2 ms·
That's fine, I've only lived in the US and can only provide that perspective. However I cannot imagine a version of public transit that would be so good that I
by llbbdd 1y ago
That's fine, I've only lived in the US and can only provide that perspective. However I cannot imagine a version of public transit that would be so good that I would actually use it - and this includes looking at the options available in other countries, because as far as I know we're still operating with buses, trains, subways, carpools, etc. Until ya'll have free taxis that come to your house and take you directly to your destination, it's just not a comparable sell.
To that extent I think it comes back to preference and maybe culture, and doesn't indicate any kind of failure. In the US we can afford not to take public transit and exercise that preference, in many places, it's not an option.
- queenkjuul 1y agoPlenty of Europeans can afford to do whatever they want and still take transit. Same in Japan, China, all over the developed world. I just fundamentally can't get why you're so offput by trains.
- palata 1y ago> In the US we can afford not to take public transit and exercise that preference, in many places, it's not an option. Public transit is objectively a better solution than individual cars. It's not that other countries have public transit because they don't have a choice. They do: they just choose the better option. > To that extent I think it comes back to preference and maybe culture, and doesn't indicate any kind of failure. Sure, it was built like this in the US because of the culture. But retrospectively it was a mistake. Driving an individual car emits more CO2 than taking a bus or a train, period. The US is probably the only place in the world where a swasticar is considered "ecological": it's using a lot of energy, just because it's heavy.