Public Transit my beloved 😍

... where you live. Where I live (in central Europe) we have a subway every 2-3 minutes and you're at worst 2 blocks away from a stop. It all depends on the infrastructure. A subway cant be stuck in traffic...

If I rode my bike to work, my shift would be over by the time I got there. I'm really starting to like the idea of biking to work.

Nearly every city on the planet with a subway system disputes your bullshit.

I'm in Vancouver, while the system needs some improvement, the skytrain gets me right to the airport, with trains every few minutes. No parking nonsense. Driving, with traffic, is much longer. Bussing has some express routes so the trips aren't so many stops also. until the system wxpands develooment the consideration is looking for a place nearer a stop or station.

A bike is faster in my city if you are decently fast, but a bus or trolley is faster than cars during rush hours, because we have public transit lanes, so while everyone in their tin cans is stressed yelling at the dumbass who just cut them off im breezing past, listening to a podcast, meditating or catching a quick ten minute nap before work.

That sounds horrible. Public transportation is such a vital thing for citys to function properly as a place to live and not just work in. And dont get me started on small towns or the countryside where not owning a car basically means you’re fucked. I cannot wrap my head around how politicians just fail to see this. Climate change might be the most urgent, but by far not the only argument for better public transportation.

It’s not fit for a city of this size.

Tokyo would like to have a word with you. It's not public transit in and of itself that is the issue, it's the implementation.

Its not just likely, thats the case. But living in the inner city is expensive here. And thats the case in most of the country.

Thankfully, my little corner store will remain open during floods and other natural disasters as well as pandemics and such. So it will never be necessary for me to have more than 24 hours worth of food in my house.

So you have to essentially grocery shop before every meal? That doesn't sound super efficient. Especially when cooking for a family.

This also still doesn't help with throwing like a big party where you need a large amount of food.

Edit: So yes, all the responses are basically shop every day. I wish I had that kinda time.

How do disabled people who can't walk far get their groceries then? 🤔

This changes sharply if you're buying for more people than just yourself.

The reason I haul entire shopping carts at once is because I don't want to waste time shopping every day. A big 2-hour haul per month vs. 1-2 20-minute trips to the local corner konbini every day. Plus some of the bigger bulk stores deliver (this is Hinode, Tokyo; rural ones probably don't).

Buying in bulk is far less expensive: you pay less (duh), but you spend a lot less time on it too. If I'm buying groceries just-in-time and the nearest shop doesn't have the ingredient I need that day, I have to go to a different shop for that one item. Lots of time wasted, and a lot of stress on top. You can't change your mind later either, because you've already bought ingredients for that one meal. So I prefer to have things buffered in stock, and resupply in advance. You also use far less plastic packaging that way, e.g. buying a 25-liter premix syrup canister instead of hundreds of coke bottles.

I don't mean this the way it's going to sound, but...

I'm happy it works for you, and you're happy with it. It doesn't work for everyone.

Two weeks worth of shopping for a family would be a lot more than three or four bags.

If you had four bags of shopping (though that’s really quite a lot - the bags are big) you would tie the tops closed and leave them in one of the racks until you reached your destination

Along with the 75 other passengers doing the same thing?

And what if it's paper goods and raining like fuck?

A delivery huh? I wonder by what mode if transport that would be delivered....

I don't understand why this is such a hard thing for people and government to understand. Your car isn't going to a place, you and the stuff you need to carry are. The car is just the means and there are many other means to do so, they just get a lot less attention and funding. Cars and traffic infrastructure have been subsidised for over a century now. Of course cars more developed, and of course we build our cities for cars, we're socializing cars.

Yes, there are many areas that have been developed so car focused that it's a necessity to own a car. People living in rural areas will always need personal cars. People in urban and suburban areas probably don't and should give up their personal vehicles so Farmer can keep theirs.

😎

Speed limits are more like suggestions in the states anyway, this is just taking it to it's logical extreme.

From my understanding, the movie is pretty close to what actually happened.

