7 ms·

I use public transport to go to work. But it's not really convenient. It takes me about 45 minutes to get there. And that's if everything goes well. Half an hou

I use public transport to go to work. But it's not really convenient. It takes me about 45 minutes to get there. And that's if everything goes well. Half an hour of that is walking (to and from bus stops) and waiting (you should be several minutes early because busses sometimes leave early themselves, but most of the time they are late). So there's not much reading that can be done. Also, try reading while you're waiting in the cold for a bus that keeps on getting more and more delayed because of weather. My personal record so far was nearly an hour with busses promised but then suddenly vanishing from the app. Compared to this, the corresponding car trip takes about 10 minutes. I never sat in heavy traffic because you can easily circumvent that in a car. However, I have been stuck in a bus sitting in a traffic jam for more than 30 minutes on many occasions. The bus can't change it's course and the bus drivers don't like letting you exit anywhere that isn't a bus stop. But at least you can read while your colleagues have already been home for a while. Most people overlook that travel to and from stops and waiting for a connecting bus can add up significantly. And then there are all those things that time tables won't tell you.

CalRobert 4y ago
Is there ample housing near your place of work with enough supply to keep prices affordable?
fatnoah 4y ago
> I use public transport to go to work. But it's not really convenient. It takes me about 45 minutes to get there. And that's if everything goes well. Half an hour of that is walking (to and from bus stops) and waiting (you should be several minutes early because busses sometimes leave early themselves, but most of the time they are late). Can you provide more details about where you are and the distance involved? I don't understand why you wouldn't simply drive 10 minutes.
Quanttek 4y ago
considering that short journey time, have you thought about biking?
- AnonymousPlanet 4y ago
  I also bike to work when the weather allows it. The trip by bike takes slightly longer than the one by bus.
skyeto 4y ago
There are ways to avoid having buses stuck in traffic. Dedicated lanes for public transport, getting more people to use public transport rather than cars, and so on. So I'd say it's more often than not a choice in planning if it's convenient compared to using cars or not. (There's also the problem of less developed systems often being less convenient, and because of it not having the funding needed to expand due to low usage)
- AnonymousPlanet 4y ago
  Dedicated lanes exist in this city, but not every street has them of course. The line in question also services a street that does not have a dedicated lane. And that's where it sometimes gets stuck in traffic. Funnily, it used to be routed via a different street that actually does have dedicated lanes. But back then the bus got stuck in the narrower street connecting those two.
louwrentius 4y ago
It all depends on circumstances, starting with the country you are in, that often determines the basic level of quality of any kind of public transport. Then, the real travel time is measured from door-to-door. That includes the traveling to stations/stops and the waiting time for connecting transport. I think this is fairly obvious. If we want to make the world a better place for people and the environment, the number one priority should be to reduce any need to travel in the first place. But if they must travel, make public transport so good (price/time) that it is the first choice of transport. That would be the appropriate vision for the future. And it can happen in any country. The reality is that capitalism and politics prevent public transport from truly shining. It's not even that of a political statement because we know why America doesn't have great public transport overall, especially a lack of long-distance rail lines like 'we' have in Europe. (Car companies lobbying against rail)
- mytailorisrich 4y ago
  In most cases it is unrealistically difficult to beat the convenience and speed of private cars. If you are in a very dense urban environments, maybe. Otherwise, no. That's why making public transport very cheap or even free does not make everyone let their cars at home.
  - Beldin 4y ago
    Actually, in most cases it is unrealistically difficult to beat the convenience of public transport over private cars without MASSIVE infrastructure investments favoring cars. Being able to get places with cars requires a lot of things: roads, parking, traffic measures (signs, crossings, stoplights, onways, offramps, freeways, more parking at destination, etc etc etc). If you only build for public transport, bikes, and walking, the savings in both space used and money spent become ridiculous. Basically: the world looks a lot different without every building having a huge car park. In my view: a lot better.
    - mytailorisrich 4y ago
      The point is that the infrastructure investments required for public transports would be even higher, taking into account that roads are also required for public transports... If I want a bus or a train to be right in front of my house any time I need one and I also want that bus/train to drive me exactly where I want to go, obviously the cost will be ridiculously high.
timcobb 4y ago
Is this in the US or Europe?
- AnonymousPlanet 4y ago
  This is in Europe.
hobs 4y ago
"I never sat in heavy traffic because you can easily circumvent that in a car" Having lived in places that actually have heavy traffic (LA) this reads like total bull. Nobody can "easily circumvent" heavy traffic.
- AnonymousPlanet 4y ago
  You can if the heavy traffic only occurs, e.g., in the center of the city because of ongoing construction. I need to go from A to B. The bus does the trip via C where the traffic jam occurs. By car I can either use route D or E. We're far away here from the traffic situation in LA or any other real city.
pjmlp 4y ago
Around my area, what takes about 30 - 45m by car, can take up to 2h in public transports, and one needs to travel both ways. Naturally I have better ways to spend 4h per day than jumping between connections.
JanSt 4y ago
It's obviously not convenient for everyone - but no single measure is. I'd also cut down on your walking time by taking a bycicle - you could probably save 20 minutes by that alone. My wife also takes a bike ride to the train station (and she packs quite a few bags on the bike). Nonetheless - yes, there are situations in which cars are still way better.
- candiodari 4y ago
  It's also really bad for families. 200 euro per person (even if you only have, say 75 euro for kids) would be 600+ for a car. Not competitive with cars in many scenarios.
- AnonymousPlanet 4y ago
  Unfortunately, it's not possible to bring a bike into a crowded commuter bus and the stretch between home and bus stop can't be efficiently used by bike without commiting several traffic violations. I can, however, do the entire trip by bike (which I often do in summer), using a different route. That takes only slightly longer than the trip via bus.
  - Symbiote 4y ago
    In the Netherlands and Denmark, it's not unusal to cycle to a bus stop or railway station, lock the bike there, take the bus/train, and walk at the other end. Or, to own a second bicycle and leave it at the other end. In London small, folding bicycles serve the same purpose, but they're much more expensive.
    - Gigachad 4y ago
      Escooters are more practical here. I see these as the future of getting to PT.
- throw_pm23 4y ago
  Or take it as a benefit: half an hour of walking a day can clear your head like nothing else (not even a bike-ride).
ur-whale 4y ago
> Half an hour of that is walking You could buy an electric scooter.
jamespetercook 4y ago
Are you in the UK by any chance? Sounds just like my old commute before I started working from home, and my partner’s current one
tenthirtyam 4y ago
Polite suggestion: if you can drive in 10 mins you could probably cycle in 20-30 mins depending on details. Although not, I suppose, if 8 of those 10 mins are on high speed autobahn :) When I lived in Rome I cycled everywhere. I was the 2nd fastest on the road for my 13-14km / 35min commute, but it takes time & effort to get fit. Public transport varied from 50 to 100 mins and private car was typically about 45 mins. The only faster means were motorbikes & mopeds.
- enigma20 4y ago
  I'm fit (2000-4000km distance per yer, multiple sports). But I would never bike to work/train for longer than 5 minutes. I sweat too much (armpits, feet). And taking spare clothes/shoes, and showering in the office is too much.
  - Evgeny 4y ago
    There are showers and the locker room where I keep a set of clean work clothes at my work. This is normal for a medium to large company, and some small ones have the same utilities. Copenhagen.
  - Symbiote 4y ago
    It's acceptable to cycle to the office at less than your maximum workout speed. I find going through all the red lights makes up the difference.
  - bromuro 4y ago
    Me and many of my colleagues ride the bike to office when it is sunny. Better than the train. It’s 30km each trip (2h). A shower once in the office seems acceptable, given the mood boost lasting for the whole day.
- atoav 4y ago
  In my case car is 25 minutes, subway is 20 minutes, bike is 15 minutes.

