Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
My mother [when younger] always told me to wash my hands after touching the poles on the subway. Didn't listen.
Me too. A little soap and water fixes a whole lot of ills. Every time I walk in the house I hear my mom's voice in my head telling me to "Wash your hands.'' although passed away eight years ago and I hadn't lived with her for 40 years prior to that.
Those germs would be from Chicago subways, Els and buses and Portland buses and light rail.
That's because you live in a dense urban area with lots of traffic. The entire US is not like that. It takes me between 10 and 15 minutes to drive the 3.5 miles from my house to my job across town during morning and afternoon commute times. It will sometimes take a little longer if it's snowy.
That would be more accurate, obviously we don't know specifically where the person is talking about, but even where you live, a round trip without stopping would take 20-30 minutes, not a minute or two each way.
Don't get the point of arguing against someone's personal experience.
Actually I am not arguing a personal experience, I am pointing out the probability of exaggerating to make the wait for a bus to seem like it would take forever compared to a car.
If antagonizing most of the regulars on the thread is excellent. It doesn't add anything new ideas to discuss other than "I think the most posters here are snobbish elitists". It is fairly obvious that public transportation doesn't work well in much of the country; I'm more interested in discussing places where public transportation is practical. But apparently doing so gives off a feeling of superiority. One side we have a few posters actually looking up interesting data, another just tossing insults.
But you don't have any new ideas. It's the same thing again and again, concentrating on the same few cities. There is no real discussion of life outside your purview. It's an extremely narrow discussion on pretty much every thread. And, yes, I have read a lot of posts over the past year my opinion isn't based on a brief skimming and rush to judgement. Ignoring the majority of the country is just turning a blind eye to the way millions of people live. In this your definition of "urban" is also very narrow, focusing only on the few major urban, high density cities in the US. But "urban development" isn't confined only to those cities.
I'm not that interested in focusing less dense urban areas, though I do mention them occasionally. I'm actually more interested in discussing more "urban" places or whatever I should call it in other countries (couldn't you also argue it's equally narrow to focus just on the US?). I grew up in rather low density suburbia, I'm well aware of that public transit is of limited usethere, which I posted about earlier in thread. But people are going to post when interests them. If you'd like to talk about a different focus, you're welcome to start your own thread.
I'm not that interested in focusing less dense urban areas, though I do mention them occasionally. I'm actually more interested in discussing more "urban" places or whatever I should call it in other countries (couldn't you also argue it's equally narrow to focus just on the US?). I grew up in rather low density suburbia, I'm well aware of that public transit is of limited usethere, which I posted about earlier in thread. But people are going to post when interests them. If you'd like to talk about a different focus, you're welcome to start your own thread.
Yeah, but as the posts you link to show, this thread is full of people who are think the only solution to Americans who drive is to artificially increase the costs of driving to give transit a greater economical advantage. The fact that transit is already far more subsidized per user and just don't work as well for driving for most Americans irks them. So while it's great that you don't personally care about what happens in 90% of America, the same can't be said for many of the "regulars." Of course, modal split between transit and cars is about 80% in Europe as well. That's lower than the United States, but cars work better for most Europeans than public transit does for most trips as well. The bigger than getting rid of cars is that more of Europe is walkable than the US.
Yeah, but as the posts you link to show, this thread is full of people who are think the only solution to Americans who drive is to artificially increase the costs of driving to give transit a greater economical advantage. The fact that transit is already far more subsidized per user and just don't work as well for driving for most Americans irks them. So while it's great that you don't personally care about what happens in 90% of America, the same can't be said for many of the "regulars." Of course, modal split between transit and cars is about 80% in Europe as well. That's lower than the United States, but cars work better for most Europeans than public transit does for most trips as well. The bigger than getting rid of cars is that more of Europe is walkable than the US.
One could also say that the US isn't one big city, so of course cars will work best for most people in this country. But the moment you have a populated metro, it would be best for that metro to have an adequate transit system in place even though it makes more sense to have a car in rural America.
One could also say that the US isn't one big city, so of course cars will work best for most people in this country. But the moment you have a populated metro, it would be best for that metro to have an adequate transit system in place even though it makes more sense to have a car in rural America.
Problem with hopelessly vague terms is they're hopelessly vague. I think we went through the exercise before where I showed that by your definition of adequate, Manhattan has inadequate transit.
Problem with hopelessly vague terms is they're hopelessly vague. I think we went through the exercise before where I showed that by your definition of adequate, Manhattan has inadequate transit.
And I would agree with you, for the size of NYC, it's transit is inadequate and should be expanded. That doesn't mean because it isn't perfect that we should get rid of it because it is useless to someone in rural Montana.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
