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.
Well, look at it this way - how many cities are decommissioning or dismantling their public transit systems, as opposed to the number of cities that are building, maintaining, or expanding them?
Remember, in the 1930's-1960's, many cities did indeed dismantle entire streetcar networks.
So if public transit is a "fad," it has been fairly robust over the past 40 years or so.
Just as many cities are expanding their highways..... people want options.
i feel like its less about options and more about being so called cost effective...but if we weren't so behind we wouldn't be struggling with trying to play catch up with mass transit.
this is why you have all this talk about light rail systems and street cars, trollies, etc. more short term solutions...that will lead to the same discussion later about what to do when the answer should be heavy rail. at least IMO.
It's clear that we need more of everything. It's clear that we don't have enough transit options in our cities (our cities being built entirely for cars has had some negative consequences, to be sure), but that doesn't mean we can or should aim for "going back" to transit entirely.
As I mentioned before, cars provide for economic opportunities that are not possible with transit. High value-added Clean technology manufacturing activities are a perfect example. Show me a wind turbine or electric car or algae farm that is accessible by public transit. Many economic activities require the cheap land and truck accessibility and employment base flexibility that cars have allowed.
The future of the US economy and jobs is in increasing our exports and boosting clean technology manufacturing. Individual cars will always be the most efficient/effective/cheapest way of getting the right workers to the right site.
All I'm getting at is that public transit has its limitations just like the personal auto does. To think that either is just a "fad" is silly, but that's not what the OP asked. The question is "is judging cities largely based on centralization and public transportation a fad." I have to hope so. As things get more complicated it will be necessary to be much more nuanced and holistic systems-based in our understanding of the world and its economic networks. No city really ends at its city limits--and the local always has global ramifications.
Is it a "fad" to think "as long as I live in Portland I'm doing the world a favor?" I hope so.
Personally, I think it's a fad to think of "cities" as being definable structures at all.
i feel like its less about options and more about being so called cost effective...but if we weren't so behind we wouldn't be struggling with trying to play catch up with mass transit.
this is why you have all this talk about light rail systems and street cars, trollies, etc. more short term solutions...that will lead to the same discussion later about what to do when the answer should be heavy rail. at least IMO.
So cars have no economical or practical use? Is. City bad if it does not have good public transit?
IMO its not worthwhile to live in a city without adequate mass transit, but maybe thats just me.
i'd rather the country use the model of the dmv area to be honest. i know that ny is a "monster" and not something that can easily be used as a blueprint but there's no reason that something like the dmv area can't be.
the entire south east should look at it as a model IMO. i love their options and would love seeing those type of options in other south eastern cities and their metro areas.
i have to agree to disagree then.
i think europe is an excellent model of what to do when it comes to a lot of things...and this is one of them.
it's tempting to think this, but europe has a very unique position in the global economy as a pretty well-buffered low-immigration middleman continent (of course this is very much generalizing, but I'm starting with your generalization).
We do need to become "more" like europe in that we need to increase transit options for our own benefit and for future sustainability. That said, could the US economy function right now if we magically got rid of the suburbs and cars and we woke up tomorrow and all of our cities looked like Europe's? Not at all.
The poor, disenfranchised immigrant residents of Paris's outer suburbs--many of whom must deal with incredibly inequitable transit options like buses that only come a couple times a day--would LOVE to have a car. Having a car would give them many more options, like many immigrants have in the US. (or, you know, the french could stop being so racist and maybe provide some transit options.... but here's my point--transit dependance without a readjustment in our capitalist values will be bad)
I'm not saying the world is hunky-dory for immigrants in the US because they have cars, but the widespread use of the personal auto has allowed for an economy in the US that can accommodate more immigrants than Europe can.
I'm open to debate on this, but I'm firm that everyone at least needs to get beyond knee-jerk reactions and stereotypes and look at things more closely.
So cars have no economical or practical use? Is. City bad if it does not have good public transit?
Who said that the cars have no economical or practical use? Have you been to any city in a industrialized country outside of North America and Australia? Have you seen their public transit?
Here is Stockholm: City population: 847k, Metro pop: 2,000,000
And since the LA/Socal area has more things to do (from cultural attractions and neighborhoods to outdoor activities) I just don't understand why people write off a city as lame because they don't have a subway taking them everywhere. Or that Universal City is not right next to the Santa Monica pier.
It's not necessarily that people here dislike the LA area. It would be silly to "write off" the 2nd largest metro area in the nation. What we're saying is that it would be much better if it had a good public transportation system throughout. Fortunately, it's gradually moving in that direction, which is a great thing.
Last edited by BigCityDreamer; 04-01-2011 at 10:53 AM..
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.
