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:
"I can beat them all to the next red light."
Oh man.
I remember when I think it was Houston started using timed lights, the idiots said that a light timed for 30 MPH was also timed for 60 and 90 MPH. It's hard to comprehend such stupidity and bad math.
Houston is the only place where I've ever been passed on the right ... while I was in the right lane.
whilst I agree with the message, no busses are that narrow
There's some artistic liberties taken but neither are the bike lanes or passenger cars that narrow.
The bike lane doesn't have a car parked in it, also...
You're morally obligated to smash mirrors on cars parked on bike lanes
Well, if we use the car to scale - the bike should be 1 seat wide, the bus stop should be 2 seats wide, and the bus itself should be 5 seats wide
Someone with photoshop skills needs to fix this
It's fine, even in it's current form it still manages to drive in the point
The artistic liberties contradict the point it's supposed to make.
Cars aren't that small, and buses aren't that uncomfortable.
No bus has that little people in it either
There are many cases when a bus can have a really small amount of people, sometimes 1 or 2
I was on my usual bike ride a couple of years ago. On a particularly wide road, a car passed me and went way over into the other lane to do so, even though he could have kept the required 4' distance from me without crossing the double yellow line. Because he went so far into the opposite lane, a van coming the opposite way had to slow down a little bit - not even stop, just slow down. As this van passed me, the driver literally stuck his upper body out the window and yelled "you're gonna get somebody killed!" ... at me, not at the driver of the car that passed me.
I just couldn't believe the insanity of this dude. Like, I didn't make the fucking car pass me like that, and at most it made him get to the red light two seconds later than he otherwise would have.
This reminds me "nice" cars that do stupid shit because they see a biker. I just want cars to be predictable. I don't want them to be nice.
I can't stand the "oh I'll stop for you when I'm not supposed to at this 2 way stop" cars.
Like, dude. This doesn't help me. I have to wait and make sure the the car coming up behind you also stops and doesn't just pass you because you're being stupid.
And then now there is a car coming the other way and they aren't stopping (because they don't actually have a stop sign).
Can you just drive safe and predictable? I literally WANT to wait here until there are NO cars. Not 3-4 cars I now have to hope stop and don't kill me.
When people do this I literally just get off my bike now to make it obvious I don't want their "help". I've had too many times where people doing this have put me in danger. I have eyes. I want to wait until it's clear.
I understand and empathize with your frustration, as a commuter long boarder i have similar sentiments about how politeness can inconvenience me because of the precautions i have to take to stay safe. I would, however, like to point out that you are complaining about people putting in an earnest effort to exercise empathy for you; those who don't bike or otherwise do not have the experience to know that predictability is key, but they are otherwise attempting to care for your well being
Comic misses a parked car
Nᴏ Wᴀʀ Bᴜᴛ Cʟᴀss Wᴀʀ
Yeah, that matches my experience on public transport alright.
Crammed in so tight you can't even bend a knee, and god help you if you're travelling with luggage or groceries...
That's not really a car issue, that's a "no-one invests in public transport" issue.
That’s not really a car issue, that’s a “no-one invests in public transport” issue.
...which is absolutely a car issue. It's not happening for no reason!
People don't invest in public transit because they have cars. Imagine if cars were banned. People would be falling over themselves to improve the systems they need to use every day.
Also too many public transport is being treated like a business, where you optimally want to cut expense therefore always reduce frequency until the vehicle is crammed to full capacity.
The only thing cars are better at than public transit and/or riding a bike (or similar), is traveling long distances. I'm not talking about your commute to the office; I'm taking about driving a percentage of the way across the country.
In that context and that context only, vehicles move more quickly, more consistently, and without needing as many breaks. With the obvious caveat of: traffic.
Other than that, for any notable Metro area, public transit should be the default, not your backup plan when your vehicle won't start.
The only reason that's true in the US at least, is because our long distance public transport infrastructure is horrific. Trains here are slow, dirty, expensive, and limited in their routes.
If we had a dense network of cross-country high speed trains, cars would be far less necessary. It's a vicious cycle. More cars requires more car-centric infrastructure, which creates incentive to continue using cars, which feeds the need for expanding the car-infra, etc.
The fun part is that the freeway system isn't built for cars. It's built to a standard that will survive entire armies, tanks, and other equipment being shipped across country, and they can act as impromptu runways for aircraft.
The American road network was built the way it is for national defense in case anyone were foolish enough to try to invade, so the military can quickly and effectively relocate their assets to where they are needed.
Sure, most of that stuff could go offroading to wherever they needed to go, but it would not be a quick trip.
Cars just use the highways and justify their existence until something else needs the roads as something other than a road.... Automakers have taken advantage of the fact that most of America is isolated in small pockets and Metro areas, while the vast majority of the country is borderline desolate. There's hundreds of miles of grassland, desert, forests, farmland, etc between some places. No transit goes there, because nobody lives there and nobody goes there, so if you need to go through that place, GFL without a vehicle.
The story isn't any different in my country.
It's all just a charade to make it seem like the government is doing everyone a favor in building highways and freeways, meanwhile the military is pulling the strings for where these roads should be built.
Cars are actually sub-par for long distance travel. They have to stop to refuel every few hundred miles, require horrifyingly expensive highway infrastructure to travel at speed, have to manually negotiate all intersections / exchanges, and their individualized form factor multiplies the maintenance upkeep required for that sort of mileage. Trains and planes both kick their ass at distance travel in different ways.
What cars are actually superior at is medium to short distance adhoc hauling trips at medium speeds on the edges of a transportation system. Rural work and visits, last mile drop-offs, back country mobility.
Airplanes, long distance busses, or trains?
Cars a good for long distance travel to the middle of nowhere. Which I personally rarely do, if I need to, I carpool or rent a car.
I live in the middle of nowhere, I am basically obligated to own a car.
Circumstances have always demanded that I have one. Whether work demands, or simply being able to travel away from my house at all.
If I lived and worked in a city, at a job that didn't demand a vehicle, I wouldn't have one.
The public transit vehicles that go short distance are optimized for short distances. The ones that go long distance are designed differently. This is feasible, because there is no need for a single vehicle to work both short range and long range routes.
Take busses for example:
Yeah that sounds about right.
Countries with super good train infrastructure can get around that pretty well but countries without that would rely on cars.
The standard for passenger rail over long distances is 200kmh, which is about 124mph. Can your Toyota pickup do that?
No. I also don't own a Toyota, or a pickup. But I need to go to my city in "middle of nowhere". Your high speed train, local transit buses, and even taxis, don't go where I live.
There's lots of cases where vehicle ownership is not a requirement. There's also plenty of examples where if you don't have a vehicle, you're just not going anywhere.
public transit is only that crowded one trip in a hundred in my city. This comic feels anti-bus as much as it feels anti-car.
I believe the author is making a statement about the hypocrisy of the carbrained. The choice to depict busses as crowded is to emphasize that point - but I agree, it's not painting buses in a flattering way