• AA5B@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Complements. The reason we’re stuck in this auto-dystopia (are we auto-asphyxiating? ;-) is people wanting one size fits all infrastructure. Let’s apply this more intelligently this time - recognize that some areas are more built up than others and different solutions scale differently . In general that can be a good thing, but we need interconnected services for everyone. That does include cars in many areas, although I agree a worthwhile goal for cities/town centers is that people not need a car

    • kameecoding@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      The reason we’re stuck in this auto-dystopia (are we auto-asphyxiating? ;-) is people wanting one size fits all infrastructure.

      The reason the US is a car dependent dystopia is because they let the auto industry dismantle a shitton of public infrastructure.

      Just because you build public transport infrastructure doesn’t mean you can’t have your car, look at switzerland, netherlands, they have good public transport/bike infrastructure and still have cars.

      Having great public transportation actually makes it better for people who only want to use cars, because it takes off a lot of people from the road who now have alternative options.

    • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Holy based someone on Lemmy not blindly advocating for public transport literally everywhere.

      • mightyfoolish@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I also want to add that if public transit was more more common; it would EVENTUALLY spread to the rural areas just in a more limited fashion. Also, towns do build up as they age, it’s not like they are static.

        • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s really efficient in densely populated areas but inefficient in sparsely populated areas.

          While it should be everywhere eventually , the focus should definitely be on cities first.

            • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              The last miles are a huge problem in villages. Train stops and you then walk 5 miles every time? The bus needs to ride every 30 minutes to bring along 5 people that’s super expensive.

              Also everyone there already has a car anyways since it’s basically required there.

              Cities however can use public transport far more efficiently.

              • kameecoding@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                you do realize trains are part of the public transport and no reasonable person would think you can’t take a car to the train station?

                what do you think I am talking about? a bus going every 30 minutes to every house in bumfuck nowhere on the off chance they get a passenger?

                • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Yes but then you already have the car.

                  And if you already have the car then that’s usually far more practical than public transport.

                  Public transport works well in cities because it can completely eliminate the need for someone to own a car.