeast Corridor works pretty well for the most part--at least the two ends of it do. The whole thing is a full day and probably costs more than a couple hour flight. Various city pairs also work but anything longer haul has to be for the experience (or avoiding flying) even if everything goes according to schedule. NY to Chic…

Sure, at some point the distances are just too great and flying is the only option

5 hours in train is probably nicer than a 5 hour flight trip (1h to go to airport, 1h in the airport, 2h flight, 1h from airport to destination).

Re: Once seniors are too old to drive, our transportation system fails them

#180

Post by sampo »

_m8fo wrote: post #34
Johnny555 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on the traffic and the train -- during rush hour, a Caltrain express train from San Francisco to San Jose is almost always faster than driving. It can take 90 - 120 minutes to drive during commute hours (at 4:30pm, Google says 90 minutes), versus 65 minutes by train.

I don't disagree that a train is better in many situations. I'm more curious about situations where a city is prepared to make a 1B+ capital expenditure. For example boring a tunnel for a train vs. a dedicated bus lane on the highway + exit.

One train can have a capacity of 1000 people. If you run these at 3 minutes interval, you have a throughput of 20,000 people per hour.

One bus takes less than 100 people, and you cannot run 200 buses per hour. Actually about 20 buses per hour is pretty much at the upper limits.

These are rough numbers, but if you need to move more than 2000 people per hour, trains can have the capacity but buses don't.

Post reply on HN