this post was submitted on 08 Feb 2024
1295 points (99.3% liked)

196

16732 readers
2687 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FireRetardant 98 points 10 months ago (5 children)

I cannot understand people that argue their 6 lane stroad is better than this in any way. It may feel more convenient for some, but at what cost?

[–] [email protected] 65 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Probably because public transit requires people to be around other people, and they'd rather get around in their little bubble without interaction (except giving a BMW the finger).

[–] FireRetardant 49 points 10 months ago (1 children)

This but also a lack of experiencing good transit

[–] [email protected] 14 points 10 months ago (1 children)

True, but I'm just going off of my experience as an American. Too many people are so antisocial that the idea of sharing space with other strangers is foreign, mostly because they've lived so long without it. Obviously this isn't true in places like NYC, but in Los Angeles you'd have a hell of a time convincing people to give up their cars.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I think a lack of being in public spaces creates the antisocial "uncomfortable around other people" issues that have been growing. Sprawl kills communities!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

No it doesn't. Rampant abuse and bigotry does, and that is the reality most Americans accept that you deny.

It's dangerous being around strangers here, especially male ones who will overpower and beat/kill you in public for the slightest offense.

So people, especially women and trans folk, are safer in cars than they are on public transport.

And that's nothing to say of the Jim Crow era, or how public transport was denied during the lockdowns depriving the elderly of freedom of movement.

No. Getting rid of cars will always be bad. You'll never have your green utopia and you ought not to have it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Safer from crimes is an argument that I could get behind depending on what country you're in but in terms of keeping people alive, especially people outside of cars, cars are so much unsafer for all genders.

As for green utopia, I'm chillin'

[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

This is what headphones are for, fuck cars

This is from someone who feels physical discomfort when someone interacts me unprompted

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Agreed, but I can understand the apprehension for those who aren't familiar

[–] Mog_fanatic 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I think the key thing is most people don't like change. They know stroads. They may not love stroads but they work and it's what they've used. I've been all over the place in this country and by and large public transportation SUCKS and creates more headaches than anything. Just hopping into a car is 1000x easier. So that's the view I think most people go into this with. In the cities where public transportation is good, it's a complete game changer, but they are few and far between so most people don't have a good reference point. They see people pushing public transportation and think of their own shitty system and say F that.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago

They’ve also had to invest in their car personally and they don’t want to have their investment nullified. Who do they sell the car to if they’re no good anymore?

Of course, there will still be roads and you might still need the car; but if you have the car why not just drive straight to the place you need to go?

So personal transportation itself is a bit of a problem - you need to make the replacement better than the current status quo. If it doesn’t save people time, if it doesn’t allow people to transport goods as easily as vehicles do, they’re not going to want to give up their car; because at the end of the day it will ultimately complicate things for them.

It’s a huge challenge towards gaining acceptance for public transit.

[–] GlitterInfection 1 points 10 months ago

I mean, you can kind of understand it since you listed one way it's better: It's more convenient for some.

[–] uis 1 points 10 months ago

It is only less than half of stroad. You stil have another half to add for people.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 10 months ago (2 children)

The whole problem is that you are asking the individual to assume societal costs. The individual is only seeking to meet their personal needs, and is not ready to engage on social progress.

To them, the transition from full utility via their own car, to relying on public transit suggests there will be a time of hardship, where the system is not fully laid out, but their options are curtailed.

Getting over that hump is critical to progress, and cars will be an important part of the shift

[–] grue 5 points 10 months ago

The whole problem is that you are asking the individual to assume societal costs.

Forcing everybody to drive does that way more than providing viable alternatives and letting people to choose which best suits them does.

[–] FireRetardant 3 points 10 months ago

Society already pays the costs of car centric infrastructure and it is bankrupting many cities.