5 ms·

"Plenty of other countries" isn't the US. For reasons that have nothing to do with cars, the US will never achieve the clean, safe, reliable systems like you s

"Plenty of other countries" isn't the US. For reasons that have nothing to do with cars, the US will never achieve the clean, safe, reliable systems like you see in Asia that are often heralded as the posterchild of ideal public transit. Wave a magic wand materialize the Tokyo or Seoul subway system into an American metropolis, and within a short period of time, you'll see it devolve. We just cannot have nice things here. Ironically, the contingent of people that are most aggressive/ambitious about promoting public transit are often the same that are most against taking the (admittedly, not always the most pleasant) steps needed to sell the idea to the masses.

kdmccormick 3y ago
You're making big assertions without giving any details. > Ironically, the contingent of people that are most aggressive/ambitious about promoting public transit are often the same that are most against taking the (admittedly, not always the most pleasant) steps needed to sell the idea to the masses. Like what?
- decafninja 3y ago
  For example - ensuring there aren't crazy drug addicted homeless persons raging about murdering everyone on the train. When issues like that are brought up, common responses from the pro-transit crowd include: "The psycho is completely harmless, just let him be. He has every right to be on the subway too." "Cars kill people!. The psycho will never hurt anyone!" "We have to pass Medicare-for-all and pass unconditional housing-first policies first. Until then, we can't/shouldn't do anything to the psycho!" To be fair: I am sympathetic with some of the above. However such statements will not help you sell improving/expanding public transit to the American public. And I know not every pro-transit person is like this. But there seems to be a sizable overlap. Also, anecdotal, but since the pro-bike and pro-transit crowd also do overlap - I've noticed a lot of people take up commuting or just traveling by bicycle in NYC the past few years. But the most common reason I hear is to specifically avoid taking the subway as much as possible due to dangers.
  - TheDong 3y ago
    It seems like such a bizarre jump to say "if we build trains, simply riding the train will drive people to drugs and mass murder, causing a new problem outweighing the benefits of the train". If the train is not what is driving people to these heinous conditions, then it seems like this imagined problem is some unrelated thing. Should we not build any shopping malls or parks or roads until we can somehow be certain there won't be a "crazy drug addicted mass-murderer" who goes there? Should we halt the plan to build apartments on the chance a purple dragon might take up residence and burn the town down? For whatever it's worth, I've personally ridden busses in the US for years, taken subways and trains in no less than half a dozen US cities, and I've been murdered zero times so far. I don't see any reasonable path to "building more trains" leading to my odds of getting murdered going up.
    - decafninja 3y ago
      You're reading it wrong. Of course riding the train won't drive people to drugs or mass murder. Rather, drugs and the perceived threat of violent crime, as well as general unpleasantness, is what turns off people from embracing public transit. Build a brand new shiny transit system in the USA, and you'll still face the same problems without changing the culture or enforcement. Both will face massive public backslash - again, from many of the same people who are most pro-transit. You're falling victim to the same mentality I mentioned earlier of handwaving away the perceived concerns people have. I ride transit nearly ever day. Obviously I haven't been murdered or fallen victim to violence. But I commonly encounter individuals who I make sure I keep away from either because of threatening behavior or simple unpleasantness.
      - danny_codes 3y ago
        > without changing the culture or enforcement Fortunately, it is within our power to both change the culture and enforce it. Thought TBF the underlying reason is that America has a relatively abysmal safety net (healthcare being the most terrible of the lot), so you just have more people falling through the cracks onto the street.
  - 3y ago

kdmccormick 3y ago

You're making big assertions without giving any details. > Ironically, the contingent of people that are most aggressive/ambitious about promoting public transit are often the same that are most against taking the (admittedly, not always the most pleasant) steps needed to sell the idea to the masses. Like what?

decafninja 3y ago
For example - ensuring there aren't crazy drug addicted homeless persons raging about murdering everyone on the train. When issues like that are brought up, common responses from the pro-transit crowd include: "The psycho is completely harmless, just let him be. He has every right to be on the subway too." "Cars kill people!. The psycho will never hurt anyone!" "We have to pass Medicare-for-all and pass unconditional housing-first policies first. Until then, we can't/shouldn't do anything to the psycho!" To be fair: I am sympathetic with some of the above. However such statements will not help you sell improving/expanding public transit to the American public. And I know not every pro-transit person is like this. But there seems to be a sizable overlap. Also, anecdotal, but since the pro-bike and pro-transit crowd also do overlap - I've noticed a lot of people take up commuting or just traveling by bicycle in NYC the past few years. But the most common reason I hear is to specifically avoid taking the subway as much as possible due to dangers.
- TheDong 3y ago
  It seems like such a bizarre jump to say "if we build trains, simply riding the train will drive people to drugs and mass murder, causing a new problem outweighing the benefits of the train". If the train is not what is driving people to these heinous conditions, then it seems like this imagined problem is some unrelated thing. Should we not build any shopping malls or parks or roads until we can somehow be certain there won't be a "crazy drug addicted mass-murderer" who goes there? Should we halt the plan to build apartments on the chance a purple dragon might take up residence and burn the town down? For whatever it's worth, I've personally ridden busses in the US for years, taken subways and trains in no less than half a dozen US cities, and I've been murdered zero times so far. I don't see any reasonable path to "building more trains" leading to my odds of getting murdered going up.
  - decafninja 3y ago
    You're reading it wrong. Of course riding the train won't drive people to drugs or mass murder. Rather, drugs and the perceived threat of violent crime, as well as general unpleasantness, is what turns off people from embracing public transit. Build a brand new shiny transit system in the USA, and you'll still face the same problems without changing the culture or enforcement. Both will face massive public backslash - again, from many of the same people who are most pro-transit. You're falling victim to the same mentality I mentioned earlier of handwaving away the perceived concerns people have. I ride transit nearly ever day. Obviously I haven't been murdered or fallen victim to violence. But I commonly encounter individuals who I make sure I keep away from either because of threatening behavior or simple unpleasantness.
    - danny_codes 3y ago
      > without changing the culture or enforcement Fortunately, it is within our power to both change the culture and enforce it. Thought TBF the underlying reason is that America has a relatively abysmal safety net (healthcare being the most terrible of the lot), so you just have more people falling through the cracks onto the street.
- 3y ago