6 ms·

More often a substitute for cars I'd say. I've ridden a bus long-distance on two trips. I'm not sure why you think busses are more equivalent to planes other t

More often a substitute for cars I'd say. I've ridden a bus long-distance on two trips. I'm not sure why you think busses are more equivalent to planes other than holding more passengers.

cesarb 3y ago
> I'm not sure why you think busses are more equivalent to planes other than holding more passengers. The more I think about it, the more similarities I find. For instance, both long-distance buses and large airplanes are usually boarded only at dedicated places (bus terminals and airports); both have a separate baggage compartment below the passenger floor; both have built-in bathrooms; both are driven by trained drivers/pilots; both have a set schedule for departure; and so on. I've taken plenty of long distance bus trips (12 hours or more in each direction), and I've also taken many airplane trips (usually on the 737 family), and I'd say the experience on both is very similar: taking a taxi to the bus terminal or the airport, looking for the correct spot or gate for boarding, putting most of the luggage in the lower compartment of the bus or airplane, waiting until the scheduled departure time, sitting still on your designated seat for most of the trip, arriving at the other terminal or airport, retrieving the luggage, taking a taxi to the actual destination. There are some differences, for instance on a bus there's a rest stop for food after several hours, while on an airplane they serve some food in the vehicle itself, but these differences are minor compared to the differences between an airplane trip and a car trip.
- brookst 3y ago
  You’re pattern matching on how the two modes work, but that isn’t what economic substitution means. Substitution means people buy one product instead of another, like the way Beyond Meat products are a substitute for meat despite having essentially zero production or digestive similarities at any reasonable level of reduction. I often fly 300-400 miles (I’m in the US where trains are a joke). If airplanes became seriously unsafe, I would drive. There is no world where I would take a bus instead.
  - cesarb 3y ago
    > You’re pattern matching on how the two modes work No, I'm going by my own experience. I've taken plenty of long-distance bus trips (I've just checked on a map site, one long-distance bus trip I've made many times is around 800 km). Several of them were to cities I could have taken an airplane to (and I did take an airplane to them in other circumstances), and the only difference is that the bus trip usually took longer (and was less expensive). > If airplanes became seriously unsafe, I would drive. There is no world where I would take a bus instead. If airplanes became seriously unsafe, I would take a long-distance bus. I can't say there's no world where I would buy a car and learn how to drive just to avoid taking a long-distance bus, but I can't see any advantage other than avoiding the short taxi steps to and from the bus terminal at either end of the trip.
rapidaneurism 3y ago
Of the top of my head: You choose what car to buy, but the bus company chooses what us to buy. You maintain your own car but the bus company maintains the bus. You drive your own car, but a professional hired and vetted by the bus company drives the bus. You drive your car from a to b when you want, but the bus travels along predefined routes at specific times.
ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
Having done both, I agree that they're more a substitute for busses. Perhaps trains. I'm not sure why you think cars are more equivalent to planes, especially when they hold fewer passengers.
- ghaff 3y ago
  Because in general, at least in the US, the choice for most routes that people take is to fly or take their car. Taking a long distance bus isn’t on the table for most moderately well off people and train usually isn’t a reasonable option.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]

More often a substitute for cars I'd say. I've ridden a bus long-distance on two trips. I'm not sure why you think busses are more equivalent to planes other than holding more passengers.

cesarb 3y ago

> I'm not sure why you think busses are more equivalent to planes other than holding more passengers. The more I think about it, the more similarities I find. For instance, both long-distance buses and large airplanes are usually boarded only at dedicated places (bus terminals and airports); both have a separate baggage compartment below the passenger floor; both have built-in bathrooms; both are driven by trained drivers/pilots; both have a set schedule for departure; and so on. I've taken plenty of long distance bus trips (12 hours or more in each direction), and I've also taken many airplane trips (usually on the 737 family), and I'd say the experience on both is very similar: taking a taxi to the bus terminal or the airport, looking for the correct spot or gate for boarding, putting most of the luggage in the lower compartment of the bus or airplane, waiting until the scheduled departure time, sitting still on your designated seat for most of the trip, arriving at the other terminal or airport, retrieving the luggage, taking a taxi to the actual destination. There are some differences, for instance on a bus there's a rest stop for food after several hours, while on an airplane they serve some food in the vehicle itself, but these differences are minor compared to the differences between an airplane trip and a car trip.

brookst 3y ago
You’re pattern matching on how the two modes work, but that isn’t what economic substitution means. Substitution means people buy one product instead of another, like the way Beyond Meat products are a substitute for meat despite having essentially zero production or digestive similarities at any reasonable level of reduction. I often fly 300-400 miles (I’m in the US where trains are a joke). If airplanes became seriously unsafe, I would drive. There is no world where I would take a bus instead.
- cesarb 3y ago
  > You’re pattern matching on how the two modes work No, I'm going by my own experience. I've taken plenty of long-distance bus trips (I've just checked on a map site, one long-distance bus trip I've made many times is around 800 km). Several of them were to cities I could have taken an airplane to (and I did take an airplane to them in other circumstances), and the only difference is that the bus trip usually took longer (and was less expensive). > If airplanes became seriously unsafe, I would drive. There is no world where I would take a bus instead. If airplanes became seriously unsafe, I would take a long-distance bus. I can't say there's no world where I would buy a car and learn how to drive just to avoid taking a long-distance bus, but I can't see any advantage other than avoiding the short taxi steps to and from the bus terminal at either end of the trip.

rapidaneurism 3y ago

Of the top of my head: You choose what car to buy, but the bus company chooses what us to buy. You maintain your own car but the bus company maintains the bus. You drive your own car, but a professional hired and vetted by the bus company drives the bus. You drive your car from a to b when you want, but the bus travels along predefined routes at specific times.

ImPostingOnHN 3y ago

Having done both, I agree that they're more a substitute for busses. Perhaps trains. I'm not sure why you think cars are more equivalent to planes, especially when they hold fewer passengers.

ghaff 3y ago
Because in general, at least in the US, the choice for most routes that people take is to fly or take their car. Taking a long distance bus isn’t on the table for most moderately well off people and train usually isn’t a reasonable option.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]