1y ago

rule

110 comments

Sowwy I skewed the statistics by drinking all the petrol I was thirsty 😖
- Darn it Petrols Georg, not again

c/fuckcars
- Fuck cars is nothing but city dwellers that think their lifestyle is scalable to suburbs or the sticks.
  
  Fuck suburbs too
  
  I definitely want a more expansive public transportation system out here in the foot hills. A high-speed rail network to connect us to other parts of the state would be awesome. But it isn't feasible to get rid of all cars completely. A single parent out here can't be expected to make multiple bike trips for the equivalent of one grocery store run, up and down hills to feed multiple children and work a full time job. Some people out here live on roads where cars can barely drive on let alone a bus. edit: typo
  
  god forbid you tell them you own an XUV or a Truck and use the bed for actual work...as much as i dislike the lifted trucks in florida. they don't get flooded when the rain comes, they can tow half the state because most of us live in trailers, 5th wheels or other 'recreational' housing, i love my Hyundai Accent for the commute and all, but one bad rainstorm and its Good night sweet south korean prince.
- I think you mean !fuckcars@lemmy.world or !fuck_cars@lemmy.ml
  (I hope a time will come when you can view all together with !fuckcars or something)
  
  Apparently i need more schooling. And akshuwally I'm not even sure where the group I'm subscribed to is hosted😒. I'll be best next time, thank you Citizen!
- What a dumb community. I'd be fucked without my car, so you're going to disparage me for using one? Sorry I don't live in fantasy land where public transport is readily available.
  
  The way I perceived it is the point isn't to disparage people people for using cars but to point out how ridiculous car oriented infrastructure is. Places were designed to have poor alternatives to driving, that's the problem.
  
  Fuck cars refers to what they caused with car centric infrastructure. The lobbying that reduced that "fantasy" of public transport to rubble. It's advocating for people centric cities.
  At least check what is about before getting offended.
  
  I think the point of the community isn't 'Fuck you for driving a car!' but more like 'We should focus on affordable public transport, proper cycling lanes and walkable neighbourhoods instead of focussing on expanding car infrastructure, turning nature parks into parking lots and urban sprawl'.
  
  I'd be fucked without my car
  And that's exactly the point of this community. We don't want you to just stop using your car. We want you to have the choice to stop using the car. We hate the fact that car-centered infrastructure led to the point where you can't go anywhere without a car.
  This is an issue because first of all, cars are the thing that makes traffic as dangerous as it is for pedestrians, cyclists and other drivers. Secondly they create traffic jams and everyone hates those. Thirdly, something something CO2 something something climate change, you know the jazz. Fourthly, not everyone can afford a car, driving lessons to get a licence, petrol and car insurance.
  I could keep going but I hope you see why infrastructure more centered around pedestrians, cyclists and public transport could lead to safer and quicker traffic, cleaner air, lower emissions and more freedom for those who can't afford it.
  
  Yes fantasy world of most of the other developed nations. Even some under developed ones

Can I just say how much I loved Edinburgh for that? I was able to go to pretty much any bus stop, and have one that goes where I needed to go like every ten minutes.
That was quite a while ago though, and I think they wanted to build a tram network, so maybe that's changed
- Best not to mention the trams in Edinburgh. They finally finished the line (all the way from the airport to the port in Leith) but it cost waaay more than planned, had to be done in two phases and was a massive ballache during the construction.
  That said, it is an absolute win for public transport in the city but it did knock the confidence of residents. Mostly down to the piss poor management of the project by the council.
  
  Sad to hear, but still great that it happened, I guess

What about the women and children? Did they have to walk?
- I transported them. I transported them all. Every single one of them. And not just the men, but the women and the children, too. They’re like passengers, and I transported them like passengers! I LOVE THEM!
  bus
  
  That was unexpectedly wholesome.
- They are always free to try and cling to the underside of the bus
- They aren't allowed to go out
  
  1980s ads were stuck in the 1780s, confirmed?
- Up to 1989 british women and children weren't issued a bus loicence
- Yes! Gotta save every drop
- No They have to run

