3 ms·
1. Of course I'm not going to reference a TV show. They aren't exactly known for realism. I've seen how they think poor people live, after all. 2. One line, a
by Broken_Hippo 4y ago
1. Of course I'm not going to reference a TV show. They aren't exactly known for realism. I've seen how they think poor people live, after all.
2. One line, a city, or a few riders isn't an issue with busses, be they with or without fares. That's society not taking care of folks. Plus, it would be ridiculous to think that it would be like this everywhere.. because it isn't like this everywhere now.
- mixmastamyk 4y agoIf you really want to help folks, get them a home and treatment first. Before inflicting your "utopia" on us transit riders.
- Broken_Hippo 4y agoHow are they supposed to get to treatment if there isn't a transit system to help them with that? And of course folks should have housing and treatment. The reason we have issues in some areas is because they aren't doing that. It doesn't meant that we shouldn't provide public transport to everyone that wants it, though. It is quite possible to do more than one thing at the same time.
- mixmastamyk 4y agoNo, some things are prerequisites to others. See project management. They are not going to inpatient treatment and housing voluntarily on the bus. Is the guy screaming obscenities at the air even aware of all his treatment options? They often need to be coerced, so trained individuals need to bring them there humanely. If they are just having bad luck, they will mostly likely need their belongings brought with them. Both these things point to van transportation with trained drivers. Not the city bus. You might spend some time thinking through the problem rather than casting aspersions. But one of those is easier, isn't it?
- mixmastamyk 4y agoToday I learned wokescold is a word.