2 ms·

I had a hard time reading this, but this quote really killed me: > public-transit options between distant suburbia and city centres are roughly comparable in A

I had a hard time reading this, but this quote really killed me: > public-transit options between distant suburbia and city centres are roughly comparable in America and Europe I used to live in America in four different cities, from east to west. I also traveled all over the US. I now live in Europe, and travel to many countries here as well. Every time I visit the US these days, I don’t have car access at first. Whether visiting parents or friends in many different parts of the country, it is impossible to exist without a car. I might be able to do a couple things nearby, but not much, and I feel incredibly stranded. The best option is Uber, since one bus an hour that often doesn’t show up at all, is quite hard to plan around. Meanwhile, every European city that I’ve visited, I haven’t driven a car once. Actually, I’ve never driven a car on this continent despite living here for a year. I’m still able to visit wineries in the countryside of Italy, remote towns with wildlife and hiking, and all of the groceries and restaurants you could possibly need. Only by taking incredibly easy and efficient public transit. Also in my home country of Europe, I commute to work in a different but nearby town, just like I did in the US. Each commute is similar in length, ~30-35 mins. The difference, is that I pay maybe 60-90 €/month total, for all of my transportation at home. Commuting, visiting friends, going to the further-away park. In the US, it was easily $600-$800 per month for insurance, gas, depreciation, and maintenance, and I didn’t drive that fancy of a car. Multiple that by two for a household and it makes an absolutely enormous difference. Also, it’s a comparably-sized apartment in both places, but in Europe it’s about 30% cheaper and I’m close to the city. It’s just more dense here, which is what makes everything else possible. So, no, it is not even close.

sarchertech 3y ago
I don’t know what the article is basing this on, or how true it is, but it and your anecdotes could both be true. There’s a good bit of selection bias to your statement because you’re starting out in the city, not some random distant suburb. Just because you can visit some places far away, doesn’t mean that all far away places can easily get to the city.
- BytesAndGears 3y ago
  Maybe not all, but there also aren’t really suburbs here anyways. The “suburbs” are their own mini cities which are also walkable with everything you need. I travel out there often for different things like unique shops. Each little “suburb town” has a train station which is usually directly connected to the city center Edit: the suburbs here are usually a bit less dense though, with plenty of row houses and a some single family homes (close together). Still far more compact than the US though. I do live in a particularly good country (Netherlands), which is definitely worth noting, but I think my experience in lots of traveling helps that I’ve never been limited in where I can go
  - sarchertech 3y ago
    I don’t doubt there are far fewer suburbs in Europe, but is it possible that what you’re describing also has an element of selection bias. Since you’ve never driven a car, you’ve never really seen the places that don’t fit the mold you’re describing.
    - BytesAndGears 3y ago
      Very true! I’m positive that there are places that don’t fit my experience — but I think the majority does seem to match, at least in the places I’ve been (most of the popular Western European countries)
  - RhysU 3y ago
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_dependencies_by_population_density https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_depend... Give the US a few centuries to catch up to European density and let's talk then.
    - BytesAndGears 3y ago
      Density of the entire country is not super relevant — the vast vast majority of travel is within a city or two away from where you live. I’m not saying that nobody should ever drive, and if you have a long ways to go between obscure locations it totally makes sense to drive. But if the US optimized for the 99% of trips that people make, within 30 miles of where they live, then it just comes down to regular urban planning where density can be “whatever you design”. But yeah this is specific to cities and suburbs, I’m not trying to imply anything about people who live further out or who are making far-away trips. If your household only needed one car for the monthly trips to grandmas or out for camping in the wilderness, and you didn’t need to drive at all around your city, that would still be a huge win for Americans today. Especially those with kids who depend on the parents for transportation by car.

sarchertech 3y ago

I don’t know what the article is basing this on, or how true it is, but it and your anecdotes could both be true. There’s a good bit of selection bias to your statement because you’re starting out in the city, not some random distant suburb. Just because you can visit some places far away, doesn’t mean that all far away places can easily get to the city.

BytesAndGears 3y ago
Maybe not all, but there also aren’t really suburbs here anyways. The “suburbs” are their own mini cities which are also walkable with everything you need. I travel out there often for different things like unique shops. Each little “suburb town” has a train station which is usually directly connected to the city center Edit: the suburbs here are usually a bit less dense though, with plenty of row houses and a some single family homes (close together). Still far more compact than the US though. I do live in a particularly good country (Netherlands), which is definitely worth noting, but I think my experience in lots of traveling helps that I’ve never been limited in where I can go
- sarchertech 3y ago
  I don’t doubt there are far fewer suburbs in Europe, but is it possible that what you’re describing also has an element of selection bias. Since you’ve never driven a car, you’ve never really seen the places that don’t fit the mold you’re describing.
  - BytesAndGears 3y ago
    Very true! I’m positive that there are places that don’t fit my experience — but I think the majority does seem to match, at least in the places I’ve been (most of the popular Western European countries)
- RhysU 3y ago
  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_dependencies_by_population_density https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_depend... Give the US a few centuries to catch up to European density and let's talk then.
  - BytesAndGears 3y ago
    Density of the entire country is not super relevant — the vast vast majority of travel is within a city or two away from where you live. I’m not saying that nobody should ever drive, and if you have a long ways to go between obscure locations it totally makes sense to drive. But if the US optimized for the 99% of trips that people make, within 30 miles of where they live, then it just comes down to regular urban planning where density can be “whatever you design”. But yeah this is specific to cities and suburbs, I’m not trying to imply anything about people who live further out or who are making far-away trips. If your household only needed one car for the monthly trips to grandmas or out for camping in the wilderness, and you didn’t need to drive at all around your city, that would still be a huge win for Americans today. Especially those with kids who depend on the parents for transportation by car.