Live data from Hacker News

Cars Kill Cities

progressivetransit.wordpress.com

31–40 of 223 posts

Re: Cars Kill Cities

#31
post #12
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Self driving electric cars that people pay for on a subscription model (rather than ownership) are the future I'd like to see. I hope it happens during my lifetime.

Taxis are a reasonable "turking" of this concept.

And zipcar.

Re: Cars Kill Cities

#32
post #6

This is easy enough to fix from a policy standpoint: (1) make free parking a taxable benefit for companies (2) tax the hell out of gas/car registration, or at the very least tax it enough to pay for infrastructure (3) no mandated parking minimums in new construction in cities (4) get rid of publicly paid for parking But of course this requires transit alternatives and popular support, which does not exist in places l…

I think a better alternative for 2 would be congestion pricing for downtown areas. An across the board registration hike would be regressive, and disproportionately affect the rural poor.

Re: Cars Kill Cities

#33
post #12
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Self driving electric cars that people pay for on a subscription model (rather than ownership) are the future I'd like to see. I hope it happens during my lifetime.

Taxis are a reasonable "turking" of this concept.

Taxis in general don't fully turk the concept, at least not in areas without reliable taxi volume. It's reasonable as long as you can rely on the taxi to show up within a decent amount of time of requesting it or expect to see one in passing in a short amount of time.

Uber et al. have done a lot to help with this in my experience, but I've had many times where I'm in a location that taxis aren't typically in the immediate vicinity. Calling the cab company has often led to lots of waiting, not knowing when the car will get there, with cars sometimes never showing up at all. Knowing that the car is definitely coming to you (whether it's a self driving car, Uber, or any other service that tracks the vehicle's location) help remove that uncertainty and definitely makes it an acceptable option in more areas.

That reliability and knowledge justify the extra cost for taking Uber (or requesting a self driving car some day) to me, more than the comfort or style of a town car compared to a cab.

Re: Cars Kill Cities

#34
If you're interested in this topic, Donald Shoup's The High Cost of Free Parking and Edward Glaeser's The Triumph of the City are both worth reading. The former explains how "free" parking isn't really free and how it distorts a lot of behavior, and the latter is about what cities are good for and how to build healthy cities in general.

Personally, I wonder why people would want to own a car if they can avoid it: https://jseliger.wordpress.com/2013/08/13/why-would-you-want... , but that may be a minority viewpoint.

Re: Cars Kill Cities

#35

FYI, the author of that post address self-driving cars in his next post: http://progressivetransit.wordpress.com/2012/02/02/self-driv...

That betrays the basic attitude of these anti-car folks. It's not the cars, but the freedom to live where you want that they detest.

Re: Cars Kill Cities

#36
post #15
post #7

The post is right, and even more so for developing world cities that emerged before cars were around. However the post is also naive. Cars are usually much faster, provide much better shelter from the weather, and are much less tiring than trying to lug bags from one place to another on buses or other public transport. They also place far fewer constraints on when you can travel. Of course it's possible to structure…

The odd thing to me about cars is that people pick the most unusual use cases and then buy their cars off of that. So my dad likes to haul plywood once in a while, so he bought a pick-up. But 99.99% of the time he could use a subcompact. Likewise everyone knows people who have two kids and buy a van/SUV because they want an extra seat or two. You can always rent a car if you get into these sorts of situations, and it…

It may not be unreasonable if the overhead to rent is high. It's coming down, though I have no idea what ranges are "too high" or where things currently stand relative to that.

Re: Cars Kill Cities

#37
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it would require a change in infrastructure. No, it is not necessary for the investment to be done upfront. You quickly ramp up cheap mass transit options (bus service segregated from regular vehicular traffic with dedicated lanes, MUCH cheaper than light rail construction) while using permitting/zoning to phase out car-friendly policies. It won't happen overnight, but its a start.

Bus service does not work. People hate buses, no matter how well designed and efficient their routes are. Buses have an extreme social stigma attached to them.

I love buses. Gives me a chance to read, when I would otherwise be stuck driving.

Re: Cars Kill Cities

#38
post #15
post #7

The post is right, and even more so for developing world cities that emerged before cars were around. However the post is also naive. Cars are usually much faster, provide much better shelter from the weather, and are much less tiring than trying to lug bags from one place to another on buses or other public transport. They also place far fewer constraints on when you can travel. Of course it's possible to structure…

The odd thing to me about cars is that people pick the most unusual use cases and then buy their cars off of that. So my dad likes to haul plywood once in a while, so he bought a pick-up. But 99.99% of the time he could use a subcompact. Likewise everyone knows people who have two kids and buy a van/SUV because they want an extra seat or two. You can always rent a car if you get into these sorts of situations, and it…

Is it really that odd? We do the exact same thing with computers. How often, exactly, are we max'ing all 16GB of RAM and pegging all eight cores of our workstations? Couldn't we "just" rent time on EC2 when we need more?

Yes, it's a pain in the butt to farm out most types of compute to EC2. Yes, it can quickly get expensive. Yes, you can save money buying a $40 Sempron. All these arguments and obstacles can be applied just as well to buying a 2-seater subcompact and renting other cars, so before we decry it as "weird" and "making no sense", maybe we should reflect on our own decisions?

Re: Cars Kill Cities

#39
post #2

At this point for a lot of cities, it would require a large amount of infrastructure change. Mass transit in most cities sucks today, so people use cars. To do this right, the city needs to do a massive up-front investment in public transit. And there is no guarantee that this investment will ever pay off.

I think you mean, "Mass transit in most American cities sucks today".

Re: Cars Kill Cities

#40
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it would require a change in infrastructure. No, it is not necessary for the investment to be done upfront. You quickly ramp up cheap mass transit options (bus service segregated from regular vehicular traffic with dedicated lanes, MUCH cheaper than light rail construction) while using permitting/zoning to phase out car-friendly policies. It won't happen overnight, but its a start.

Bus service does not work. People hate buses, no matter how well designed and efficient their routes are. Buses have an extreme social stigma attached to them.

Unfortunately, just because you hate something doesn't mean we should continue to support policies for wasteful/inefficient transportation.
Post reply on HN