3 ms·

I'm sure I'll get some angry responses here like I did in some of my previous comments (someone implied I was poor or something because they thought that I coul

I'm sure I'll get some angry responses here like I did in some of my previous comments (someone implied I was poor or something because they thought that I couldn't afford 3 cars???), but I so far couldn't agree more with this article. I voted for Biden and lean independent, so this isn't political. But this infrastructure bill is largely a jobs and pork program and isn't meaningful change. We don't need more new highways. "In the 2010 stimulus package, my community received millions for a new road. Guess what? That gave us some short-term construction jobs, but now my community has a new overengineered, overbuilt road to maintain. Forever. This is what infrastructure is: a forever obligation." Yep. And ya know what? Building trains isn't going to solve the problem either. Why build a train when you go from one city to another and you just have to rent a car when you get there anyway? Trains work when you have desirable places to go once you step off the train. Maybe if we're lucky those places will spring up around the train station(s). And even if you largely disagree with the article, at least appreciate that someone is challenging the status quo in an honest, if not ideological way, who wants to make America a better, more sustainable place. I feel frustrated on a routine basis that nobody ever questions every family having all these cars, maintaining them, paying insurance, and building and maintaining new roads and highways versus like, just building differently instead of the suburbs and strip malls. I do live in the suburbs, and it's not all bad. It's easy to get in my car and drive a mile down the road and get a coffee from McDonald's, what's not to love? And my Amazon Prime packages from some warehouse never get stolen. Hell, most days I don't need to leave near my house or talk to anybody, I can just interact with them on social media instead. (-edit- /s) Ok, I do admit there are some nice things. Having a yard (aside from the constant mowing noises, weed killer, etc.) has some nice benefits. We did condense down to one car at least since we don't have kids.

ardit33 6y ago
I disagree with you on the trains part. Where do you live? There are parts of the country where trains are a must for everyday commuters, and intercity commuters. NYC, Boston, DC, etc... Do you realize that the north-east corridor is already profitable, and it is used a lot. (NYC, D.C. and Boston part). Its profits go to subsidize other routes. That corridor needs a high-speed portion, but there has always been political oppositions to it, and this bill doesn't do much, or hasn't specified anything. Seems like a Obama 'shovel ready' infra plan 2.0, it didn't accomplish anything meaningful and lasting to the country. This looks the same.
- ericmay 6y ago
  I live in Columbus, Ohio. There are talks about expanding lines from here to Cleveland and Cincinnati and other locations. I love the idea of that, but it's just not a good use of money right now. There's nowhere to go once you get there. You need walkability. If you get there and have to rent a car most people would save the $100 or whatever and just drive an hour and a half or two hours. And yea the east coast is different. Is the west coast? Idk. For most of the rest of America it's unfortunately not feasible in the current state of things. There are exceptions of course.
LegitShady 6y ago
I disagree on the train provided the route is built on an already heavy commuter route. Even if they need to rent a car at the other end that's still a huge net benefit to reducing the load on the route as it exists now, as well as increasing the overall system efficiency. And putting trains on tracks is easy. You aren't building trains you're building train track routes that can be used by many trains.
andrewzah 6y ago
> I do live in the suburbs, and it's not all bad. It's easy to get in my car and drive a mile down the road and get a coffee from McDonald's, what's not to love? [U.S.] Suburbs become unpalatable once you live somewhere that actually cares about public transit and designed the city accordingly. E.g. Seoul. With mixed residential and commercial businesses, one never has to walk more than 5 minutes to get groceries, if that. Trains and busses will take you anywhere you want. Of course, you can still have a car, but it simply is obviated unless you have a specific need to move furniture, etc. After having experienced that, I absolutely detest having to hop in my car to drive and get groceries, etc, because there is -nothing- but houses in my suburb area. It makes me rather depressed knowing what people are missing out on, what life is capable of being like. A well-run, comprehensive train and bus system like that will probably never happen in the US. edit: I am speaking specifically about suburbs in the US. I don't think other countries design suburbs nearly as car-centric and isolated as the U.S. does.
- chrisseaton 6y ago
  People have such curious idea of what a suburb has to be like. I live in a suburb in the UK. We have groceries in walking distance. I can get a train or a bus anywhere I want. This is all achievable without building a metropolis like Seoul. I don't understand why people hear suburb and think unwalkable and no public transport. It's normal in other places.
  - andrewzah 6y ago
    I suppose I should clarify that I'm talking about suburbs in the US. They're not designed for humans, but for cars. And public transportation is largely a joke outside of a few cities.
  - ericmay 6y ago
    Most often they're Americans where in the suburbs you can't walk to groceries even if they're in distance unless you want to walk on the highway. There's no public transport either. Like there's nothing at all. People drive a quarter mile because the environment is so hostile.
  - 6y ago