The man in the car has to be at work at 8AM. He has a 15-minute commute, so he can leave at 7:40 to give himself a bit of extra time to get there. At 12:30, he gets a call that his mother is in critical condition in the hospital. He leaves immediately, drives 30 minutes to the hospital the next town over, and is there to say his last goodbye before she passes away.
A man on the bus has to be at work at 8AM. The bus runs hourly with the scheduled pickup being x:20. Normally, it takes 30 minutes to reach his stop and another 10 minutes to walk, but sometimes the bus runs 10-15 minutes late, so he has to take the 6:20 bus to make sure he can get there on time. At 12:30, he gets a call that his mother is in critical condition in the hospital. The man pulls up Google Maps to find the quickest bus route to the hospital, runs to the bus stop in 5 minutes, and waits another 10 minutes for the bus to arrive. Unfortunately, this stop does not have a direct route to the hospital, so he must ride the bus for 10 minutes and make a connection to another bus at a different stop. On the way there, the first bus stops in front of a retirement community, and 10 elderly passengers spend a good 5 minutes fumbling through pocketbooks for bus fare because they don't understand how to use the newfangled reloadable transit cards. One elderly man gets violent because he has no change and the bus driver won't take a check, so he has to be removed from the bus. The man gets off at his first stop and sprints across the block to his next bus stop, but he realizes that he has unfortunately arrived late, and the second bus he had to catch just left. The bus runs hourly and this city is too small for there to be an abundance of taxis, so his options are either to wait an hour for the next bus or to call an Uber. The man opens his Uber app and, after 5 minutes, it matches him to a driver. The man waits around, watching the map as the Uber driver circles around the city for a bit, before eventually that driver drops and he is connected to a different driver. Another 5 minutes pass, the Uber driver arrives, and the man is now in a car on the way to the hospital. A 20-minute drive later, the man is now at the hospital, but his mother has just passed away before he had the chance to say goodbye.
This is why people drive.
- Sorry to burst your tortured made up anecdote, but taxis exist.
  
  Taxis are expensive and have the fuel issue per the post were replying to. They were pretty long winded but busses do take longer than driving yourself that much is true.
  
  some countries subsidize their taxis to keep them cheap, it's a great alternative to public transit
  
  Not in my city they don't. I mean, I even mentioned that if you had read what I wrote, but you do you.
- This is the most convoluted bullshit ever.
- Since we're making up stories...
  A man in a place with bad public transit gets the call that his mother has been in a car accident and is being rushed to the hospital at 8AM. Since it's rush hour, he spends the next two hours stuck in gridlock traffic (bad traffic today, something about a big car accident...). He doesn't make it in time for her last goodbyes.
  In contrast:
  A man in a city with a good public transport goes to work easily and there is minimal traffic. His mom doesn't get hospitalized because there are fewer cars on the road and the streets are designed for pedestrian safety.
  or
  His mom gets to the hospital more quickly because there is less traffic. She survives.
  or
  He runs (or bikes) to the hospital within 20 minutes because he lives close to it in a dense neighborhood without endless sprawl caused by parking lots and cars.
  or
  He gets to the hospital quickly via an efficient transit route since there are many routes going to a hospital because... it's a hospital!
  or
  He calls a taxi that arrives quickly and gets him to the hospital in 1 hour because there is less traffic.
  Also, in all these scenarios everyone in the society is wealthier and healthier due to spending less money on their cars and breathing less pollution. They all get to work quicker because of less traffic congestion.
  This is why people want better public transit.
  
  Way to miss the point.
  Nowhere in my post did I mention traffic. Traffic is not a concern in my area.
  Emissions are a non-problem as EVs become more common.
  The scenario involves a need to get out of your city and into another ASAP. How dense your city is irrelevant if the place you need to go is somewhere else.
  The point of the scenario is about balance of time in life, and how to immediately get somewhere in an emergency. Regardless of whether the mother lives or dies in this scenario, is a loved one in the hospital ever not an emergency? Would anyone in the real world ever think "Well I'm sure the ambulance got there quick enough, no need to rush"?
- "15 minute drive" at rush hour. My man could walk.
  This entire comment could be summarized by "butbutbut people who live in areas with shitty public transport have to drive"
  We already know this. The point is to make it better, because good public transport is better for literally everyone. I live on the edge of town, and I'm 5 minutes from 7 bus stops for 5 different bus lines, and a train station. Most of those buses come every 10-15 minutes, and are up to 5 minutes late at rush hour. It is by far a better experience to take the bus than to drive for me.
  
  I'm imagining more of a 15 minute drive down the interstate at 70mph. I am not going to walk or bike 15 miles to and from work, particularly in the rain/snow/heat.
- I take the bus to work almost every day. I have a choice of three bus routes that work for me, one of which runs every 15 minutes. The one I take runs every 30. The only time they have been behind schedule was during a blizzard, but I got an alert on my phone about it.
  No one has ever slowed down everyone else while fumbling for change because the busses are fare-free.
  Public transportation can work, but we have spent the last 80 years developing a culture of individual car ownership so that we haven't prioritized making public transportation that works for the people.
  