Was there ever any doubt that people who dislike cars live in walkable cities? They can't conceive that someone could live in another place that doesn't have the same infrastructure they do. The idea of being out in the middle of nowhere with 40 acres of land doesn't even cross their minds because to them everyone lives in an urban environment or should be able to make the same solutions work.

It's also weird that they classify getting groceries for two weeks as strange, like do you guys not have natural disasters? You just buy groceries for the next day? What do you do when the shelves go bare during things like Covid or a hurricane? I guess you turn into looters, since you apparently think planning for anything beyond the next day is "deranged." God forbid someone has some extra rice and beans to get through a period of logistics failure.

How many cars have you seen with step-free access?

And besides, surely there exist no disabilities that inhibit people's ability to operate a vehicle like a car, right?

Still no. You can stop claiming that now, you've been proven different many times already in all the other threads.

yes, that's the point. the first one was about how math is just nonsense.

And yet very few people actually get to launch nukes these days. One rule for them and another for us.

Thinking anyone who has ever seen violence on a bus or a train gives a shit

Thinking women in third world countries who are sexually harassed on public transport should just put up with it to make you happy

Thinking "enlightened, developed" aka white countries are free of violence simply because they are in line with what you want

You're not going to sway anyone into giving up their autonomy just because you don't like the way they live. If you're so butthurt about it, why wouldn't you just band together with the other NPCs, put a pot of money together, buy a shitload of land out in the boonies, incorporate it into a separate county and just build a walkable city of your own?

But you won't, because you're too lazy, selfish, and lack initiative, and that's why you'll never get the world you want.

Most major cities with extensive public transport have these problems. You're the one living in denial. And denial ain't just a river in Egypt.

Seems more like you're pointing to other systemic issues of your shithole country.

But that experience of driving is often terrible when every single person (on their own with no heavy cargo) is using a car for every trip.

OK, but what would be the alternative? Especially for those living outside and entering the city either for work of for shopping?

When I was young, I went basically everywhere by bike, as I neither has a car, nor could I afford public transport (which would have cost me about 60% of available money). So I went to work and back on my bike (15km each way), and then to university and back in the evening (another 20km each way). Well, that was when I was young. Nowadays, this is no longer an option.

I don't expect people to commute 20+km a day by bike. A safe bike garage at a P+R place would be nice and reduce at least part of the way by bike, but it does not exist. And public transport, well, at this P+R, there are good connections into the cities, but they have a low frequency and take quite some time, apart from costing a shitload of money for what they offer.

There you are wrong. The official titel of a female mayor is "mayoress", so it is "Mr. Mayor" and "Madam Mayoress". Well, at least in the UK.

Source: I had to deal with them last week.

I don't live in that car-centric shithole. So much for assumptions.

And I take calling me "rightwinger" as a serious insult.

There are cities in my country that managed to strike a good balance between cars and bikes. E.g. with continuous bike paths and stuff like that. But most cities here have two problems: They simply jump short with bike paths and leave safe bike access as a crazy patchwork on the city map, making it more or less useless. And they keep public transport back because it actually costs money.

I've nothing against bikes. Occasionally I rant against stupid and irresponsible bikers, of which there are too many, and that give normal bikers a bad name. I would love to see bike-friendly cities, but I also see cities stumbling around like a beheaded chicken when it comes to implementation.

So, as long as public transport is no usable alternative, a city has to deal with cars as a means of people coming into a city as workers and customers. The alternative would be a city that completely relies on local people. Might be environment friendly, but simply not realistic. They just don't have the purchase power to keep a cities businesses alive.

Their comment is missing the point. It essentially boils down to "the current infrastructure is bad" which is entirely what people advocating for less car centric design have been saying for a long time, but instead of using that as a reason to advocate for better they're using it as a reason not to do anything

Thanks.

Rather, his "arguments" are so stupid, it's difficult to chose how to completely destroy them.

/r/theLeftCantMeme