231–240 of 783 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Crucially, the road network also operates at a loss
In the first level analysis. Once you realize the sheer amount of commerce and business that is enabled by roads you see that they pay for themselves several times over.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except that having more car traffic induces more pollution, more casualties, and more time spent unproductively (you can do other things on public transit, or get exercise commuting by bike), whereas more book reading has few downsides.
>> you can do other things on public transit, What can I do on public transit that people don't do in a car in traffic?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t think this analogy is quite correct. Driving on a particular route is not a driver’s objective like reading a particular book is a reader’s objective. The driver’s objective is arriving at a destination. The objective in driving is not a finite resource, but the multiple route options to the objective can be, which differs substantially from a library queue.
Let's consider a library with both a manned librarian and a self checkout, two different queues, same objective. Let's call the self checkout the 'highway' queue and the manned one the 'surface street' queue. Each of which could be expanded to improve throughput (more lanes:more self checkout lanes, more streets:more librarians). Ultimately the problem with anti-car rhetoric is that it seeks to limit access to the ob…
Sounds like the Bay Area. We don't like cars but we refuse to build comprehensive transit. To build transit that works you cannot value everyone's opinion equally and have to just make it happen. Some of the worst localized pollution I have experienced in my life was while living in the Bay Area with the massive traffic jams.
Here's a nice study: https://newatlas.com/motorcycles-reduce-congestion/21420/ They say 10% of traffic being replaced by motorcycles reduces congestion by 40%. California has pretty good weather so it's probably feasible to commute by motorbike almost every day.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US is not a democracy. Not even at the state level. For many aspects and holons it is a representative republic.
The U.S. is a democracy, albeit a deficient one rather than a working one [1]. At least is the least deficient one amongst those. [1] https://www.democracymatrix.com/ranking
https://www.democracymatrix.com/online-analysis/matrix#/char...
after further looking it turns out that it was also categorized as working before 2020 and after 2020. the difference being 0.01 points. in 2020 it took a dive in rules settlement and implementation for which there is an obvious culprit: covid.
https://www.democracymatrix.com/online-analysis/country#/Uni...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the first level analysis. Once you realize the sheer amount of commerce and business that is enabled by roads you see that they pay for themselves several times over.
Actually, it has been shown that removing cars increase commerce.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Try a motorcycle! The laws for lane splitting are the best in the country. You could probably fit 6 motorcycles in the space of one car.
Motorcyles have a roughly 30 times higher fatality rate per mile driven compared to cars
As someone who loves trains and buses and planes, I wish that people who pushed public transport would actually engage with the reasons why people don't want to use it rather than just making alternatives worse. There are three main issues that need to be solved for even me, a train lover, to prioritise using them. 1) Undesirables need to be removed. I don't want to deal with beggars or other general hoodlums. Transp…
Sounds like the Bay Area. We don't like cars but we refuse to build comprehensive transit. To build transit that works you cannot value everyone's opinion equally and have to just make it happen. Some of the worst localized pollution I have experienced in my life was while living in the Bay Area with the massive traffic jams.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What I'm saying is that public transport is a reflection of the local society. You can accept it, work to improve it, or hide from it in your private vehicle. Here in London, hardly a quaint and sleepy village, everyone uses public transport, including beggars and hoodlums as you put it, and it's fine.
We simply disagree that public transport (or society in general) has to accept everyone regardless of how badly they behave. It has nothing to do with "sectors of society". If you want me on the bus, kick off the dickheads. Making driving worse will not get me on the bus however much you attempt to manipulate me emotionally.
I don't understand your double standard, you should apply the same rules for driving and public transits.