4 ms·
Alright, there are some options: a) keep everything as is. Leave up to 80% of public space to cars (as in L.A. for example), destroy all social interactions wh
by donjoe 6y ago
Alright, there are some options:
a) keep everything as is. Leave up to 80% of public space to cars (as in L.A. for example), destroy all social interactions which could otherwise happen in those places, increase commute time due to cities designed around long distances and destroy our environment.
b) buy a new bicycle and a good rain coat, use our feet, expand public transport, improve our wellbeing by doing some exercise, reduce obesity and diabetes, socialize in public space again and save tons of tax payer's money. Whilst saving the life of 1.2m people.
Which one sounds better to you?
- LoSboccacc 6y agothis isn't a proposal but wishful thinking there's a load of people, especially in big cities, that commute further than feasible with bicycle. and no, people will not want to live within biking range from heavy industry.
- throwaway316943 6y agoB only applies to relatively wealthy, childless people living close to where they work. A is a straw man. There’s no innovation there. We need to redesign roads so that they are invisible and uncongestible. We either have to do personal air travel, which we don’t have the power density for yet or underground which is looking more promising. All people moving cars need to be electric and self driving. A car should be like a universal elevator, just get in and push a button. That’s the best option, 0 time dedicated to piloting your body through space and you’re able to live anywhere and work anywhere.