6 ms·

I agree with the idea that car-based transportation is inefficient. However, people will not get rid of it until they are forced to.

zucker42 6y ago
People don't have to be forced to get rid of cars, they just have to be incentivized to get rid of cars. That can be done by increasing the convenience of other options compared to cars or by decreasing the price of other options compared to cars.
- AnthonyMouse 6y ago
  It would go a long way to even make it possible to get rid of cars. There are huge swathes of America which aren't within a mile of mass transit. And you can't fix that with more mass transit, because the density there isn't high enough to justify it -- a bus with one rider is worse than a car. What you need is to get rid of zoning density restrictions. That's the only way for more people to live close enough to things for walking and mass transit to be viable.
  - danans 6y ago
    > There are huge swathes of America which aren't within a mile of mass transit. > What you need is to get rid of zoning density restrictions. Most of those places were built for and are still dominated by the votes of people who don't want more density and transit options, for a variety of reasons, some reasonable, and others based in the nation's sordid racial history. I don't agree with those people, but until the settled, voting population inhabiting those vast swathes gets significantly younger and more pro-transit and density, I don't see what you call for happening soon.
    - AnthonyMouse 6y ago
      This is one of the few instances where doing something at a more central (e.g. statewide) level of government could be productive.
      - danans 6y ago
        That's exactly what the state of CA has been doing with recent state bills that override local density restrictions.
princekolt 6y ago
The problem with the US is that people are scared of buses. A bunch of people from SF told me the buses were not good, but when I visited I took several and they were consistently good, and were never empty, just the frequency could be a lot better. They were a lot noisier than the buses in Europe, though.
- pm90 6y ago
  You are greatly minimizing the problems that most Americans face. Most American cities are not dense enough to require good public transportation options (the exception being NYC); without enough density (and lack of public funding), public transportation is short on cash and often very inconvenient. If you miss your bus, you have to wait an absurd amount of time for the next available one. Also good luck with hauling in all the groceries and stuff you need into your suburban home using only buses.... simply not possible. So there are multiple factors at play. Short of a massive change in the way American cities are designed or some innovation that greatly reduces the cost of building public transportation, cars will continue to be something Americans absolutely need for surviving.
- mjevans 6y ago
  My understanding as an average American (in this context) is that in European cities there are nice, fairly frequent, commuter trains and rail; and often also busses. In the US, mostly the only 'good' bus service is geared for 9-5 workers in big offices in big cities. Anything outside of that tends to run across the economic divide that: people who take the bus _have_ to take the bus, while taking the car is a luxury in time, freedom, and isolation from possibly literally unwashed masses (who might also literally be taking the bus in the summer for a place to have some AC and safety with a seat). The issue is very much related to classism and a lack of social safety nets and inclusion.
  - CameronNemo 6y ago
    Another factor to consider is the age of the cities involved. Most European cities predate cars, while many American cities were built up after or during the the rise of the automobile.

zucker42 6y ago

People don't have to be forced to get rid of cars, they just have to be incentivized to get rid of cars. That can be done by increasing the convenience of other options compared to cars or by decreasing the price of other options compared to cars.

AnthonyMouse 6y ago
It would go a long way to even make it possible to get rid of cars. There are huge swathes of America which aren't within a mile of mass transit. And you can't fix that with more mass transit, because the density there isn't high enough to justify it -- a bus with one rider is worse than a car. What you need is to get rid of zoning density restrictions. That's the only way for more people to live close enough to things for walking and mass transit to be viable.
- danans 6y ago
  > There are huge swathes of America which aren't within a mile of mass transit. > What you need is to get rid of zoning density restrictions. Most of those places were built for and are still dominated by the votes of people who don't want more density and transit options, for a variety of reasons, some reasonable, and others based in the nation's sordid racial history. I don't agree with those people, but until the settled, voting population inhabiting those vast swathes gets significantly younger and more pro-transit and density, I don't see what you call for happening soon.
  - AnthonyMouse 6y ago
    This is one of the few instances where doing something at a more central (e.g. statewide) level of government could be productive.
    - danans 6y ago
      That's exactly what the state of CA has been doing with recent state bills that override local density restrictions.

princekolt 6y ago

The problem with the US is that people are scared of buses. A bunch of people from SF told me the buses were not good, but when I visited I took several and they were consistently good, and were never empty, just the frequency could be a lot better. They were a lot noisier than the buses in Europe, though.

pm90 6y ago
You are greatly minimizing the problems that most Americans face. Most American cities are not dense enough to require good public transportation options (the exception being NYC); without enough density (and lack of public funding), public transportation is short on cash and often very inconvenient. If you miss your bus, you have to wait an absurd amount of time for the next available one. Also good luck with hauling in all the groceries and stuff you need into your suburban home using only buses.... simply not possible. So there are multiple factors at play. Short of a massive change in the way American cities are designed or some innovation that greatly reduces the cost of building public transportation, cars will continue to be something Americans absolutely need for surviving.
mjevans 6y ago
My understanding as an average American (in this context) is that in European cities there are nice, fairly frequent, commuter trains and rail; and often also busses. In the US, mostly the only 'good' bus service is geared for 9-5 workers in big offices in big cities. Anything outside of that tends to run across the economic divide that: people who take the bus _have_ to take the bus, while taking the car is a luxury in time, freedom, and isolation from possibly literally unwashed masses (who might also literally be taking the bus in the summer for a place to have some AC and safety with a seat). The issue is very much related to classism and a lack of social safety nets and inclusion.
- CameronNemo 6y ago
  Another factor to consider is the age of the cities involved. Most European cities predate cars, while many American cities were built up after or during the the rise of the automobile.