3 ms·

Awesome, London's got 2.6E6 registered cars according to https://www.statista.com/statistics/314980/licensed-cars-in-london-england-united-kingdom/ https://www.

by donjoe 9y ago

Awesome, London's got 2.6E6 registered cars according to https://www.statista.com/statistics/314980/licensed-cars-in-london-england-united-kingdom/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/314980/licensed-cars-in-.... Since by your estimation, 50% of traffic during rush hour is private, these cars need a space to park. A parked car needs roughly 8sqm. That's 2.6E6 * 0.5 * 8sqm = 10 400 000sqm of parking area (plus commuters which are obviously not included) covered by cars not moved more than a couple of mins/day. And I bet 50% of the traffic wouldn't functionally harm cities, it would simply harm people's selfishness. A car is - in most of the cases - unnecessary and simply used as a status symbol.

barrkel 9y ago
Whoa, you're leaping to some conclusions there - most cars owned by Londoners are not used for commuting, they're for shopping, moving kids around, that kind of thing - things that public transport is a poor substitute for. Things like congestion charging apply only to the centre, where the congestion is, and that's where my comments apply. Most of the cars owned by Londoners are not in central London.
- zimpenfish 9y ago
  > things that public transport is a poor substitute for Largely because public transport is underfunded in London and, of course, ridiculously hampered by the car traffic. Try getting a bus down the A2 in peak hours or at the weekend. It's often quicker to walk. That's why people end up getting cars and ... making things worse for everyone.
  - Angostura 9y ago
    Nope. I certainly wouldn't be able to carry my weekly shop on the bus. And public transport is, in my opinion pretty well funded here.
    - donjoe 9y ago
      I love the irony. Moving 2 tons to buy 1kg of bread ;) delivery services as an alternative? It would work out if people wanted to...
      - barrkel 9y ago
        Delivery services means delegating your choice of fresh produce. Incentives are not aligned; the lowest bidder will not do as good a job as the consumer. From direct experience: food delivery works well enough for branded, processed and other long shelf life products. It's not bad for meat, as long as you're ordering from a specialist and not a supermarket (and of course there is a price premium). It's not good at all for fruit or vegetables, with current suppliers. Goods are bruised, mouldy, unripe, overripe, etc. It's also useless for bread; you always get yesterday's bread.
        martinald 9y ago
        Not true in my experience; stuff in the physical shops is often worse best before date wise than the online delivery. All of the online delivery services will instantly refund and produce with no questions ask that you say is bad quality.
      - Angostura 9y ago
        If your weekly shop consists of 1kg of bread, you and I have somewhat different life-styles.
- grey-area 9y ago
  Cars are not necessary in almost all parts of London. Removing them would vastly improve quality of life.
  - barrkel 9y ago
    This is ridiculous: you're just arguing by assertion. Give some evidence for your assertions, please! Cars aren't necessary, of course; we could get by with horses and carts. But removing them would not "vastly improve" quality of life. I live in Greater London, about 12 miles from where I work (35 minutes by scooter, 55 minutes by public transport if you time it perfectly, average 1h20 if you don't). My preferred supermarket is 3.9 miles away by road, about 40 minutes by bus or 12 minutes by car (though I normally go by scooter). Would my life be better without a motorised vehicle? My opinion is it definitely would not! Either I'd need to severely reduce my choices in purchasing or commit to spending significantly more of my life on and waiting for public transport. Neither of these would vastly improve my quality of life.
ekianjo 9y ago
This is ridiculous. Most people have cars because they need them. Try raising kids without a car to move them around, its a lot trickier than you can imagine.
- kybernetikos 9y ago
  And most people need them because most people have them. I know of families in ecotowns that don't have cars. The tram service covers nearly everything they need, and when they do actually need a car, they get a car-share/rental. The infrastructure where they live is set up for this, to the extent that owning a car is awkward, because you're not allowed to park it anywhere near the houses, but it's fine because there are such good facilities for people without cars in that area. The point is that we need cars because we don't have good facilities for not having cars, and we don't have good facilities because we all have cars.
- seishun 9y ago
  Not really. I was raised without a car just fine, as was most of my generation.
- flarg 9y ago
  Totally agree. I am of the generation that grew up without a car and life was pretty tough on public transport and it meant we couldn't do things like shop efficiently and price consciously because we had to think how we would carry our purchases home. I still use public transport as much as I can, and the traffic in London is such that it's often a viable option, but a car is also a necessity.

