this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2023
241 points (98.0% liked)

Asklemmy

43984 readers
1096 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] masterairmagic@sh.itjust.works 35 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Build a decent train line and those people using phones or checking they nails will not put anyone in danger.

[–] Belgdore@lemm.ee -3 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I’m all for better public transit.

But for those of us who don’t live in a city, it’s not an option. I live about a five minute walk from my nearest neighbor, and a 20 minute drive from work. I’m not in a neighborhood or apartment. They could not feasibly build a rail system to service me and the millions of others who live like I do.

Busses are an option but then my commute would start hours earlier, and they would not pay for themselves where I live. Or I would be paying a very high fair.

Just build a rail system is not the solution.

[–] radix@lemm.ee 14 points 1 year ago

I think it's got to be subways in big cities, buses in suburban towns, and trains to connect rural/suburban/urban areas. All of these being free like libraries would be great, and the commute would be shortened by rides available every 15 minutes.

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Public transit isn't supposed to "pay for itself" via fares. It is a net-good that makes it so that everyone doesn't need a car and all the supporting infrastrucutre and wastes of space and energy that cars require.
If cars weren't subsidized to be the primary mode of transportation, you wouldn't live "5 miles from your neighbor," and you wouldn't need a car to get to work.

[–] Belgdore@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago

Ok, so I’m supposed to move when they build this new transit?With what money?

[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 5 points 1 year ago

It is the solution for the vast majority of people (though I personally like bikes better).

[–] puppy@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Public transport isn't supposed to "pay for itself". How about asphalt roads in your area, have they paid for themselves?

[–] Belgdore@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes via the commerce that results in taxes. But the pint is that public transit does not get built unless you can convince law makers that it will be cheaper than any alternative to the government’s pocket.

[–] puppy@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Road related taxes are not even enough for maintaining roads let alone build them. Watch the below video from the 3.18 mark.

https://youtu.be/QPAil1xY42I?t=191

Tell me this, if your sparsely populated area justifies asphalt roads because of the "resulting commerce", why can't public transport achieve the same?

[–] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 1 points 1 year ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/QPAil1xY42I?t=198

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source, check me out at GitHub.