“Giving people more viable alternatives to driving means more people will choose not to drive, so there will be fewer cars on the road, reducing traffic for drivers.”

Concise, easy to understand, and accurate. I have used it at least a dozen times and it is remarkable how well it works.

Also—

“A bus is about twice as long as a car so it only needs to have four to six passengers on board to be more efficient than two cars.”

  • Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    22 days ago

    Normal countries don’t require every person drive to get to work.

    There are a lot of jobs - the majority, even - where WFH is not an option. A baker is not making the bread at home. And those people are often forced to change employments for a number of reasons. And they simply cannot just chose where to live due to financial constraints.

    All this “fuck cars, use bikes and public transport” is just a dream of a wealthy white collar society who has lost the touch with reality.

    I’m not against bikes and public transports. On the contrary. But unless those two options are actually viable, condemning cars is just a stupid idea. You cannot expect people to up their commute from 30 minutes one way to 3+ hours, just because the city dwellers don’t like their cars.

    • rwtwm@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      22 days ago

      The point seems to have gone quite a long way over your head. The person above is advocating for a system where transit/active travel is the easy option. Not one where you have to up your commute by 500% to do the right thing.

      It’s not, “just use transit”, it’s “please make it easier to do so”.

      • Treczoks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        22 days ago

        It’s not, “just use transit”, it’s “please make it easier to do so”.

        Exactly my thoughts. The current situation is decidedly different, though. I would not mind public transport being an alternative, but at the moment, in many places, it simply is not.

    • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      22 days ago

      All this “fuck cars, use bikes and public transport” is just a dream of a wealthy white collar society who has lost the touch with reality.

      Do you think ~90% of the 30 million people in Shanghai are all white collars who lost touch with society? What about 99% of Singapore?

      You cannot expect people to up their commute from 30 minutes one way to 3+ hours, just because the city dwellers don’t like their cars.

      These places public transit, including intercity, is far, far superior to driving, so people use it. In America, our public transit is garbage, so people don’t use it.

      • Treczoks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        22 days ago

        Do you think ~90% of the 30 million people in Shanghai are all white collars who lost touch with society? What about 99% of Singapore?

        Those places are so densely populated that they can afford a good public transport system. But look at other cities in the world - or, more precisely, their environment - and you will soon see a serious lack of public transport once you leave the cities. Yes, people are living there.

        These places public transit, including intercity, is far, far superior to driving, so people use it.

        That is totally fine. I was not talking about city dwellers, they do have access to public transport in most cases. I’m especially talking about the people not living in the city centers.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          21 days ago

          That’s not actually true. Our decentralized system of roads and cars is actually more expensive than a robust rail and bus system. And I’ve been to other places, in Europe and South America. They all have better developed mass transit. You don’t need to be South Korea. You just have to be willing.

    • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      22 days ago

      what? only rich people drive to work lol, poor people take public transport because that’s hilariously much cheaper, especially since all the cheap housing is in cities.