this post was submitted on 15 Nov 2024
560 points (98.6% liked)

Fuck Cars

9630 readers
323 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://mastodon.uno/users/rivoluzioneurbanamobilita/statuses/113485559637864463

La soluzione al #traffico era già nota nel 1927

In un manifesto dell'azienda di trasporto di Wichita Falls, si chiede di dare priorità al trasporto di massa, perché molto più efficiente: in un #tram possono sedersi comodamente le persone portate da ben 28 #auto (con 2 persone per auto, stima ottimistica).

100 anni fa era già tutto li: problema e soluzione

@energia #mezziPubblici #mobilitaSostenibile

Trovata qui:
https://www.facebook.com/100033858551663/posts/1365019054636700/

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] udon@lemmy.world 6 points 11 hours ago (4 children)

I agree we need fewer cars and more pubic transport, but these comparisons always assume maximum efficiency in bus use and minimum efficiency in car use. What if we only have 3 people on the bus? Maybe people prefer cars to an extent because they are not all crammed up? We need to make buses/trains enjoyable to use for those people who are now using cars (not me, who is already on the train anyway)

[–] lgsp@feddit.it 2 points 1 hour ago

Actually the ad mentions

  • 56 people can "seat" on the streetcar (and many more could stand if needed)
  • cars are pretty full with an unrealistic occupancy of 2 people per vehiclr

And finally 3 people in a bus occupy less room than 3 cars and consume more or less the same amount of fuel...

[–] BluesF@lemmy.world 7 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

This is a good point. Especially because public transport comes out on top even if you consider them half empty, or cars full.

[–] udon@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Meh, I'm not in for comfortable as in "I have two seats for myself". More like: It's fucking awesome to drive by bus, because you can sleep (horizontally!), have a meal together, work/have a video call, have sex, store your gym bag, whatever you may come up with. Luxury for the masses at a higher quality than you can do all these things in cars at the moment. That is what I want to see, not the sad future where we all just sit on regular buses like we do now. I think we need to demand higher standards.

Japan is experimenting with some of those things much more than European countries. The "luxury" type night buses are quite comfortable if you're not over 1,80m and thus exceptionally tall. Switzerland has panorama trains to enjoy the alps while having a snack with your friends (even if you're 80+ and can't hike anymore).

That, not the village bus that comes once a day, is full of vomit, girls get harrassed and all the other shit

[–] BluesF@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

I don't really want to be involved in public transport people fuck on. But other than that you're describing trains. Busses are for short distance travel which I don't personally think requires much more luxury than a seat and a window.

[–] udon@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

Well, let's put it differently. Cars are not just about going from A to B. Most use people get out of them is storing stuff and moving it without effort, safely. Public transport doesn't offer that. "Fucking" here stands more for a bunch of stuff that people do otherwise in cars that requires some privacy you don't get on trains.

The point is, trains are the minimum tolerable environment for most people, and already not tolerable for others

[–] iamtherealwalrus@lemmy.world 9 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

In the city where my mother lives they are repeatedly cutting down on the number of public busses, to the point where there is one bus per hour on Sundays. This is the 3rd largest city in the country of Denmark. The thinking goes: Well nobody is using the busses so why have so many. Then as less busses serve the city, less people use them. And round and round we go.

[–] udon@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago

Same dynamic as "well, the streets are too full, let's build more streets!" which has worked great over the past century to fight traffic jams!

[–] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 2 points 8 hours ago

well the expectation is if more people prefer public transport over cars, the average number will increase to a level comparable to max capacity on busy hours