ardit33 6y ago

I disagree with you on the trains part. Where do you live? There are parts of the country where trains are a must for everyday commuters, and intercity commuters. NYC, Boston, DC, etc... Do you realize that the north-east corridor is already profitable, and it is used a lot. (NYC, D.C. and Boston part). Its profits go to subsidize other routes. That corridor needs a high-speed portion, but there has always been political oppositions to it, and this bill doesn't do much, or hasn't specified anything. Seems like a Obama 'shovel ready' infra plan 2.0, it didn't accomplish anything meaningful and lasting to the country. This looks the same.

ericmay 6y ago
I live in Columbus, Ohio. There are talks about expanding lines from here to Cleveland and Cincinnati and other locations. I love the idea of that, but it's just not a good use of money right now. There's nowhere to go once you get there. You need walkability. If you get there and have to rent a car most people would save the $100 or whatever and just drive an hour and a half or two hours. And yea the east coast is different. Is the west coast? Idk. For most of the rest of America it's unfortunately not feasible in the current state of things. There are exceptions of course.

LegitShady 6y ago

I disagree on the train provided the route is built on an already heavy commuter route. Even if they need to rent a car at the other end that's still a huge net benefit to reducing the load on the route as it exists now, as well as increasing the overall system efficiency. And putting trains on tracks is easy. You aren't building trains you're building train track routes that can be used by many trains.

andrewzah 6y ago

> I do live in the suburbs, and it's not all bad. It's easy to get in my car and drive a mile down the road and get a coffee from McDonald's, what's not to love? [U.S.] Suburbs become unpalatable once you live somewhere that actually cares about public transit and designed the city accordingly. E.g. Seoul. With mixed residential and commercial businesses, one never has to walk more than 5 minutes to get groceries, if that. Trains and busses will take you anywhere you want. Of course, you can still have a car, but it simply is obviated unless you have a specific need to move furniture, etc. After having experienced that, I absolutely detest having to hop in my car to drive and get groceries, etc, because there is -nothing- but houses in my suburb area. It makes me rather depressed knowing what people are missing out on, what life is capable of being like. A well-run, comprehensive train and bus system like that will probably never happen in the US. edit: I am speaking specifically about suburbs in the US. I don't think other countries design suburbs nearly as car-centric and isolated as the U.S. does.

chrisseaton 6y ago
People have such curious idea of what a suburb has to be like. I live in a suburb in the UK. We have groceries in walking distance. I can get a train or a bus anywhere I want. This is all achievable without building a metropolis like Seoul. I don't understand why people hear suburb and think unwalkable and no public transport. It's normal in other places.
- andrewzah 6y ago
  I suppose I should clarify that I'm talking about suburbs in the US. They're not designed for humans, but for cars. And public transportation is largely a joke outside of a few cities.
- ericmay 6y ago
  Most often they're Americans where in the suburbs you can't walk to groceries even if they're in distance unless you want to walk on the highway. There's no public transport either. Like there's nothing at all. People drive a quarter mile because the environment is so hostile.
- 6y ago