13 ms·
People don't realize is that public transport works if it's a network. The denser the network, both in time and space, the better the options is. Here in the N
by brnt 1y ago
People don't realize is that public transport works if it's a network. The denser the network, both in time and space, the better the options is.
Here in the Netherlands there's actually fewer routes than a 100 years ago (country was full of local 'intertown' trams then). Housing stock has expanded a few times over since the war, but rail routes (light of heavy) stayed put. It's ridiculous to build a 5000 home neighborhood and not plunk down some steel bars! Or at least reserve the space. Meanwhile, bus services are down YoY in frequency, reach. They now basically only serve as a last resort for those that really have no other options and thus can be forced to deal with incredible transit durations.
Even cycling, which in denser cities can absorb some of the commuter traffic, is not encouraged as part of mixed transport. Tax law is such that one modality can be compensated.
The Netherlands has none of the geology to deal with that Switzerland has, so I don't know what excuse there is. All energy went into cycling I suppose. Not bad, but it's about the network, and never about the one modality.
- sokoloff 1y agoIsn’t the new bike parking facility next to Centraal in Amsterdam a massive counterexample? That clearly supports mixed-mode commuting, right?
- withinboredom 1y agoYou can do it because it’s easy, but when you file your taxes, you have to choose one to count as a tax break. In 2024, driving gave you the biggest tax break.
- sokoloff 1y agoIf government funds were used to build or finance the parking facility, I’d argue that’s taxes supporting/encouraging mixed mode commuting. (I have no idea if that was 100.00% private or not.)
- TimTheTinker 1y agoIt's insane to me that some countries have such high taxes that tax breaks become the most important variable when deciding which mode of transportation to use.
- brnt 1y agoYou should turn that around: if getting people off the road is something you really care about then make it pay.
- TimTheTinker 1y agoI take no position on which mode of transportation is preferable for others to take (though I have my own preferences, to be sure). Where I come from, taxes are comparatively low. So it's weird to see people talking about them influencing their behavior so significantly. That's a lot of power the government has... I'd rather keep my money than let bureaucrats spend it to manipulate the public's behavior.
- Symbiote 1y agoTaxes spent on building roads presumably significant influence your behavior. Taxing cars puts the cost of those roads more directly on the users of them.
- TimTheTinker 1y agoI'm not talking about building infrastructure or paying directly for things that cost money for the government to do, I'm talking about market manipulation.
- brnt 1y agoWait till you discover how capitalists manipulate markets...
- brnt 1y agoIn addition to sibling: the bike is, for many people, already, 'too cheap to meter', so the tax advantage goes to the train subscription. And quite some employers either give you a train subscription, or let you deduct kilometers travelled at some rate. That rate depends on modality, but the subscription for free is usually (always) a much better deal, _if_ you really don't need that car. Whoever is left driving cars (which is, also in the Netherlands, a large fraction), can't for instance drive up to some remote train station, and rail the rest. That's how you can get those who still drive out of their cars; those that already take trains are covered by the rules as they are.