A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!
1. Be Civil
You may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.
2. No hate speech
Don't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.
3. Don't harass people
Don'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 topic
This community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.
5. No reposts
Do 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.
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:
to be honest; a factor of 10 seems a bit low
Yes, I will cycle 15 miles (one-way) to the nearest produce section.
I'm all for bikes in sufficiently urban areas, but they are never going to be reasonable for 90% of America (by land mass, not population).
We need passenger train service (or other mass transit) that can cover lower density areas and still be reliable. (There's active train tracks within 100m of both my driveway and the produce section, so for me a passenger train would be ideal.)
Why the fuck is the nearest produce section 15 miles away? That's a major planning failure. Most trips that Americans take are less than 3 miles, so planning by population would be a lot more sensible than planning by land mass.
Thats more a problem inherrent to how america builds its cities than it is a problem inherrent to the bicycle. I agree we still need to buld rail, but you would likely still have to increase density to get good ridership. Otherwise you start to sacrafice speed for frequent stops serving low density. A problem many buses already face.
"City" is an optimistic word for where I am compelled (by familial duty) to live. But, we need to plan for my density, too. Otherwise we'll still have millions of cars on the roads and they will need somewhere to park when they visit the city.
When I visit a real city, I don't mind paying for parking. I'd prefer not to have to pay for parking to get groceries each week, but that would probably be fine. But biking is not reasonable, and mass transit is unavailable.
people who live in 90% of the least densely populated land on earth are... not that many people in the grand scheme of things.
And if you live close enough to civilization to have utilities like power maybe it's possible to also have a grocery store that's closer than average distance between towns in germany. Might even be beneficial idk.
I would love to be able to ride trains to get places and not have to drive everywhere.
I don't dislike driving, but if I could fit my schedule around public transit, I think I'd prefer that, most of the time.
Good public transit would be so frequent you wouldn't need to fit your schedule around it. I live in a place with passable public transit and I never check schedules before leaving the house. I wait 10 mins max (I'm still annoyed sometimes tho)
So the tracks are already there they just don't run passenger trains on it?..
worse, a lot of places have "rails2trails" programs where they rip out old train tracks and put in bicycle paths instead.
It makes more sense to put trains there and convert old car roads to bike paths
Yep. Passenger service stopped in my area before I was born, but my father remembers being able to use them that way.
Freight trains run through multiple times a day, still.
The "old train depot" meuseam / visitor's center is literally across the street from the grocery store w/ produce section.
Even if you need/prefer an ebike you get about 85 ebike batteries out of one Nissan leaf not even a powerful e-car the most pedestrian one.