02 Oct 10
Originally posted by kmax87I don't experience the gridlock. If I did know that gridlock is a problem, then I'd come up with other ways to deal with it. I'm not big on having my car parked in a giant parking lot.
....ah yes the freedom of the peak hour gridlock.....where you are forced to suck in someone else's exhaust pipe, and you can exercise your freedom to be in your own space by deciding whether or not you are going to accelerate and brake, or whether you are going to nurture a bit of room in front of you so that you never stop moving, albeit very slowly...which ...[text shortened]... without all that suppressed highly expressed emotion that's just waiting to do in your aorta.
Perhaps I could get to work early and leave early. Perhaps I can go watch a movie or eat dinner while traffic works itself out. There are always options for those who have a mind to use it.
02 Oct 10
Originally posted by EladarYour boss might now allow your flexible working hours. Your wife might be waiting for you to have dinner with her and the kids at home; or you might be a single parent who has to collect the kids as early as possible after work. Perhaps your options are few. But perhaps some more options would open up if your kids could get themselves home from school via efficient public transport; if you could get back home quickly through the non-congested streets on a state-subsidised bus service; if you could deal with some of your workload on the state-subsidised train on the way to and from the office.
Perhaps I could get to work early and leave early. Perhaps I can go watch a movie or eat dinner while traffic works itself out. There are always options for those who have a mind to use it.
02 Oct 10
Originally posted by EladarWell, if you live in a rural area then public transport isn't going to be very practical in the first place...
I don't experience the gridlock. If I did know that gridlock is a problem, then I'd come up with other ways to deal with it. I'm not big on having my car parked in a giant parking lot.
Perhaps I could get to work early and leave early. Perhaps I can go watch a movie or eat dinner while traffic works itself out. There are always options for those who have a mind to use it.
... and you can avoid rush hour in public transport as well, which is something I personally do so I can work in the train (something you cannot do in a car).
02 Oct 10
If you want to use public transportation, go for it. I'm just saying that there are other options. I wouldn't use it because I've never lived in an area where it was needed. I grew up in Southern California and most of my family still lives there. None of us use public transportation.
02 Oct 10
Your boss might now allow your flexible working hours. Your wife might be waiting for you to have dinner with her and the kids at home; or you might be a single parent who has to collect the kids as early as possible after work.
Single parent? Chances are you made some really bad decisions in life. Hopefully you have other family that can help out. Sucks having a kid just to have another person raise your kid for you.
Wife at home making a meal knowing I won't be home until later? That's her fault. If she doesn't like me coming home late, then we need to move or I need to get another job. Perhaps I can fork out a few more bucks so I can use that "pay only fast lane".
Yep, all of your examples assume that getting to work early or late isn't an option.
02 Oct 10
Originally posted by EladarSo you presumably would support free public transport as it enables you to continue driving where you want. The alternative is to force everyone to use public transport - which you find undesirable.
You are forced to sit next to a complete stranger. If you have your own vehicle, you are surrounded by your own bubble. You can listen to your own music without having to have something stuck in your ears. You do not get the feeling that you are nothing but cattle or sardines.
In your own car you determine the surrounding temperature. You like it cold, ...[text shortened]... With public transportation you have no choice. You give up freedom. You are forced to conform.
02 Oct 10
Originally posted by twhiteheadIt all depends how much that "free public transporation" costs. If we have the extra money and it makes sense as opposed to building new freeways, then sure. Of course states like California could just build turnpikes and charge lots of money for people to get home on time.
So you presumably would support free public transport as it enables you to continue driving where you want. The alternative is to force everyone to use public transport - which you find undesirable.
I have no problem with people supplying their own transportation. I have no problem with people paying to use public transportation.
I'm pretty flexible on this issue.
02 Oct 10
Originally posted by TeinosukeKids who don't live in walking distance already take the bus home, and in areas where they take the school bus, the school bus is free. I think in some places without school buses, students ride the city bus free during school transport hours.
Your boss might now allow your flexible working hours. Your wife might be waiting for you to have dinner with her and the kids at home; or you might be a single parent who has to collect the kids as early as possible after work. Perhaps your options are few. But perhaps some more options would open up if your kids could get themselves home from school via ...[text shortened]... deal with some of your workload on the state-subsidised train on the way to and from the office.
Someone else mentioned traffic. Sitting in a city bus only changes who does the driving, not the stop and go nature (and buses have a lot more stopping). Chicago was the only city I lived in with a train system. Someone else mentioned buses making it easy to travel to the city center. I actually do take the bus on those rare occasions in which I have to go downtown. Our downtown is not high on anyone's destination list. The town is very spread out and so is traffic. I think the city layout and the needs of its citizens are the prime factors in the viability of public transportation.
02 Oct 10
Originally posted by EladarYeah, sure, but isn't the situation we're talking about one where the flexibility might be the problem? Lots of private vehicles lead to gridlock; if, instead, you have a rather smaller number of vehicles on the road because public transport is dominant, and buses each take more passengers than cars do, then the traffic flow is much smoother and people can get to their destination faster.
I have no problem with people supplying their own transportation. I have no problem with people paying to use public transportation.
I'm pretty flexible on this issue.
02 Oct 10
Originally posted by EladarNo it won't. I live in one of the most densely populated countries in the world, with subsidized public transport and a 200% petrol tax and the highways are completely gridlocked during rush hours. Investment in highways has arguably been lacking, but that's hardly something the free market will fix automatically.
Gridlock will take care of itself. Mass transit systems already exist in US cities. If people want to use them, they will. If the additional cost of free mass transit is cheaper than construction, then do it.
03 Oct 10
Originally posted by KazetNagorraNo, the free market doesn't fix freeways. I didn't say that it did. I just said that one way to fix grid lock is to build other freeways or perhaps toll roads. Build more roads or expand the number of lanes for the highways already in existance, that's how you deal with grid lock.
No it won't. I live in one of the most densely populated countries in the world, with subsidized public transport and a 200% petrol tax and the highways are completely gridlocked during rush hours. Investment in highways has arguably been lacking, but that's hardly something the free market will fix automatically.