by donjoe 9y ago

barrkel 9y ago

Whoa, you're leaping to some conclusions there - most cars owned by Londoners are not used for commuting, they're for shopping, moving kids around, that kind of thing - things that public transport is a poor substitute for. Things like congestion charging apply only to the centre, where the congestion is, and that's where my comments apply. Most of the cars owned by Londoners are not in central London.

zimpenfish 9y ago
> things that public transport is a poor substitute for Largely because public transport is underfunded in London and, of course, ridiculously hampered by the car traffic. Try getting a bus down the A2 in peak hours or at the weekend. It's often quicker to walk. That's why people end up getting cars and ... making things worse for everyone.
- Angostura 9y ago
  Nope. I certainly wouldn't be able to carry my weekly shop on the bus. And public transport is, in my opinion pretty well funded here.
  - donjoe 9y ago
    I love the irony. Moving 2 tons to buy 1kg of bread ;) delivery services as an alternative? It would work out if people wanted to...
    - barrkel 9y ago
      Delivery services means delegating your choice of fresh produce. Incentives are not aligned; the lowest bidder will not do as good a job as the consumer. From direct experience: food delivery works well enough for branded, processed and other long shelf life products. It's not bad for meat, as long as you're ordering from a specialist and not a supermarket (and of course there is a price premium). It's not good at all for fruit or vegetables, with current suppliers. Goods are bruised, mouldy, unripe, overripe, etc. It's also useless for bread; you always get yesterday's bread.
      - martinald 9y ago
        Not true in my experience; stuff in the physical shops is often worse best before date wise than the online delivery. All of the online delivery services will instantly refund and produce with no questions ask that you say is bad quality.
    - Angostura 9y ago
      If your weekly shop consists of 1kg of bread, you and I have somewhat different life-styles.
grey-area 9y ago
Cars are not necessary in almost all parts of London. Removing them would vastly improve quality of life.
- barrkel 9y ago
  This is ridiculous: you're just arguing by assertion. Give some evidence for your assertions, please! Cars aren't necessary, of course; we could get by with horses and carts. But removing them would not "vastly improve" quality of life. I live in Greater London, about 12 miles from where I work (35 minutes by scooter, 55 minutes by public transport if you time it perfectly, average 1h20 if you don't). My preferred supermarket is 3.9 miles away by road, about 40 minutes by bus or 12 minutes by car (though I normally go by scooter). Would my life be better without a motorised vehicle? My opinion is it definitely would not! Either I'd need to severely reduce my choices in purchasing or commit to spending significantly more of my life on and waiting for public transport. Neither of these would vastly improve my quality of life.

ekianjo 9y ago

This is ridiculous. Most people have cars because they need them. Try raising kids without a car to move them around, its a lot trickier than you can imagine.

kybernetikos 9y ago
And most people need them because most people have them. I know of families in ecotowns that don't have cars. The tram service covers nearly everything they need, and when they do actually need a car, they get a car-share/rental. The infrastructure where they live is set up for this, to the extent that owning a car is awkward, because you're not allowed to park it anywhere near the houses, but it's fine because there are such good facilities for people without cars in that area. The point is that we need cars because we don't have good facilities for not having cars, and we don't have good facilities because we all have cars.
seishun 9y ago
Not really. I was raised without a car just fine, as was most of my generation.
flarg 9y ago
Totally agree. I am of the generation that grew up without a car and life was pretty tough on public transport and it meant we couldn't do things like shop efficiently and price consciously because we had to think how we would carry our purchases home. I still use public transport as much as I can, and the traffic in London is such that it's often a viable option, but a car is also a necessity.