4 ms·

> Public transportation doesn't scale this especially well, as anybody using public transport knows, but this article is a nice summary Then how do cities like

> Public transportation doesn't scale this especially well, as anybody using public transport knows, but this article is a nice summary Then how do cities like Singapore, with a population density of nearly 8k people per square km, have far less traffic than pretty much any major US city? They make public transportation work, and if you've ever been there, you'd know it works really well. Just because western countries haven't figured it out yet doesn't mean that it can't work at all. Public transportation in the US sucks because the US, as a whole, wants it to suck.

mc32 9y ago
Well, there are a couple of reasons they can make it work: -Tax cars really highly. -Have car quotas -Suppress dissent and in practice a one party system -Build out public transit -Pop Density. -No land for sprawl available.
- jacobolus 9y ago
  You don’t need to run a one-party police state in order to have a functioning public transit system or limit urban car use, and it’s entirely possible to have a one-party police state while also having car-dependent suburban sprawl.
  - mc32 9y ago
    Granted. I'm just pointing out those were the reasons it was "easy" to pull off in SG.
- akgerber 9y ago
  Japan also has excellent public transportation, and is much less restrictive than Singapore. In major metro areas, its rail systems even make a profit. It has sprawl but it's far less auto-oriented than the US. Some major factors are: -expressways are almost all tolled -carbuyers are required to demonstrate that they own/rent a parking space, rather than policy than mandates every new housing unit and business have enough parking that demand is more than sated even at zero cost -zoning that allows sufficiently-dense land use such that most residences are within a short walk of a rail station— this station usually has groceries and other necessities nearby, as well as schools within walking distance
yorwba 9y ago
> Public transportation in the US sucks because the US, as a whole, wants it to suck. Rather, public transportation sucks, so everyone who can afford a car (and some who can't) buy a car and use it, so they don't care very much that public transportation sucks; they instead are annoyed that private transportation sucks and want that to improve (e.g. by having an AI deal with driving). They don't see public transportation as a solution to the problem they experience, even if it would solve the problem that brought them into that situation. FWIW, I have always relied on public transportation in any western country I have been to and while it could have been better sometimes (e.g. rural bus schedules requiring you to plan around them) I don't think it's too bad either. I don't know how Singapore compares, but usable public transportation is definitely also common elsewhere.
- candiodari 9y ago
  By the way, what about the victims of this public transport attitude ? Such as this making it impossible for disabled and elderly to do groceries ? (and let's not forget things like Amazon just don't work unless they exploit delivery men if you do choose to answer this question)
  - yorwba 9y ago
    Are you implying that public transport, which in Europe is required to have accessibility measures like ramps and elevators, is worse for someone in a wheelchair than a regular car they would never fit in (let alone in the driver seat)? Most elderly also benefit from the same measures. EDIT: I don't really understand the Amazon question. Maybe I didn't understand the original question either.
    - candiodari 9y ago
      1) Cars are accessible for wheelchair users (obviously they are modified for this purpose, which is less than you'd think) [1] [2] [3] 2) public transport is not wheelchair accessible. We have trains from the 70s on the track, and aside from multiple steps and a gap, there are no places for wheelchairs. Buses are a little better, but not really usable either. When push comes to shove, this requires people to lift the wheelchair and put it on the train/bus, then help you on the bus as well. If bystanders don't do this, I guarantee out here the driver won't either. For trains, you are supremely unlikely to find anyone of the public transport companies in the station, and nobody helping wheelchair bound people on the bus. Plus, you never, ever see wheelchairs on the train. Note that if you look at the videos below you see that in most cases, disabled people need (much) more time to get aboard a vehicle. This is not available in public transport and is available in private cars. Furthermore, wheelchair users (as visible in the second video) (and obviously only up to a certain level of disability) are not just able to use cars, but are able to carry and move heavy loads using them, like groceries. So once again, an argument in favor of cars once a good look at reality is added to it. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0usQ1LksSA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0usQ1LksSA [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTuMw6rtsxA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTuMw6rtsxA [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMvvQOeBDfY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMvvQOeBDfY

mc32 9y ago

Well, there are a couple of reasons they can make it work: -Tax cars really highly. -Have car quotas -Suppress dissent and in practice a one party system -Build out public transit -Pop Density. -No land for sprawl available.

jacobolus 9y ago
You don’t need to run a one-party police state in order to have a functioning public transit system or limit urban car use, and it’s entirely possible to have a one-party police state while also having car-dependent suburban sprawl.
- mc32 9y ago
  Granted. I'm just pointing out those were the reasons it was "easy" to pull off in SG.
akgerber 9y ago
Japan also has excellent public transportation, and is much less restrictive than Singapore. In major metro areas, its rail systems even make a profit. It has sprawl but it's far less auto-oriented than the US. Some major factors are: -expressways are almost all tolled -carbuyers are required to demonstrate that they own/rent a parking space, rather than policy than mandates every new housing unit and business have enough parking that demand is more than sated even at zero cost -zoning that allows sufficiently-dense land use such that most residences are within a short walk of a rail station— this station usually has groceries and other necessities nearby, as well as schools within walking distance

yorwba 9y ago

> Public transportation in the US sucks because the US, as a whole, wants it to suck. Rather, public transportation sucks, so everyone who can afford a car (and some who can't) buy a car and use it, so they don't care very much that public transportation sucks; they instead are annoyed that private transportation sucks and want that to improve (e.g. by having an AI deal with driving). They don't see public transportation as a solution to the problem they experience, even if it would solve the problem that brought them into that situation. FWIW, I have always relied on public transportation in any western country I have been to and while it could have been better sometimes (e.g. rural bus schedules requiring you to plan around them) I don't think it's too bad either. I don't know how Singapore compares, but usable public transportation is definitely also common elsewhere.

candiodari 9y ago
By the way, what about the victims of this public transport attitude ? Such as this making it impossible for disabled and elderly to do groceries ? (and let's not forget things like Amazon just don't work unless they exploit delivery men if you do choose to answer this question)
- yorwba 9y ago
  Are you implying that public transport, which in Europe is required to have accessibility measures like ramps and elevators, is worse for someone in a wheelchair than a regular car they would never fit in (let alone in the driver seat)? Most elderly also benefit from the same measures. EDIT: I don't really understand the Amazon question. Maybe I didn't understand the original question either.
  - candiodari 9y ago
    1) Cars are accessible for wheelchair users (obviously they are modified for this purpose, which is less than you'd think) [1] [2] [3] 2) public transport is not wheelchair accessible. We have trains from the 70s on the track, and aside from multiple steps and a gap, there are no places for wheelchairs. Buses are a little better, but not really usable either. When push comes to shove, this requires people to lift the wheelchair and put it on the train/bus, then help you on the bus as well. If bystanders don't do this, I guarantee out here the driver won't either. For trains, you are supremely unlikely to find anyone of the public transport companies in the station, and nobody helping wheelchair bound people on the bus. Plus, you never, ever see wheelchairs on the train. Note that if you look at the videos below you see that in most cases, disabled people need (much) more time to get aboard a vehicle. This is not available in public transport and is available in private cars. Furthermore, wheelchair users (as visible in the second video) (and obviously only up to a certain level of disability) are not just able to use cars, but are able to carry and move heavy loads using them, like groceries. So once again, an argument in favor of cars once a good look at reality is added to it. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0usQ1LksSA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0usQ1LksSA [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTuMw6rtsxA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTuMw6rtsxA [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMvvQOeBDfY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMvvQOeBDfY