8 ms·

It'll be a cold day in Hell when Americans value comprehensive public transit and walkable neighborhoods over driving an individual automobile long distances to

It'll be a cold day in Hell when Americans value comprehensive public transit and walkable neighborhoods over driving an individual automobile long distances to every destination. I see this as an intractable problem until self-driving cars take away some of the risk. The other option is for people to drink less and do fewer drugs, but that seems even more unlikely that a radical shift in favor of walking/transit.

biomcgary 4y ago
> comprehensive public transit Need to mandate WFH. One way is to tax companies for every employee that is required onsite proportional to the average commute distance of the city that the worksite is located. This will reduce travel substantially and undercut support for building more roads (since peak traffic will drop). Until businesses relocate away from large, legacy central locations downtown to distributed locations closer to consumers, we can fund means-tested subsidies for grocery deliveries, etc. If you don't need to move people around, there is no need for a sclerotic, politicized, centralized solution that exists just to move people around!
- fasthands9 4y ago
  I don't know what percent of jobs could really be WFH. Not everyone is a programmer. Do we really expect healthcare, education, construction, transportation to shift to WFH? I also believe that WFH increases total miles driven because people are more willing to move to rural areas where driving to do anything is longer.
- foxyv 4y ago
  A solution would be to require employers to pay for commute times and/or the additional cost of living close to work. If a company has to pay me an additional 2 hours because they require workers to come into their offices in a high traffic car dependent city like Los Angeles then they will have to pay for that privilege. They already do this to some extent with higher wages. But making it an actual line item on the budget would focus minds a great deal better.
sn0w_crash 4y ago
People should not be drinking and driving is a reasonable statement with overwhelming support for many years. “People should not be driving” is not a statement that I - or most normies - will ever get behind. Some of us don’t like the bus, the bicycle, or walking. I get it, some of you have a pamphlet to give us about the benefits of these things. We’re not interested. We like the vroom vroom.
- sfpotter 4y ago
  You can speak for yourself, but you obviously haven't talked to enough people to make a sweeping claim like that. Maybe you like the vroom vroom, but there are loads of people who are forced to drive every day and who absolutely loathe the experience, whether it's because of the sunk time, the cost, the physical, mental, and emotional exhaustion that comes from sitting in traffic for an ungodly amount of time everyday surrounded by people with road rage, or just the pure danger of the thing. I reject the idea that most people won't see the sense in trading in the ability to drive whenever they want for short, inexpensive, and safe commutes, as well as the ability to live somewhere where there's actually something going on, instead of the mind-numbing dullness of the suburbs. But you like the vroom vroom. OK.
  - dsfyu404ed 4y ago
    If your average commute includes some confusing interactions with other traffic it's probably not the other traffic that's the problem (unless you drive a lumbering commercial vehicle that is a magnet for people pulling stupid moves to not get stuck behind you). If the average person's driving experience was like yours your opinion wouldn't be in the minority.
    - sfpotter 4y ago
      I used to commute an hour each way from Baltimore to DC on I-95. I am a very defensive driver. My experience had everything to do with other people driving aggressively. I have met countless people who have had the same problem. I guarantee you the number of people who hate commuting by car is not insignificant. If you think otherwise you live in a bubble.

biomcgary 4y ago

> comprehensive public transit Need to mandate WFH. One way is to tax companies for every employee that is required onsite proportional to the average commute distance of the city that the worksite is located. This will reduce travel substantially and undercut support for building more roads (since peak traffic will drop). Until businesses relocate away from large, legacy central locations downtown to distributed locations closer to consumers, we can fund means-tested subsidies for grocery deliveries, etc. If you don't need to move people around, there is no need for a sclerotic, politicized, centralized solution that exists just to move people around!

fasthands9 4y ago
I don't know what percent of jobs could really be WFH. Not everyone is a programmer. Do we really expect healthcare, education, construction, transportation to shift to WFH? I also believe that WFH increases total miles driven because people are more willing to move to rural areas where driving to do anything is longer.
foxyv 4y ago
A solution would be to require employers to pay for commute times and/or the additional cost of living close to work. If a company has to pay me an additional 2 hours because they require workers to come into their offices in a high traffic car dependent city like Los Angeles then they will have to pay for that privilege. They already do this to some extent with higher wages. But making it an actual line item on the budget would focus minds a great deal better.

sn0w_crash 4y ago

People should not be drinking and driving is a reasonable statement with overwhelming support for many years. “People should not be driving” is not a statement that I - or most normies - will ever get behind. Some of us don’t like the bus, the bicycle, or walking. I get it, some of you have a pamphlet to give us about the benefits of these things. We’re not interested. We like the vroom vroom.

sfpotter 4y ago
You can speak for yourself, but you obviously haven't talked to enough people to make a sweeping claim like that. Maybe you like the vroom vroom, but there are loads of people who are forced to drive every day and who absolutely loathe the experience, whether it's because of the sunk time, the cost, the physical, mental, and emotional exhaustion that comes from sitting in traffic for an ungodly amount of time everyday surrounded by people with road rage, or just the pure danger of the thing. I reject the idea that most people won't see the sense in trading in the ability to drive whenever they want for short, inexpensive, and safe commutes, as well as the ability to live somewhere where there's actually something going on, instead of the mind-numbing dullness of the suburbs. But you like the vroom vroom. OK.
- dsfyu404ed 4y ago
  If your average commute includes some confusing interactions with other traffic it's probably not the other traffic that's the problem (unless you drive a lumbering commercial vehicle that is a magnet for people pulling stupid moves to not get stuck behind you). If the average person's driving experience was like yours your opinion wouldn't be in the minority.
  - sfpotter 4y ago
    I used to commute an hour each way from Baltimore to DC on I-95. I am a very defensive driver. My experience had everything to do with other people driving aggressively. I have met countless people who have had the same problem. I guarantee you the number of people who hate commuting by car is not insignificant. If you think otherwise you live in a bubble.