4 ms·

If you live in any first world city (aka not the US), you know that's the case.

• kcorbitt 9y ago
  I realize you're trying to be snarky, but it's worth pointing out that the original definition of "First World" was the set of countries economically/politically aligned with the USA. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_World https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_World
  • H4CK3RM4N 9y ago
    I love that the second world is implicitly the soviet countries, but it's disappeared from common use.
    • mmahemoff 9y ago
      Even better, a lot of those countries in central Europe went ahead and leapfrogged the "first world" in terms of infrastructure and digital services.
• oh_sigh 9y ago
  First world is literally defined as aligning with the US. I have to guess you've never been to NYC, Chicago, San Fran, LA, etc if you want to snarkily dismiss them as "not first world"
  • TillE 9y ago
    Everywhere in the US outside of the borough of Manhattan has fairly awful public transit options. Feel free to sub in "developed country" to make the joke work better.
    • oh_sigh 9y ago
      Is public transit the only measure of a developed city? Perhaps public transit fulfills a different role in a country where car ownership is aspirational and currently at < 10% vs a country where car ownership is the norm and >90%
      • dasloop 9y ago
        Los Angeles and Manhattan are still in the same country? The quality of public transport is related to density, public money and proper policies not the % of owned cars.