CalRobert 4y ago

Is there ample housing near your place of work with enough supply to keep prices affordable?

fatnoah 4y ago

> I use public transport to go to work. But it's not really convenient. It takes me about 45 minutes to get there. And that's if everything goes well. Half an hour of that is walking (to and from bus stops) and waiting (you should be several minutes early because busses sometimes leave early themselves, but most of the time they are late). Can you provide more details about where you are and the distance involved? I don't understand why you wouldn't simply drive 10 minutes.

Quanttek 4y ago

considering that short journey time, have you thought about biking?

AnonymousPlanet 4y ago
I also bike to work when the weather allows it. The trip by bike takes slightly longer than the one by bus.

skyeto 4y ago

There are ways to avoid having buses stuck in traffic. Dedicated lanes for public transport, getting more people to use public transport rather than cars, and so on. So I'd say it's more often than not a choice in planning if it's convenient compared to using cars or not. (There's also the problem of less developed systems often being less convenient, and because of it not having the funding needed to expand due to low usage)

AnonymousPlanet 4y ago
Dedicated lanes exist in this city, but not every street has them of course. The line in question also services a street that does not have a dedicated lane. And that's where it sometimes gets stuck in traffic. Funnily, it used to be routed via a different street that actually does have dedicated lanes. But back then the bus got stuck in the narrower street connecting those two.

