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

Secrets of the world's happiest cities

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–68 of 68 posts

Re: Secrets of the world's happiest cities

#61

Post by alpeb »

merraksh wrote: post #32
alpeb wrote: post #21

Bogotanian here. This is one of the most unlivable cities there is. As soon as you step out the door you're aggravated in a thousands ways through your day. Bogotá and Colombia usually score high in the "happiness" rankings because of a servitude mentality that dates back to the colony. Inequality is very high even for Latin American standards and people are taught to accept and embrace it. You'll rarely see protests…

I don't think the article has any intention to depict Bogotá as a happy city in absolute terms (although yeah, the author calls Peñalosa the "Mayor of Happiness"), but rather that the changes brought by its mayor in recent years have made it happiER. I would be curious about your opinion in this sense: despite the rampant corruption and all other problems, has the city's quality of life actually improved over the pas…

Indeed, Peñalosa was an extraordinary mayor ans his transportation system improved the standard of living. But as the article hints at the end, the follow up has been terrible (e.g. one mayor indicted) and the city has gotten out of hands.

Re: Secrets of the world's happiest cities

#62

Post by Daniel_Newby »

mjn wrote: post #60
Daniel_Newby wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In most towns, bus economics only allows for one hour routes and a transfer for most trips. That means two hours in motion average for a round trip, and up to two more hours waiting if your business does not line up with scheduled stops. The grandparent comment is exactly right. Shorter, more frequent routes are possible, but making the economics work does require a ban on cars to convert drivers to paying transit ri…

How about just a good and reasonably fast commuter-rail network? It's faster to get to many suburbs of Copenhagen by public transit than to drive, because we have: 1) extensive commuter rail; and 2) not many freeways. I don't think it's only that American cities aren't actively discouraging driving (e.g. by banning cars from city centers), but that they are spending huge piles of money actively encouraging it, by bui…

America is big. The population is very spread out. It is normal for an American city to have 1/20th the population density of Copenhagen. Commuter rail would just dump you in a sprawling suburn with no economically viable public transportation. Autonomous taxis will make it workable, but that is a decade or two in the future.

Re: Secrets of the world's happiest cities

#63

Post by pkulak »

jaegerpicker wrote: post #51
pkulak wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or walk 6 blocks to the corner store each day to fetch your dinner. Shopping only every two weeks seems like what your car forces you to do, not enables you to do. I don't even like buying food that won't spoil in two weeks.

because all people live within 6 blocks of a corner store. I do now but this is the first time in my live that I've lived with in 3 miles (at least usually more) of a shop able store. A lot of cars in the city centers are people who live out of the city but have to drive in to get supplies.

Then that's a horribly designed city. That's the whole point of this article.

Re: Secrets of the world's happiest cities

#64

Post by wink »

ams6110 wrote: post #52
svantana wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. Even in places that are generally enamoured with free markets, you never see this. It would be fun to see market-priced parking in places like Manhattan - what would happen?

Parking is not market-priced in Manhattan? Are there any major cities where it is free? When I lived in Chicago it certainly wasn't. Parking in the Loop was $10-$20/day (this was 15 years ago) if you just did it ad-hoc, you could buy monthly passes and save a bit, but it certainly wasn't free and as far as I know it wasn't subsidized. All the extra taxes, costs, and inconvenience of owning a car in an major urban are…

Here in Munich, Germany you pay something like 6-10 EUR to park in the city centre for the time you're working, that is 8-10h. There are still some free spots, the more you leave the center, the more easily you find them. Less than 10 years ago it was much easier to find a free one in the center as well.

Re: Secrets of the world's happiest cities

#65

Post by zacinbusiness »

pkulak wrote: post #63
jaegerpicker wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

because all people live within 6 blocks of a corner store. I do now but this is the first time in my live that I've lived with in 3 miles (at least usually more) of a shop able store. A lot of cars in the city centers are people who live out of the city but have to drive in to get supplies.

Then that's a horribly designed city. That's the whole point of this article.

There are places in the US that bikes are impractical. The more rural areas may have distances of over 10 miles to the nearest market, and the roads will be of poor quality and there may be large hills and/or mountains. That said, a public transportation system could help this problem as well.

Re: Secrets of the world's happiest cities

#66

Post by DanBC »

zacinbusiness wrote: post #65
pkulak wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then that's a horribly designed city. That's the whole point of this article.

There are places in the US that bikes are impractical. The more rural areas may have distances of over 10 miles to the nearest market, and the roads will be of poor quality and there may be large hills and/or mountains. That said, a public transportation system could help this problem as well.

I'm not fit, but I used to regularly cycle 15 miles, with some reasonable hills.

I think one of the problems with cycling is that people don't have good bikes, and don't know how to maintain them, and are worried about longer (more than 10 miles) distances.

In this context when I say "good bike" I just mean "in good working order" and "sensibly adjusted to size of rider", and "has baskets or panniers". Something like that is cheap and really easy to keep going. And once someone has actually got that bike and they start using it regularly for shorter distances they build up the distances they're comfortable with.

Having said all that, it's pretty hair-raising cycling on roads where traffic travels fast if that traffic isn't used to cycles and if there's not much room for passing.

Re: Secrets of the world's happiest cities

#67

Post by oftenwrong »

Daniel_Newby wrote: post #42
epo wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any rational planning system would enhance public transport to mitigate the effects of curtailing widespread use of privately owned cars. However, you seem to be American so perhaps the notion of rational planning is alien to you. Certainly the use of verbiage like "stomping all over a person's right to own property and use it as they wish" would indicate that rational thought is alien to you.

In most towns, bus economics only allows for one hour routes and a transfer for most trips. That means two hours in motion average for a round trip, and up to two more hours waiting if your business does not line up with scheduled stops. The grandparent comment is exactly right. Shorter, more frequent routes are possible, but making the economics work does require a ban on cars to convert drivers to paying transit ri…

>Since they won't crash

Yeah, software never has bugs.

/s

Re: Secrets of the world's happiest cities

#68

Post by pkulak »

DanBC wrote: post #66
zacinbusiness wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are places in the US that bikes are impractical. The more rural areas may have distances of over 10 miles to the nearest market, and the roads will be of poor quality and there may be large hills and/or mountains. That said, a public transportation system could help this problem as well.

I'm not fit, but I used to regularly cycle 15 miles, with some reasonable hills. I think one of the problems with cycling is that people don't have good bikes, and don't know how to maintain them, and are worried about longer (more than 10 miles) distances. In this context when I say "good bike" I just mean "in good working order" and "sensibly adjusted to size of rider", and "has baskets or panniers". Something like…

+1. Most people have an old mountain bike in their garage, with double suspension, low tires, and a chain that's nearly totally fused together. They hop on that thing once and have a miserable time barely going faster than they would walk. That's enough to turn them off for another 5 years.
Post reply on HN