9 ms·
We try to avoid Boston traffic by driving at night and then we run into... night construction! There's basically no time when traffic is reasonable around Bosto
by josefresco 2y ago
We try to avoid Boston traffic by driving at night and then we run into... night construction! There's basically no time when traffic is reasonable around Boston. I'm pretty certain if they gave this equipment to the Mass DOT they'd figure out how to modify it to negate any benefit. /rant
- bastardoperator 2y agoSame thing in California, but working at night is actually better for the workers when it comes to sun and breathing in exhaust fumes. This might be economical for what amounts to a two lane road, but we have freeways with 22 lanes (I5).
- pixl97 2y agoYou are traffic. Our dependence on car culture made this nightmare we exist in. You're ranting at the wrong group, they are just trying to get the most done in the least amount of time and disruption, hence lowest cost.
- eddd-ddde 2y agoI agree that cat centric life is awful. However "you are traffic" is not the whole picture, not all traffic is created equal. Some people are just naturally adept at making traffic.
- pixl97 2y agoBoth quality and quantity matter. Bad drivers can make traffic anytime, but if you a good driver leave the house at 5PM you are traffic.
- eddd-ddde 2y agoCorrect. That's the biggest downside of car infrastructure, we are bound(ed?) by the lowest common denominator. Once a slow car is blocking the way we just contribute to that same traffic.
- pixl97 2y agoWhich leads me to CGP Grey's great video on the topic. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHzzSao6ypE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHzzSao6ypE
- globular-toast 2y agoWhy do Americans think "traffic" means congestion? Traffic is the people on the road. You can say things like "let me check the traffic" or "the traffic is really bad", but if you use the road you are traffic. It's nothing to do with congestion, if you use the road you are traffic. It's this kind of subtle language mistake that reveals a whole country full of main characters: I'm the one travelling, everyone else is just there for my inconvenience.
- digging 2y agoAmericans just use "traffic" to mean "traffic congestion." Nobody is confused by it here.
- eddd-ddde 2y agoInteresting perspective. Not from thr US and my native language is Spanish, where I live traffic really is synonym of congestion. When there are little cars you wouldn't say that there is traffic. That's just how the language is.
- kelnos 2y ago> I agree that cat centric life is awful. I dunno, I have three cats, a big part of my life revolves around them, and it's pretty great. (I know, I know...)
- eddd-ddde 2y agoOh wow I re-read my comment 5 times and never noticed. I also have 3 cats, those are great (:
- TylerE 2y agoIt's awful for some. For others, like those with mobility issues it can be the difference between being able to leave the house or not.
- fineIllregister 2y agoIt's awful for most. If a person lives long enough, they will likely lose the ability to drive. A lack of walkable infrastructure basically means social death at that point. How many people struggle with the decision to try to take the keys away from their parents? Also, cars create mobility issues by injuring people.
- mitthrowaway2 2y agoGood pedestrian and transit infrastructure is barrier-free. If you can't cross the street and board a train in a wheelchair, the lack of pedestrian infrastructure is exactly the problem.
- TylerE 2y agoThe train? What train? There isn't a train within 100 miles of here.
- abenga 2y agoExactly.
- TylerE 2y agoThe problem isn't barriers to being a pedestrian. It's alternate forms of transit not existing. My town barely has bus service. The nearest stop is over a mile away, and it has a frequency, in theory, of hourly. I live in town. The bus route sorta serves the historically poor section of town and that's about it. Having a car is not optional. We don't have a functional long distance rail network, never mind light rail or subways.
- mitthrowaway2 2y ago
- Vaslo 2y agoNot a nightmare at all - simply add more roads or more lanes on major highways where there are backups. People have a right to travel the way they want, and pay tax money to do so.
- acdha 2y agoPeople do not pay taxes anywhere near the level needed to maintain the existing roads, much less expand them. They also do not pay enough for the health costs their driving inflicts on the people whose neighborhoods they drive through, nor the cost of the climate change we’re all living through. Similarly, while most countries have free movement that does not guarantee availability of space to put those extra lanes - your freedom to drive ends where other people’s property begins.
- Vaslo 2y agoGovernments can buy property. There are lots of things that can be cut by government to get more roads - all that public assistance that goes to a small portion of people can be re-examined and reapportioned to help all people via roads rather than a large portion of them who are leeches. Climate change isn’t some doomsday. Relax about it, I promise you that you and billions of others will be fine. Many of us are tired of living our lives for the Doomsday Climate Cult.
- acdha 2y agoLeeches? That’s quite a loaded term, especially when you are asking the government to subsidize your lifestyle.
- presentation 2y agoInduced demand is a thing, build more roads get more traffic. Roads are physically incapable of scaling to demand.
- Vaslo 2y agoImagine not building something because there will be more demand. I don’t care if they never scale to 100% demand, every additional mile of lane helps.