louwrentius 4y ago

It all depends on circumstances, starting with the country you are in, that often determines the basic level of quality of any kind of public transport. Then, the real travel time is measured from door-to-door. That includes the traveling to stations/stops and the waiting time for connecting transport. I think this is fairly obvious. If we want to make the world a better place for people and the environment, the number one priority should be to reduce any need to travel in the first place. But if they must travel, make public transport so good (price/time) that it is the first choice of transport. That would be the appropriate vision for the future. And it can happen in any country. The reality is that capitalism and politics prevent public transport from truly shining. It's not even that of a political statement because we know why America doesn't have great public transport overall, especially a lack of long-distance rail lines like 'we' have in Europe. (Car companies lobbying against rail)

mytailorisrich 4y ago
In most cases it is unrealistically difficult to beat the convenience and speed of private cars. If you are in a very dense urban environments, maybe. Otherwise, no. That's why making public transport very cheap or even free does not make everyone let their cars at home.
- Beldin 4y ago
  Actually, in most cases it is unrealistically difficult to beat the convenience of public transport over private cars without MASSIVE infrastructure investments favoring cars. Being able to get places with cars requires a lot of things: roads, parking, traffic measures (signs, crossings, stoplights, onways, offramps, freeways, more parking at destination, etc etc etc). If you only build for public transport, bikes, and walking, the savings in both space used and money spent become ridiculous. Basically: the world looks a lot different without every building having a huge car park. In my view: a lot better.
  - mytailorisrich 4y ago
    The point is that the infrastructure investments required for public transports would be even higher, taking into account that roads are also required for public transports... If I want a bus or a train to be right in front of my house any time I need one and I also want that bus/train to drive me exactly where I want to go, obviously the cost will be ridiculously high.

timcobb 4y ago

Is this in the US or Europe?

AnonymousPlanet 4y ago
This is in Europe.

hobs 4y ago

"I never sat in heavy traffic because you can easily circumvent that in a car" Having lived in places that actually have heavy traffic (LA) this reads like total bull. Nobody can "easily circumvent" heavy traffic.

AnonymousPlanet 4y ago
You can if the heavy traffic only occurs, e.g., in the center of the city because of ongoing construction. I need to go from A to B. The bus does the trip via C where the traffic jam occurs. By car I can either use route D or E. We're far away here from the traffic situation in LA or any other real city.

pjmlp 4y ago

Around my area, what takes about 30 - 45m by car, can take up to 2h in public transports, and one needs to travel both ways. Naturally I have better ways to spend 4h per day than jumping between connections.

JanSt 4y ago

It's obviously not convenient for everyone - but no single measure is. I'd also cut down on your walking time by taking a bycicle - you could probably save 20 minutes by that alone. My wife also takes a bike ride to the train station (and she packs quite a few bags on the bike). Nonetheless - yes, there are situations in which cars are still way better.

candiodari 4y ago
It's also really bad for families. 200 euro per person (even if you only have, say 75 euro for kids) would be 600+ for a car. Not competitive with cars in many scenarios.
AnonymousPlanet 4y ago
Unfortunately, it's not possible to bring a bike into a crowded commuter bus and the stretch between home and bus stop can't be efficiently used by bike without commiting several traffic violations. I can, however, do the entire trip by bike (which I often do in summer), using a different route. That takes only slightly longer than the trip via bus.
- Symbiote 4y ago
  In the Netherlands and Denmark, it's not unusal to cycle to a bus stop or railway station, lock the bike there, take the bus/train, and walk at the other end. Or, to own a second bicycle and leave it at the other end. In London small, folding bicycles serve the same purpose, but they're much more expensive.
  - Gigachad 4y ago
    Escooters are more practical here. I see these as the future of getting to PT.
throw_pm23 4y ago
Or take it as a benefit: half an hour of walking a day can clear your head like nothing else (not even a bike-ride).

ur-whale 4y ago

> Half an hour of that is walking You could buy an electric scooter.

jamespetercook 4y ago

Are you in the UK by any chance? Sounds just like my old commute before I started working from home, and my partner’s current one

tenthirtyam 4y ago

Polite suggestion: if you can drive in 10 mins you could probably cycle in 20-30 mins depending on details. Although not, I suppose, if 8 of those 10 mins are on high speed autobahn :) When I lived in Rome I cycled everywhere. I was the 2nd fastest on the road for my 13-14km / 35min commute, but it takes time & effort to get fit. Public transport varied from 50 to 100 mins and private car was typically about 45 mins. The only faster means were motorbikes & mopeds.

enigma20 4y ago
I'm fit (2000-4000km distance per yer, multiple sports). But I would never bike to work/train for longer than 5 minutes. I sweat too much (armpits, feet). And taking spare clothes/shoes, and showering in the office is too much.
- Evgeny 4y ago
  There are showers and the locker room where I keep a set of clean work clothes at my work. This is normal for a medium to large company, and some small ones have the same utilities. Copenhagen.
- Symbiote 4y ago
  It's acceptable to cycle to the office at less than your maximum workout speed. I find going through all the red lights makes up the difference.
- bromuro 4y ago
  Me and many of my colleagues ride the bike to office when it is sunny. Better than the train. It’s 30km each trip (2h). A shower once in the office seems acceptable, given the mood boost lasting for the whole day.
atoav 4y ago
In my case car is 25 minutes, subway is 20 minutes, bike is 15 minutes.