4 ms·

Isn't requiring driving itself a form of regressive tax? Forcing people to purchase and maintain expensive cars, pay for gas, pay for expensive downtown parking

Isn't requiring driving itself a form of regressive tax? Forcing people to purchase and maintain expensive cars, pay for gas, pay for expensive downtown parking, etc? "Here's this nice shiny new road, it's yours for free! All you have to do is pay $500/month in car expenses to use it. For Free!" And improving one road requires further improvements to other roads as traffic increases due to induced demand. City streets (and parking) is extremely expensive to improve, so after you spend billions of dollars to feed cars into downtown more efficiently, how do you address downtown congestion and parking?

colanderman 11y ago
As someone who works a block from the big dig, I can say that street traffic is generally not an issue. People generally use the big dig to commute through Boston, or to get to the airport, not to get downtown. (There's not much downtown for tourists!) Those in the suburbs (of which I was one) drive to train/subway stations on the outskirts and take those in. You'd be an absolute fool to try to drive into the mess of one-way streets that is downtown Boston unless you have a really good reason.
givinguflac 11y ago
Public transit used the same roads, no one "requires" one to drive.
- Johnny555 11y ago
  Ahh yes, "Here you go, since you can't afford a car, you should ride this nice shiny bus! Picks up you blocks from home, drops you off blocks from work, and guaranteed to take at least a long as a car commute, but probably much longer!" Buses make good feeders to trains, but aren't so good for main routes. If you want people to use transit, it needs to be usable. BRT is a good compromise. I've done a cross-town bus commute and that was a good commute, the bus was crowded, but tolerable for 15 - 20 minutes. But then I moved and tried a longer distance bus commute from the suburbs to work, but didn't stick with it as it took 45 minutes longer than driving (30 minutes by car, 75 minutes by bus), and dropped me off a 15 minute walk from work. I could bike in about the same amount of time as taking the bus. A road accident meant that the bus could take even longer since it had to sit in the same traffic. My current commute is much farther by miles, but shorter by time because I now live where I can take a train. Limited stop express trains are great. Full grade separation would be even better (to reduce delays due to accidents), but taking the train is faster than driving so I wouldn't even consider taking the car.

colanderman 11y ago

As someone who works a block from the big dig, I can say that street traffic is generally not an issue. People generally use the big dig to commute through Boston, or to get to the airport, not to get downtown. (There's not much downtown for tourists!) Those in the suburbs (of which I was one) drive to train/subway stations on the outskirts and take those in. You'd be an absolute fool to try to drive into the mess of one-way streets that is downtown Boston unless you have a really good reason.

givinguflac 11y ago

Public transit used the same roads, no one "requires" one to drive.

Johnny555 11y ago
Ahh yes, "Here you go, since you can't afford a car, you should ride this nice shiny bus! Picks up you blocks from home, drops you off blocks from work, and guaranteed to take at least a long as a car commute, but probably much longer!" Buses make good feeders to trains, but aren't so good for main routes. If you want people to use transit, it needs to be usable. BRT is a good compromise. I've done a cross-town bus commute and that was a good commute, the bus was crowded, but tolerable for 15 - 20 minutes. But then I moved and tried a longer distance bus commute from the suburbs to work, but didn't stick with it as it took 45 minutes longer than driving (30 minutes by car, 75 minutes by bus), and dropped me off a 15 minute walk from work. I could bike in about the same amount of time as taking the bus. A road accident meant that the bus could take even longer since it had to sit in the same traffic. My current commute is much farther by miles, but shorter by time because I now live where I can take a train. Limited stop express trains are great. Full grade separation would be even better (to reduce delays due to accidents), but taking the train is faster than driving so I wouldn't even consider taking the car.