4 ms·

I can drive to work in twelve minutes. If I humor the premise of a bus that stops in front of my home and also my workplace, which is unlikely to ever exist no

I can drive to work in twelve minutes. If I humor the premise of a bus that stops in front of my home and also my workplace, which is unlikely to ever exist no matter how much money is thrown at public transit, it would still take several times longer than driving myself because there are numerous other homes and businesses between which the bus would stop at. Using a bus would mean I have to wake up earlier, and therefore fall asleep earlier, and also get back later. It would mean less time at home with my family. I suppose next you'll say that I should be living in walking distance of my job, like my life and indeed entire communities should be structured around employers like during the industrial revolution. God forbid you ever want to change your job, you'll have to hope the new one is next door or you'll be moving your family... more likely you're locked into your current job which is just the way employers would like it. The normalization of cars were a huge win for labor, but the anti-car crowd always ignores this. I guess being locked into my job and at the mercy of public transit is meant to be compensated by the benevolence of The Party who will surely have my back? No thanks.

desas 3y ago
That escalated quickly.
- badgersnake 3y ago
  Indeed, the lizard people are already marching across the flat earth I guess. They'll be here for us soon.
vertis 3y ago
If you can drive in 12 minutes surely the walk itself isn't that long. Public transport is never going to be able to compete over a short distance. I used to commute 1.5 hours each way on the train from Wollongong to Sydney. The alternative drive takes the same or longer, depending on traffic. Hundreds and hundreds of people do this trip every day (and the equivalent from Newcastle). Another period of my life was living in Brunswick (MEL) and working in Richmond (MEL). Drive 40 mins to 1 hour, train including 5-6 min walk at both ends 44 mins. I can read on the train though. Every situation is going to be different. When the public transport is as bad as most US cities I'm not surprised that people don't want to take it, but with European/UK and Australian public transport you're almost certainly better off commuting that way (excluding things like carrying goods, or mobility issues).
- yourusername 3y ago
  >If you can drive in 12 minutes surely the walk itself isn't that long. I just checked this with google maps. In 12 minutes i can get 10 km from my house. That's a 2 hour walk.
  - vertis 3y ago
    It highly depends I guess. A 12 minute drive in peak hour in Melbourne on one of the walks I used to take was about 50 minutes of walking. At a different time of day, about 1hr and 50 mins of distance (using Google Maps to find examples). Granted an hour of walking each way isn't necessarily doable. But that same track can be done in about 25 mins on a bike, probably less on an e-bike.
  - NoGravitas 3y ago
    It's maybe 20-30 minutes of bicycling, depending on roads.
- edgyquant 3y ago
  Public transportation cannot compete over long distances either as they stop dropping people off anywhere close to home once you leave the city. They are only able to complete within a city at medium range where they special lanes.
  - vertis 3y ago
    Fine, you drive between London and Paris, but I'm going to catch the Eurostar (tube and metro). You drive between New York and SF, but I'm going to fly. I'm not recommending buses, buses suck. European public transport is amazing and the US could learn something.
    - edgyquant 3y ago
      Im talking more going from Chicago to small town central Illinois. You’re biased and assuming everyone who travels lives in, leaves from and arrives at a city. You assume everything else is fly over country instead of most of the countries land and half its population.
prmoustache 3y ago
Considering that each time you are driving your it costs money to you and the society and reduce your health and life expectancy unless you exercise separately, that cycling and walking improve your life expectancy while saving money to both you and the society, and that a 12 minutes drive can't be much more than a 40 minutes bicycle ride, my bet is that riding to work would be a better option for both you and the society as it would save everyone money[1] and time while improving everyone general health and life expectancy. [1] combining exercising + commuting will make you gain time over commuting faster + exercising separately in that kind of distances.
- genocidicbunny 3y ago
  I'm genuinely curious how much doing heavy aerobic exercise (cycling) right next to a road with a bunch of cars affects my life expectancy. Especially since we're starting to discover that things like the tire dust from car tires wearing down while driving also has a huge impact on areas near roads. I know a singer that avoids doing any heavy exercise near major roads because it affects their performance after even just after a short exposure.
Mawr 3y ago
> I can drive to work in twelve minutes. Then you can cycle there in ~20 minutes. The difference would be that cycling infrastructure is dirt cheap, bikes are dirt cheap, you can fit way more bikes on a path than cars, you get daily physical exercise - longer lifespan, emit trivial amounts of pollution and parking is a non-issue.
- genocidicbunny 3y ago
  > Then you can cycle there in ~20 minutes. Unless, you know, there's no way to actually cycle there in 20 minutes because the routes are not cyclist friendly or accessible. Or maybe they live in a hilly area where cycling means either working up quite a sweat, or getting an e-bike to assist. Or there's inclement weather that makes cycling extremely uncomfortable if not impossible. Or if you have an injury that makes cycling difficult or painful to where you can only go very slow. Or when you have to carry something heavy with you. There was a point where I had a 15 minute commute to work by car. Cycling, it was 40 minutes and required getting pretty sweaty. Why? Because by car I could take the highway, and by bike I couldn't. Cycling was also much more dangerous on that route than the highway drive, because I had to go through many intersections, pass multiple schools during the morning drop-off time, cross over a major highway overpass that always had heavy traffic that time of day.

