3 ms·

> Working from the office they spend that money on fuel, indirectly spend on road maintenance, directly spend on vehicle maintenance where the shop in turn spen

> Working from the office they spend that money on fuel, indirectly spend on road maintenance, directly spend on vehicle maintenance where the shop in turn spends on parts and tools and so on. It's arguable whether all of this is needed everywhere in the world, to such a degree as is presently done. In the cities, the transportation needs of most folks can be covered by public transportation (depending on the country, admittedly) - it is more efficient, more green and also results in fewer traffic jams. Furthermore it scales up and down better: whether at 50% or 80% of capacity it will do its scheduled route, as opposed to all of those people otherwise needing cars and parking spaces for those and so on, which isn't always entirely feasible in densely populated cities. I guess it's just a different take on things, but if there's commute, we might as well make it more efficient, as opposed to spending 1-2 hours per day in traffic, which is essentially wasted time. Or not have the commute altogether. In more rural areas or many places in the US as opposed to EU it's a slightly different story.

sokoloff 4y ago
I live in Cambridge, MA (a city for sure) and used to work in an office near the Waltham/Lexington line. Not some out in the rural woods places at all. I looked up and wrote up my “what if I tried to commute on public transit to make a 9AM meeting?” It’s ugly to the point where no one would voluntarily choose it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31723197 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31723197
- KronisLV 4y ago
  It probably depends a lot on your circumstances, location and other factors! In my case, in Rīga (the capital of my country, Latvia), it was approximately: - leave apartment at 7:45 - walk to stop in around 5 minutes - wait 5 - 10 minutes for a trolley bus - ride in it for 20 - 30 minutes - walk from stop to work for 10 minutes I think it averaged out to around 40 minutes per trip, and 1 euro per day, given a monthly ticket: https://www.rigassatiksme.lv/en/tickets-and-e-ticket/types-and-prices-of-tickets-1/one-month-ticket/ https://www.rigassatiksme.lv/en/tickets-and-e-ticket/types-a... With a car, the same trip would be around 20-40 minutes. For comparison's sake, walking would mean upwards of 100 minutes for that trip. Regardless of whether in a car, or using public transportation, coming home in the evening often included waiting in traffic jams for close to an hour. In comparison, when coming home before 4-6 PM, the streets were relatively empty and there were no such traffic issues. Fewer cars, fewer issues of that sort. But what holds here true doesn't hold true elsewhere and vice versa. Once you go past a certain scale of the city in question, transfers and other complications become unavoidable. Just how much of an issue it is, depends on many other factors as well (car ownership cost, possibility of accidents, the disadvantage of not being able to easily transport things when not owning a car and so on, lack of freedom without a car, especially when you want to visit less popular rural areas). Neither beats rolling out of bed at 8:45, turning on the computer and brewing some coffee or tea, doing a morning shower and "being at work" 10 minutes later, though.
- bluGill 4y ago
  Bad public transit exists all over. That doesn't make the idea of public transit bad, it just means we need better management of it.
  - sokoloff 4y ago
    Random route service is difficult to efficiently serve with mass transit. Public transit doesn't have to be specifically mass transit, but the collective need of "I need to go from random place A to random place B and later return" is almost never going to line up with a mass transit solution. Having high frequency mass transit service and decent transfers is better than the current situation, but it's really, really hard to compete with "sub-minute latency, personalized perfectly random route".
    - bluGill 4y ago
      True, but I still firmly maintain that with good transfers you can get transit close enough to car levels of service so that it doesn't matter. Of course such service is a lot more expensive to run than current service - but it is still cheaper than the costs of owning a car.
carlosjobim 4y ago
Having your own vehicle is an enormous benefit in quality of life, why would anybody want to take that away? Why should we then eat nice food when we can survive on dull rations? There is so much more to the use of personal vehicles than just "transportation needs", but yes - some places build their infrastructure too much catering to cars. The best way to beat traffic right now without having to wait for anybody else to change is to get a motorcycle - if the climate where you live permits.
- bluGill 4y ago
  Only if the alternative is bad. While it is true that most public transit in the US is bad, that doesn't mean it has to be that way.
  - carlosjobim 4y ago
    It is impossible to build public transport that gives the same freedom of movement as a personal vehicle.
    - bluGill 4y ago
      That is false. In areas with heavy traffic you can give more freedom of movement. In the typical city without congestion (including US suburbs!), while the car is better, it still doesn't have to be enough better to matter. That you think the car is always better is a reflection on the bad service you have had on public transit.
      - carlosjobim 4y ago
        Public transport runs on a schedule and you have to adapt to that schedule. I live in a place where public transport is good, cheap and safe. You can never achieve public transport that could even compare to the freedom of movement a personal vehicle gives you, and that's not the purpose of public transport. > That you think the car is always better Make your arguments without inventing what other people say and you will make better arguments.