  So the model only works if you have a large number of free (at point of service) buses which go between everywhere anyone may want to start to anywhere they may want to go?
- I know you're trying to say the opposite, but what I'm thinking of when reading your comment, is that more money should be invested in building better infrastructure to make buses and trains more reliable. Like 90% of the traffic hindering the buses is made up of cars. With less cars, more people could ride buses, trains etc. and people could ride a lot more frequently. People shouldn't have to fumble through their purses, because busrides should be mostly free.
  
  I'm not even talking traffic. Buses are just inherently slower than cars.
  A car gets me from point A to point B with little to no interruption. To go the same distance in a bus, I first have to walk 10 minutes to the closest bus stop, ride the bus down a less direct route with a dozen stops along the way, and then when I get to my stop, walk another 10 minutes to get where I need to go. And the entire time, you are at the mercy of a schedule that is often unreliable. I am not kidding when I say taking a bus would triple my commute time. When I am working 50+ hours a week, it's just not feasible.
  Everyone in here apparently lives in a fantasy city where public transport takes you exactly where you want to go, is never late, and runs every 5 minutes. And when the whole thread here is full of "Just take a taxi/Uber", how is that a solution to the problem above?
- Omg. Let's argue a once in a lifetime situation and use it as the reasoning for people driving daily let alone the whole environment point the ad is about.
  
  It's one-in-a-lifetime situations that people typically try to account for. And the average person is likely to have more than one emergency in life that they need to be somewhere ASAP for.
- The answer to these problems is just better public transport... buses coming more often. Problem solved. No need to resort to individualised transport because public doesn't run often enough.
- wouldn't you just take a taxi/uber in such an emergency situation?
  Also, buses don't exist in a vacuum, and PT can easily be faster than cars. Think of metros in the city, dedicated bus lanes on congested roads, and bicycle paths to stations and stops
  
  Yeah I mentioned Uber.
- Man have you heard of Uber? If one has an emergency there are solutions to your convoluted example, you know.
  
  Have you used Uber? Last time, I was stuck waiting on the sidewalk for 30 minutes as my request got passed from driver to driver. It's fine when they're quick, but when your solution to "I need to go somewhere now" is to rely on borderline slave labor who don't have to pick you up if they don't like where you are, it's not great.
- The only perfect solution: cycling
  
  My friend with triplets disagrees
- Except cars have to deal with traffic whereas buses pretty much don't.
  
  What makes you think buses don't have to deal with traffic while cars inherently do?
- You can always call a a taxi if its urgent.
  For the first, if you can't find a job where starting 10 minutes later is not something you can negotiate, then probably you working at a low end job, in that case you shouldn't spend your hard earned money on car payments and gas anyway.
  Cars are obviously more convenient, but also more expensive and less environment friendly. Noone force anyone to give up your convenience so no need to go defensive, just consider it as an option for all the good reasons.
- I love how much hate this reply got. Yes, its over the top and unrealistic, but the point is that private cars are extremely convenient while public transportation isn't. Yes, private cars are very bad for the environment. So is pretty much all modern human industry.
  Stop having kids, if you're so concerned about the environment. Your stupid butthole babies and their progeny will cause more environmental harm than any of your personal lifestyle choices.

But how many gallons will 68 seamen take?

I agree that personal muscle cars are a "go fuck yourself" to the climate, but look at that bus. It doesn't look fast because it has no reason to be aerodynamic. That thing is either stopped or going like 30 mph a majority of the time. If driving takes you 15 minutes but taking the bus takes you an hour, those with enough money will trade it to get that time back.
- Why does it need to be aerodynamic? You know you don't need a Formula 1 shaped car to go faster than 30mph right?
  Also the bus pictured is a London city bus. They can't go faster anyways because of all the traffic in London. There's busses designed to go on the highway at least like 60 mph.
  
  My point was that it doesn't need to be aerodynamic, because it won't be going fast. I'm sure it is still capable of going fast, and that some bus routes go on the highway, but if the designers expected that to be happening with any regularity, they would have designed it with that in mind. Most busses are not aerodynamic because its not necessary. Busses are generally slow.
  My commute to work is literally 15 minutes by car or 60 minutes by bus. Traffic is rarely a significant factor for me. It may sometimes add as much as 5 minutes to my travel time.
  Would there be significant benefits if everyone used public transportation? Yes. Do I want to spend an extra 90 minutes commuting every day? Not even a little bit.
  
  That's why the example 15min vs an hour is not working, because both are stuck in traffic
- That's why good public transit networks using multiple modes are important, as well as reducing car infrastructure to disincentivize driving at the same time

67 gallons

110 comments