desas 3y ago

That escalated quickly.

badgersnake 3y ago
Indeed, the lizard people are already marching across the flat earth I guess. They'll be here for us soon.

vertis 3y ago

If you can drive in 12 minutes surely the walk itself isn't that long. Public transport is never going to be able to compete over a short distance. I used to commute 1.5 hours each way on the train from Wollongong to Sydney. The alternative drive takes the same or longer, depending on traffic. Hundreds and hundreds of people do this trip every day (and the equivalent from Newcastle). Another period of my life was living in Brunswick (MEL) and working in Richmond (MEL). Drive 40 mins to 1 hour, train including 5-6 min walk at both ends 44 mins. I can read on the train though. Every situation is going to be different. When the public transport is as bad as most US cities I'm not surprised that people don't want to take it, but with European/UK and Australian public transport you're almost certainly better off commuting that way (excluding things like carrying goods, or mobility issues).

yourusername 3y ago
>If you can drive in 12 minutes surely the walk itself isn't that long. I just checked this with google maps. In 12 minutes i can get 10 km from my house. That's a 2 hour walk.
- vertis 3y ago
  It highly depends I guess. A 12 minute drive in peak hour in Melbourne on one of the walks I used to take was about 50 minutes of walking. At a different time of day, about 1hr and 50 mins of distance (using Google Maps to find examples). Granted an hour of walking each way isn't necessarily doable. But that same track can be done in about 25 mins on a bike, probably less on an e-bike.
- NoGravitas 3y ago
  It's maybe 20-30 minutes of bicycling, depending on roads.
edgyquant 3y ago
Public transportation cannot compete over long distances either as they stop dropping people off anywhere close to home once you leave the city. They are only able to complete within a city at medium range where they special lanes.
- vertis 3y ago
  Fine, you drive between London and Paris, but I'm going to catch the Eurostar (tube and metro). You drive between New York and SF, but I'm going to fly. I'm not recommending buses, buses suck. European public transport is amazing and the US could learn something.
  - edgyquant 3y ago
    Im talking more going from Chicago to small town central Illinois. You’re biased and assuming everyone who travels lives in, leaves from and arrives at a city. You assume everything else is fly over country instead of most of the countries land and half its population.

prmoustache 3y ago

Considering that each time you are driving your it costs money to you and the society and reduce your health and life expectancy unless you exercise separately, that cycling and walking improve your life expectancy while saving money to both you and the society, and that a 12 minutes drive can't be much more than a 40 minutes bicycle ride, my bet is that riding to work would be a better option for both you and the society as it would save everyone money[1] and time while improving everyone general health and life expectancy. [1] combining exercising + commuting will make you gain time over commuting faster + exercising separately in that kind of distances.

genocidicbunny 3y ago
I'm genuinely curious how much doing heavy aerobic exercise (cycling) right next to a road with a bunch of cars affects my life expectancy. Especially since we're starting to discover that things like the tire dust from car tires wearing down while driving also has a huge impact on areas near roads. I know a singer that avoids doing any heavy exercise near major roads because it affects their performance after even just after a short exposure.

Mawr 3y ago

> I can drive to work in twelve minutes. Then you can cycle there in ~20 minutes. The difference would be that cycling infrastructure is dirt cheap, bikes are dirt cheap, you can fit way more bikes on a path than cars, you get daily physical exercise - longer lifespan, emit trivial amounts of pollution and parking is a non-issue.

genocidicbunny 3y ago
> Then you can cycle there in ~20 minutes. Unless, you know, there's no way to actually cycle there in 20 minutes because the routes are not cyclist friendly or accessible. Or maybe they live in a hilly area where cycling means either working up quite a sweat, or getting an e-bike to assist. Or there's inclement weather that makes cycling extremely uncomfortable if not impossible. Or if you have an injury that makes cycling difficult or painful to where you can only go very slow. Or when you have to carry something heavy with you. There was a point where I had a 15 minute commute to work by car. Cycling, it was 40 minutes and required getting pretty sweaty. Why? Because by car I could take the highway, and by bike I couldn't. Cycling was also much more dangerous on that route than the highway drive, because I had to go through many intersections, pass multiple schools during the morning drop-off time, cross over a major highway overpass that always had heavy traffic that time of day.