4 ms·

Mass transit, like higher density living, requires a stronger, more homogeneous, polite and less individualistic culture than the US has. A major driver of the

Mass transit, like higher density living, requires a stronger, more homogeneous, polite and less individualistic culture than the US has. A major driver of the growth of the suburbs was the abandonment of the cities and immediate neighborhoods around them, mainly by catholic ethnics as their neighborhoods were de-homogenized. (Catholicism has always been more urban-friendly than the native US protestant culture.) At root it boils down to social trust, which has been and will continue to keep falling in the US and elsewhere in the west. Despite my preferences, I expect remote work to take the place of high density living: it's just more compatible with the highly individualistic ethos we have.

danans 5y ago
> Mass transit, like higher density living, requires a stronger, more homogeneous, polite and less individualistic culture than the US has. A society doesn't have to be Singapore or Beijing to have viable alternatives to cars for moving the population around. I've been in few places that are more diverse, rude, and individualistic than New York City, London, and Paris yet they all have excellent (by American standards) mass transit systems. The Bay Area, a more "polite" region, has arguably worse transit. Furthermore, the most homogeneous and polite parts of the United States have the worst mass transit. I suspect it has more to do with historical suburban planning decisions (redlining, mass transit unfriendly zoning) designed to enforce homogeneity than it has to do with broad cultural generalizations.
- recursivedoubts 5y ago
  All those major cities developed their mass transit systems long ago in far different environments than they exist in them today. If you don't have strong cultural norms (and in NY, anyway, you do have a sort of lowest-common-denominator norm: you don't talk to strangers on the subway) you end up with people abandoning public transit. Zoning is and was certainly an issue, but without stronger social consensus you are going to have a hard time getting folks back into a shared space. I prefer denser living and would love to see it, but I view both sides of the political spectrum as sharing blame for the problem, and neither one willing to compromise on, or, frankly, even discuss it. So, unfortunately, I expect remote work to address the energy crisis rather than a return to sensible urbanism.
  - danans 5y ago
    > All those major cities developed their mass transit systems long ago in far different environments than they exist in them today. NYC, London and Paris have been pretty impolite places for a long time - far more impolite when they built their transit systems. For example, many 19th century London buildings were built with urine deflectors [1], reflecting the general civility of the time. The Victorian era during which the early London public transit system was built was one of the most famous eras of high crime, giving rise to stories like Sherlock Holmes. The the Victorian era also saw mass exiles of criminals and other undesired people to Australia. The difference isn't in the culture of those places at the time that their transit systems were built, but rather that they were built before mass personal car ownership was a thing. I don't doubt that the shift to remote work for many people will change the transportation landscape a bit. However, a huge number of people will still have to physically get to a workplace, and highway congestion in major cities is nearly as bad now as it was before the pandemic, so the problem really hasn't been solved in any way by remote work. 1. https://www.mylondon.news/news/zone-1-news/19th-century-urine-deflectors-still-22378403 https://www.mylondon.news/news/zone-1-news/19th-century-urin...

danans 5y ago

> Mass transit, like higher density living, requires a stronger, more homogeneous, polite and less individualistic culture than the US has. A society doesn't have to be Singapore or Beijing to have viable alternatives to cars for moving the population around. I've been in few places that are more diverse, rude, and individualistic than New York City, London, and Paris yet they all have excellent (by American standards) mass transit systems. The Bay Area, a more "polite" region, has arguably worse transit. Furthermore, the most homogeneous and polite parts of the United States have the worst mass transit. I suspect it has more to do with historical suburban planning decisions (redlining, mass transit unfriendly zoning) designed to enforce homogeneity than it has to do with broad cultural generalizations.

recursivedoubts 5y ago
All those major cities developed their mass transit systems long ago in far different environments than they exist in them today. If you don't have strong cultural norms (and in NY, anyway, you do have a sort of lowest-common-denominator norm: you don't talk to strangers on the subway) you end up with people abandoning public transit. Zoning is and was certainly an issue, but without stronger social consensus you are going to have a hard time getting folks back into a shared space. I prefer denser living and would love to see it, but I view both sides of the political spectrum as sharing blame for the problem, and neither one willing to compromise on, or, frankly, even discuss it. So, unfortunately, I expect remote work to address the energy crisis rather than a return to sensible urbanism.
- danans 5y ago
  > All those major cities developed their mass transit systems long ago in far different environments than they exist in them today. NYC, London and Paris have been pretty impolite places for a long time - far more impolite when they built their transit systems. For example, many 19th century London buildings were built with urine deflectors [1], reflecting the general civility of the time. The Victorian era during which the early London public transit system was built was one of the most famous eras of high crime, giving rise to stories like Sherlock Holmes. The the Victorian era also saw mass exiles of criminals and other undesired people to Australia. The difference isn't in the culture of those places at the time that their transit systems were built, but rather that they were built before mass personal car ownership was a thing. I don't doubt that the shift to remote work for many people will change the transportation landscape a bit. However, a huge number of people will still have to physically get to a workplace, and highway congestion in major cities is nearly as bad now as it was before the pandemic, so the problem really hasn't been solved in any way by remote work. 1. https://www.mylondon.news/news/zone-1-news/19th-century-urine-deflectors-still-22378403 https://www.mylondon.news/news/zone-1-news/19th-century-urin...