Highway spending increased by 90% in 2021. This is one of many reasons why car traffic is growing faster than population growth.
Wheres the light rail?
Completely agree with your point, not trying to detract or anything, but why 69?
TBF US highways are undermaintained and a collapse could endanger lives.
Iโd rather have a railway expansion but we still gotta maintain whats been built.
That is premised on the notion that the expansion that has happened until the present is sustainable.
Hope that bus is going to 69 very separate locations some of which are at least 20 miles from the closest urban area and in opposite directions to accommodate those who cannot afford or donโt want to live in a city.
This person has never lived anywhere close to an actual small American town and has no idea how small towns are structured.
โHereโs a solutionโ
โThat solution doesnโt work for A LOT of peopleโ
โWell you donโt think itโll work for valid reasons you must not want anything to work everโ
What you are dong there is actually an argument against the other side of the issue. Exclusively Residential zoning plans are what create the situation you are referring to and they also account for the constant risk of bankruptcy of car centric cities. Dense, multi-use zoning allows for the creation of transit corridors where a single bus stop can serve several hundred people within a 5 minute walk, instead of serving just a handful of people within a 20 minute walk (the problem you are complaining about).
Valid and I had not considered that.
However, this post is in โfuck carsโ not โfuck poor zoning laws.โ The solutions and complaints I see in this thread have NOTHING to do with remapping the way cities work, which would be necessary to even be able to consider saying โfuck carsโ for the vast majority of suburban / rural residents.
The comments here seem entirely fixated on โsolvingโ a symptom of a much larger problem by creating several more problems for other people because it would be more convenient for them.
And while your solution is nice for those in the city I ask again, what if someone lives 20 or 30 miles (not 20 mins walking) away because they can buy a 3 bedroom house in a neighboring city or unincorporated rural area for the price of renting a small studio apartment in the city, and have a nicer view.
They are both the same single problem. Remember that fuck cars is not about the hate of cars solely, but about the car centric infrastructure and its externalities on society. โFuck carsโ as a phrase is just the succinct summary of a largely complex and multifaceted social issue.
Why are the cars spaced but the walking humans not?
The car/bus comparison is useful, the others arenโt because they travel at different speeds.
Probably walking can still move more people than cars. If walking is 5 kph and driving is 50, people need to take 10x less space to break even. They probably do, as cars need to keep distance.
Well, itโs still a useful comparison for cities. Good traffic planning brings people into the city center via rail and buses, and then they make sure the city center is walkable.
That way, they can fit the most people into the city center, without it turning into a massive traffic jam.
Uh, theyโre not? The cars are in fact much closer to one another than they could possibly be while moving at speed. They would only get this close to one another during a traffic jam. On the other hand, the walkers are entirely capable of moving in exactly the way they are pictured.
I understand your argument but there is a clear bias here. Unless youre in an exceptionally denly populated area, people dont travel this close to one another. Most leave at least 1-2 humans gap between eachother, especially if there are wheelchairs, kids and prams involved.
Thats all my argument was, the cars are spaced out per lane (albiet bumper to bumper) but the side to side space is not consistent with the walkers. You could fit cars in between the cars with how they are spaced in that pic. I live in a victorian town where the roads force you to drive wingmirror to wingmirror
Im on the fuckcars space here, trust me I agree cars need to be phased out/down but thats no excuse for bias in data
That and the fact that cars have a much bigger distance radius. So everything can be spaced out more.
15 minute walkable cities are cool. But lets not pretend like you canโt drive 2 towns over in 15 minutes by car to reach what you need.
Fuck cars, but that isnโt really an argument.
Not sure where you drive, but those cars arenโt spaced at all- theyโre very close to bumper-to-bumper, which you can only do at extremely low speeds that unrealistic for travel. Meanwhile, the people that are bundled together ARE actually capable of moving like that, though the average american (who has a larger โpersonal bubbleโ that other cultures) would probably not like it.
Moreover, the car example could actually be worse than it appears- because theyโre taking up all lanes of a road, so youโre assuming theyโre coming AND going, which none of the other examples are assuming. If you did it properly, the line of cars would be two wide and twice as deep!
I understand your argument but there is a clear bias here. Unless youre in an exceptionally denly populated area, people dont travel this close to one another. Most leave at least 1-2 humans gap between eachother, especially if there are wheelchairs, kids and prams involved.
Thats all my argument was, the cars are spaced out per lane (albiet bumper to bumper) but the side to side space is not consistent with the walkers. You could fit cars in between the cars with how they are spaced in that pic. I live in a victorian town where the roads force you to drive wingmirror to wingmirror
Im on the fuckcars space here, trust me I agree cars need to be phased out/down but thats no excuse for bias in data
I understand your argument but there is a clear bias here.
Welcome to fuckcars. Nobody is here to have an honest or productive discussion, this place only exists to let people vent.
If youโve ever tried to drive a car youโll discover that you need to keep a relatively large distance between other cars, particularly when moving at high speeds in order to avoid crashes.
By contrast, when youโre moving through a crowd, you can get practically on top of someone else without risk of bodily harm.
I understand your argument but there is a clear bias here. Unless youre in an exceptionally denly populated area, people dont travel this close to one another. Most leave at least 1-2 humans gap between eachother, especially if there are wheelchairs, kids and prams involved.
Thats all my argument was, the cars are spaced out per lane (albiet bumper to bumper) but the side to side space is not consistent with the walkers. You could fit cars in between the cars with how they are spaced in that pic. I live in a victorian town where the roads force you to drive wingmirror to wingmirror
Im on the fuckcars space here, trust me I agree cars need to be phased out/down but thats no excuse for bias in data