sokoloff 4y ago

I live in Cambridge, MA (a city for sure) and used to work in an office near the Waltham/Lexington line. Not some out in the rural woods places at all. I looked up and wrote up my “what if I tried to commute on public transit to make a 9AM meeting?” It’s ugly to the point where no one would voluntarily choose it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31723197 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31723197

KronisLV 4y ago
It probably depends a lot on your circumstances, location and other factors! In my case, in Rīga (the capital of my country, Latvia), it was approximately: - leave apartment at 7:45 - walk to stop in around 5 minutes - wait 5 - 10 minutes for a trolley bus - ride in it for 20 - 30 minutes - walk from stop to work for 10 minutes I think it averaged out to around 40 minutes per trip, and 1 euro per day, given a monthly ticket: https://www.rigassatiksme.lv/en/tickets-and-e-ticket/types-and-prices-of-tickets-1/one-month-ticket/ https://www.rigassatiksme.lv/en/tickets-and-e-ticket/types-a... With a car, the same trip would be around 20-40 minutes. For comparison's sake, walking would mean upwards of 100 minutes for that trip. Regardless of whether in a car, or using public transportation, coming home in the evening often included waiting in traffic jams for close to an hour. In comparison, when coming home before 4-6 PM, the streets were relatively empty and there were no such traffic issues. Fewer cars, fewer issues of that sort. But what holds here true doesn't hold true elsewhere and vice versa. Once you go past a certain scale of the city in question, transfers and other complications become unavoidable. Just how much of an issue it is, depends on many other factors as well (car ownership cost, possibility of accidents, the disadvantage of not being able to easily transport things when not owning a car and so on, lack of freedom without a car, especially when you want to visit less popular rural areas). Neither beats rolling out of bed at 8:45, turning on the computer and brewing some coffee or tea, doing a morning shower and "being at work" 10 minutes later, though.
bluGill 4y ago
Bad public transit exists all over. That doesn't make the idea of public transit bad, it just means we need better management of it.
- sokoloff 4y ago
  Random route service is difficult to efficiently serve with mass transit. Public transit doesn't have to be specifically mass transit, but the collective need of "I need to go from random place A to random place B and later return" is almost never going to line up with a mass transit solution. Having high frequency mass transit service and decent transfers is better than the current situation, but it's really, really hard to compete with "sub-minute latency, personalized perfectly random route".
  - bluGill 4y ago
    True, but I still firmly maintain that with good transfers you can get transit close enough to car levels of service so that it doesn't matter. Of course such service is a lot more expensive to run than current service - but it is still cheaper than the costs of owning a car.

carlosjobim 4y ago

Having your own vehicle is an enormous benefit in quality of life, why would anybody want to take that away? Why should we then eat nice food when we can survive on dull rations? There is so much more to the use of personal vehicles than just "transportation needs", but yes - some places build their infrastructure too much catering to cars. The best way to beat traffic right now without having to wait for anybody else to change is to get a motorcycle - if the climate where you live permits.

bluGill 4y ago
Only if the alternative is bad. While it is true that most public transit in the US is bad, that doesn't mean it has to be that way.
- carlosjobim 4y ago
  It is impossible to build public transport that gives the same freedom of movement as a personal vehicle.
  - bluGill 4y ago
    That is false. In areas with heavy traffic you can give more freedom of movement. In the typical city without congestion (including US suburbs!), while the car is better, it still doesn't have to be enough better to matter. That you think the car is always better is a reflection on the bad service you have had on public transit.
    - carlosjobim 4y ago
      Public transport runs on a schedule and you have to adapt to that schedule. I live in a place where public transport is good, cheap and safe. You can never achieve public transport that could even compare to the freedom of movement a personal vehicle gives you, and that's not the purpose of public transport. > That you think the car is always better Make your arguments without inventing what other people say and you will make better arguments.