“most of the surrounding villages”
Comment on After 50 million miles, Waymos crash a lot less than human drivers
rtxn@lemmy.world 1 week agoYes it does, if done properly. I have stops for four bus lines within walking distance. During peak hours, buses come once every 15 minutes. Trolleys in the city centre, every 10 minutes. Trams, every two minutes. Most of the surrounding villages have bus stops. A lack of perspective is not an excuse.
essteeyou@lemmy.world 1 week ago
watty@lemm.ee 1 week ago
I live on a 40mph road with no sidewalk or shoulder. That is connected to a 45mph road with no sidewalk or shoulder. My nearest bus stop is 3.2 miles away.
I’m not even that far out, I can drive to a major city downtown in 30 minutes.
That’s great that you have all this infrastructure around you, but not everyone does. Like you said, a lack of perspective is not an excuse.
Cethin@lemmy.zip 1 week ago
That’s not out of necessity. It’s a design decision. You could have one nearby with the right elected officials and public effort. You also chose where to live, with the ability to know where existing stops are. If you chose the live away from a bus stop or other public transport then that’s on you.
watty@lemm.ee 1 week ago
So fuck everyone who can’t afford to live in the city?
Yea, I can, do, and will vote for officials that want to expand public transit. I also appreciate other efforts being taken, because I don’t let perfect be the enemy of the good.
Cethin@lemmy.zip 1 week ago
So fuck everyone who can’t afford to, or doesn’t want to, live in the city?
What the hell? Were did you pull that from my comment?
We need to work to improve public transport everywhere. Switzerland can have timely consistent trains to tiny villages in the fucking alps. We can have it here. We need to push for it though.
People saying “it doesn’t work for me right now so shut up” are actively harmful to the discussion. They’re choosing to be in a position where it doesn’t work at all (though it doesn’t work well for almost anyone in America outside of DC and NYC). I’m not saying “fuck them” I’m saying “your opinion is not relevant if it’s only complaining about doing better because it’s bad for you right now.”
Its like saying we shouldn’t go to the moon because it’s hard right now, or we shouldn’t try to develop nuclear fusion technology because it’s hard right now. I don’t care if it’s hard right now. We’re discussing what could/should be.
errer@lemmy.world 1 week ago
It’s better to have a few self driving cars that are safer than everyone owning their own car. It’s like getting gas guzzling vehicles off the road: better to replace a humvee with a sedan than a sedan with an electric.
FinalRemix@lemmy.world 1 week ago
Good thing we basically got rid of sedans in favor of “light truck” SUVs…
Coreidan@lemmy.world 1 week ago
ROFL ya because taking 5 separate buses to get to work is TOTALLY going to encourage people to get rid of their cars.
Fucking brilliant.
Oh ya and I TOTALLY want to give up my car just so I can be forced to sit next to rude assholes coughing in my face.
This brilliant suggestions are amazing.
MintyFresh@lemmy.world 1 week ago
Jesus. Ten of the hottest years ever recorded were the last ten. Its time for some major changes. If more people rode public transport it would be better.
All your objections seem to be about how inconvenient it would be for you. Sound kinda self-centered. Act like the only way to get by is to continue to conspicuously consume everything. Get a fuckin grip. You sound like a real asshole with your whiny ass
Coreidan@lemmy.world 1 week ago
Fella it isn’t me you need to convince. It’s the billions of other people on the planet you need to convince.
If you think you can force the entire world then by all means and try.
Krauerking@lemy.lol 1 week ago
And also clearly you. As you seem to have decided you won’t participate until every single one of the other billions do.
AlfredoJohn@sh.itjust.works 1 week ago
You do realize that if we invest in more mass transit, then the people who want to take the bus will. That means fewer cars on the road and less traffic that you have to deal with. If you like driving your car and the freedom it gives you, advocating for more mass transit is in your favor. Imagine your commute with 90% less traffic. Doesn’t that sound appealing to you? Dedicated bus lanes that keep the slow busses out of your lane, doesn’t that sound appealing to you? I don’t know about you, but I love driving, and to me, that sounds like an absolute win
sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 week ago
5 separate buses
Holy hyperbole, Batman!
To get to work 25 miles away, it takes 2 trains (commuter and light rail) and a bus. I personally don’t take transit though, not because of the other passengers, but because of how infrequent those lines run, which turns what should be an hour commute into two, each way.
I have zero problem with transit and I actually alternated between cycling and the bus to my last job based on weather, which took a out 40 min regardless of method of transport (about 10 miles away, two buses).
I can get to most popular destinations in my area with about 3 transfers, and the most popular ones would be one transfer (commuter train to light rail). The main limiting factor is ridership and feeder lines. I even have a rail line that goes right through my suburban city (and a bunch of others) that connects to light rail lines, but that extension keeps getting delayed. If they built the line, it would shave an hour off my transit commute and connect me to multiple destinations (two pro stadiums and downtown), but no, we get wider highways instead, and still have terrible traffic (sometimes it’s slower than the 2 trains + bus that takes 2 hours).
gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 1 week ago
Public transport (with acceptable intervals) is only (practically) feasible in densely populated areas, like cities and maybe the immediate surroundings. There’s no chance every tiny village in the middle of bumfuck nowhere is gonna have even a resemblance of acceptable public transport.
DasAlbatross@lemmy.world 1 week ago
Well if YOU have a bus stop near you then everyone must! That’s just science!
sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 week ago
If you build it they will come
TheEighthDoctor@lemmy.zip 1 week ago
Because having a bus to pick up 7 people in a day is really efficient economically and environmentally…
DasAlbatross@lemmy.world 1 week ago
For sure. Just cruising around the countryside on the off chance that someone actually needs the bus that day. They haven’t for the past few but they have to go shopping eventually.
gaael@lemm.ee 1 week ago
Much more so than having a car-centric infrastructure. If you start cherry-picking you’ll of course find cases where a car would have been more efficient but public transportation needs to be understood as a whole.
sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 week ago
Yeah, all three of them.
rtxn@lemmy.world 1 week ago
Uh, yes, actually. I know someone like you can’t even fathom the possibility of a public transit system being well-built, but we’ve got 80 bus and trolley lines criss-crossing the city.
DasAlbatross@lemmy.world 1 week ago
And all the world is cities! There’s noooooooooo other type of living. Your egocentric view of the world is going to carry you really far.
rtxn@lemmy.world 1 week ago
Did you hallucinate that I said anything like it or something? Obviously not every situation is solved by the same concept. Dense city centres – sidewalks, bike paths, trams, human-scale infrastructure. Suburban areas – abolish Euclidean zoning, European-style grid streets, buses, local light rail services. Inter-city transit – high-speed rail. Smaller villages and towns – regional rail. It’s an issue that most of the developed world has solved.
Public transit is not supposed to replace cars altogether, but give people another choice. A transit system that is built well, operated well, and cheap, will reduce the reliance on cars, and make the streets safer for people or services that have to use cars.
MichaelScotch@lemmy.world 1 week ago
Public transport can, and does work in rural areas too.