3 ms·

I never shop anywhere I can't park at

by kylec 10y ago

op00to 10y ago
I only step foot in the mall when I must. I much prefer to walk to the corner grocery store or take the train to a downtown shopping district. I suppose we cancel each other out.
- s0rce 10y ago
  You probably live in a walkable city with good public transit, the parent poster probably lives in the other 95% of the USA.
  - TulliusCicero 10y ago
    And the reason transit sucks and cars are way more convenient in 95% of the USA is exactly what we're discussing: mandates from the government that prioritize cars over other modes.
    - gbrs 10y ago
      I think the problem is that to transition to a public transit model would require the transportation to be built first. It would also require the public transit to operate at a loss for a decade or two while buildings and people transition to this new mode of transportation. Many people are against this in the US because it's expensive and nobody likes tax hikes. Also people love their cars.
      - TulliusCicero 10y ago
        Transit already exists in the US, it just usually sucks. And you're never going to get radical, system-wide improvement in one shot in a car-dominant area. But there's nothing stopping us from releasing mandatory minimum parking requirements while gradually improving transit, biking, and walking. Removing the minimums doesn't erase parking overnight. > It would also require the public transit to operate at a loss for a decade or two while buildings and people transition to this new mode of transportation. Transit always operates at a loss, same as driving, or biking, or walking. > Many people are against this in the US because it's expensive and nobody likes tax hikes. Agreed, politically it's up in the air whether this will work. Mostly it is region-dependent, with a bunch of metros actually passing tax hikes to fund better transit the other day: http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/north-america/nearly-70-of-us-transit-ballot-measures-pass.html http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/north-america/nearly-70... > Also people love their cars. Two things: 1. Again, this is largely a chicken and egg situation. Over the course of decades, we've created an environment that's good for cars and hostile to everything else. People are mostly pretty rational about their personal transportation choices, and they quite rationally prefer the method that's much better supported, because it works better. But when other modes work well, people will choose them too. 2. The younger generation does not like cars as much as previous ones. There's a steady shift underway.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
hx87 10y ago
What if parking were plentiful but cost $16?

I never shop anywhere I can't park at

by kylec 10y ago

I never shop anywhere I can't park at

I only step foot in the mall when I must. I much prefer to walk to the corner grocery store or take the train to a downtown shopping district. I suppose we cancel each other out.

s0rce 10y ago
You probably live in a walkable city with good public transit, the parent poster probably lives in the other 95% of the USA.
- TulliusCicero 10y ago
  And the reason transit sucks and cars are way more convenient in 95% of the USA is exactly what we're discussing: mandates from the government that prioritize cars over other modes.
  - gbrs 10y ago
    I think the problem is that to transition to a public transit model would require the transportation to be built first. It would also require the public transit to operate at a loss for a decade or two while buildings and people transition to this new mode of transportation. Many people are against this in the US because it's expensive and nobody likes tax hikes. Also people love their cars.
    - TulliusCicero 10y ago
      Transit already exists in the US, it just usually sucks. And you're never going to get radical, system-wide improvement in one shot in a car-dominant area. But there's nothing stopping us from releasing mandatory minimum parking requirements while gradually improving transit, biking, and walking. Removing the minimums doesn't erase parking overnight. > It would also require the public transit to operate at a loss for a decade or two while buildings and people transition to this new mode of transportation. Transit always operates at a loss, same as driving, or biking, or walking. > Many people are against this in the US because it's expensive and nobody likes tax hikes. Agreed, politically it's up in the air whether this will work. Mostly it is region-dependent, with a bunch of metros actually passing tax hikes to fund better transit the other day: http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/north-america/nearly-70-of-us-transit-ballot-measures-pass.html http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/north-america/nearly-70... > Also people love their cars. Two things: 1. Again, this is largely a chicken and egg situation. Over the course of decades, we've created an environment that's good for cars and hostile to everything else. People are mostly pretty rational about their personal transportation choices, and they quite rationally prefer the method that's much better supported, because it works better. But when other modes work well, people will choose them too. 2. The younger generation does not like cars as much as previous ones. There's a steady shift underway.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

hx87 10y ago

What if parking were plentiful but cost $16?