1

Does anyone know where I can access any resources on how Nottingham developed its public transport netowork to what it is now? It is arguably the 3rd best system in the UK (behind Manchester and London) despite being the 9th largest city. With austerity getting worse in this country, I wonder if there's anything worth learning about how to establish good public transport on a budget. Maybe similar sized cities like Leicester or even bigger like Leeds can adopt some of the strategies that made Nottingham into an easy place to travel around without a car.

33
submitted 10 months ago by t_jpeg@lemmy.world to c/fuckcars@lemmy.world

The UK has some of the worst public transport of Europe's "more economically developed countries" after decades of austerity and lack of investment into public services. But which local councils would you say have made the most out of what they have had to work with in developing a transport network that is effective for people to get to work, school and social events? What would you say makes each of them so effective and how did they achieve these things? I have excluded London as the UK (in my opinion) has a problem with pretending like London is the only place worth investing in when it comes to public transport.

I ask this question so that we can reflect on how places can make the average citizen's life easier for getting about whilst on a budget. Even though the UK is in dire straights at the moment, it might be worth looking to the towns and cities that make the most out of what they're given to understand how to develop good public transport (which will inevitably develop those micro-economies)

Thanks.

[-] t_jpeg@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago

Yeah this makes sense. I come from a country that doesn't have many trams and when I do see them they tend to be interacting with the road which is probably where my perception comes from.

49
submitted 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) by t_jpeg@lemmy.world to c/fuckcars@lemmy.world

Sometimes when watching videos on effective ways of public transport and trams come up, I get a bit annoyed at people not addressing the fact that they seem to share the road with cars. Why do people twerk for trams so much as a form of light rail if they share the road with cars and are subject to being affected by traffic? Doesn't that just make them rail buses without their own bus lane? Doesn't that make them more obsolete? Why do people like them so much?

Edit: Also, does anyone have any resources about the cost to benefit ratio of different intratown/city forms of transport (bike lanes, BRT, trams and other forms of light rail, subways etc)? Would be much appreciated.

160
submitted 11 months ago by t_jpeg@lemmy.world to c/fuckcars@lemmy.world

I live in the UK and my town has not got transport that allows mobility for all. No bike lanes (and if they exist they're just painted on the road), no bus lanes (buses get stuck in the same rush hour traffic and everyone else which doesn't incentivise people to take them) and these buses are also unreliable and infrequent. What makes it worse is that my local council is right leaning. How do I hold my local council accountable to implementing even the cheapest solutions to traffic and transportation? How can I lead to public transport change in my community?

[-] t_jpeg@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago

I wonder what you think the motive behind colonialism and the transatlantic slave trade was.

[-] t_jpeg@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago

Me when I purposely try to ignore global power structures put into place by numerous historical events.

[-] t_jpeg@lemmy.world 43 points 1 year ago

Carlos Sainz's racing IQ is insane.

[-] t_jpeg@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

indubitably based.

[-] t_jpeg@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

I believe the post is referring to those who are both economically and socially liberal. The rainbow capitalists. They believe in equal rights for the LGBTQ+ community, black and brown people etc. but refuse to acknowledge, learn or put the work into how a system like neoliberal capitalism results in these groups being oppressed in the first place.

In order for equality to be achieved the system has to radically change. A lot of liberals don't want this because it makes them feel uncomfortable (and a lot of the time this conflicts with a system they benefit from).

[-] t_jpeg@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

Literally. When the capitalist class are the ones funding the majority if political parties in your country, you are left with either voting for a really right wing candidate or a slightly less right wing candidate.

[-] t_jpeg@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Merc nightmare of a strategy, wow.

[-] t_jpeg@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

They won't work because they take up space and therefore genrate traffic. They are also wasteful to resources, electric or not, because trains do a more efficient job of transporting people en mass than motorways/ highways (decreased cost of traintrack maintenance, decreased use of fuel per capita).

[-] t_jpeg@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)
  1. Accessible trains that cover long distances (particularly high-speed rail) with trains that have floors at the level of the platform, like any European country with a competent public transport system. "Your mother" could also use something like a microcar to get to the station, which is allowed on bike lanes in the Netherlands as long as she can prove she has a disability.

  2. No, but your sons would have an easier and safer time getting around with protected bike lanes, which is precisely why parents in the Netherlands never have to do school runs.

  3. Your groceries will get to you faster the less unneccessary road users are there due to less induced demand. Do you honestly think countries that heavily rely on public transport don't have businesses that use the road regularly? Do you honestly think they have no emergency services (ambulances, firetrucks, police cars)? Have you actually thought about examples of how countries that actually exist using good public transport amenities and dense housing operate? Or are you just against change?

[-] t_jpeg@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago

Twitter culture (depending on what parts of twitter you were on) was really hard to explain. Unless you used it and really knew how to, you don't really get the benefit from it. Its feed structure combine with post length and algorith meant that it was really easy for you to know what other people were saying about things going on right now (reality shows, football matches etc). It also made searching for news so easy (due to its Trending feature), so you were kept in the loop about things.

The meme culture of Twitter was also very unique. I can say with absolute confidence that Twitter memes were bomb (before Musk ruined it). Way better than any memes I'd come across on Reddit or Lemmy so far.

The only problem is you had to take Twitter in small doses. Stan culture and cyber-bullying culture were real negatives of Twitter. Certain people on that app were unhinged and that went unchecked because of how echo-chambers were set by the algorithm. You really had to check yoursel to make sure you weren't being corrupted, especially because cyber-bullying was so normalised there (at least in my experience).

[-] t_jpeg@lemmy.world 44 points 1 year ago

I was under the impression not much had changed because a small minority used 3rd party apps tbh.

view more: next ›

t_jpeg

joined 1 year ago