Kestas
Staff member
I remember when they predicted 1986 would be peak oil.
By 2030, 95% of people won’t own a private car
- Thread starter nap
- Start date
- Status
I do not consider leasing or financing a car as ownership. So we are closer to less ownership than you may think. I see us going toward renting a car. What if interest rates go up? What about insurance rates going up once the infrastructure for autonomous cars makes them safer than a human driving. It may become more affordable to rent a car when you need it than own it. It may not happen be 2030, but that is the direction it is going.
Originally Posted By: Wurlitzer
Originally Posted By: Astro14
Originally Posted By: Wurlitzer
In most of western Europe they have dependable public transportation such as train systems, bus systems, and bike lanes. It makes it a lot easier to go places and a lot cheaper. I would love for America to catch up and do the same thing. You can still own a car but without having to depend on it.
We never will "catch up".
We didn't have the population density to make public transportation viable outside of a few pockets (e.g. DC-BOS corridor) before the development of the automobile while Europe had long established cities.
Further, the growth of America, building of cities and town, was concurrent with the automobile. It's a symbiotic relationship. We couldn't have our population/living pattern without the car and for the most part, we are now too spread out for public transportation to be practical and viable in most of the country.
Europe limited that growth by taxing fuel heavily from the outset, initially making cars the toys of the rich, instead of the enabler of the commoner.
If Henry Ford hadn't changed the cost of cars, the US today would look very different. Suburbs would be as non-existent here as they are in Europe. Call it "sprawl" if you like, but the fact remains, that most of American growth happened subsequently to the car, and light rail, bus, rail, etc. just can't replace the car.
Now, Uber? Self-driving cars? Car sharing? All use existing infrastructure (roads) and have the potential to change how we get around. But it won't happen in a decade and it won't be rail/bus that supplants the car in the US. They simply don't work with the way we've built.
This is all true. But the European model would still benefit America, even with the existing infrastructure and community layouts. A train station in every major municipality; buses from the municipality to the smaller suburbs/towns/communities; bike lanes from the suburbs/towns/communities to peoples homes.
The distances are too great. A person can fly faster than taking a train and in most cases it’s cheaper. The US has just a few regions with the population density that can support a train system. Out west the population centers are mostly separated by large distances.
Originally Posted By: Astro14
Originally Posted By: Wurlitzer
In most of western Europe they have dependable public transportation such as train systems, bus systems, and bike lanes. It makes it a lot easier to go places and a lot cheaper. I would love for America to catch up and do the same thing. You can still own a car but without having to depend on it.
We never will "catch up".
We didn't have the population density to make public transportation viable outside of a few pockets (e.g. DC-BOS corridor) before the development of the automobile while Europe had long established cities.
Further, the growth of America, building of cities and town, was concurrent with the automobile. It's a symbiotic relationship. We couldn't have our population/living pattern without the car and for the most part, we are now too spread out for public transportation to be practical and viable in most of the country.
Europe limited that growth by taxing fuel heavily from the outset, initially making cars the toys of the rich, instead of the enabler of the commoner.
If Henry Ford hadn't changed the cost of cars, the US today would look very different. Suburbs would be as non-existent here as they are in Europe. Call it "sprawl" if you like, but the fact remains, that most of American growth happened subsequently to the car, and light rail, bus, rail, etc. just can't replace the car.
Now, Uber? Self-driving cars? Car sharing? All use existing infrastructure (roads) and have the potential to change how we get around. But it won't happen in a decade and it won't be rail/bus that supplants the car in the US. They simply don't work with the way we've built.
This is all true. But the European model would still benefit America, even with the existing infrastructure and community layouts. A train station in every major municipality; buses from the municipality to the smaller suburbs/towns/communities; bike lanes from the suburbs/towns/communities to peoples homes.
The distances are too great. A person can fly faster than taking a train and in most cases it’s cheaper. The US has just a few regions with the population density that can support a train system. Out west the population centers are mostly separated by large distances.
Triple_Se7en
$50 Site Donor 2024
Quote:
Cue Al Gore and "carbon credits" for the "global warming" farce that has been proven a lie through manipulated data- the only people that suffer are the rank and file.
So the average temp of the earth hasn't been warming every couple years and all those glaciers really aren't melting rapidly?
................ hahahahahahaha.
Cue Al Gore and "carbon credits" for the "global warming" farce that has been proven a lie through manipulated data- the only people that suffer are the rank and file.
So the average temp of the earth hasn't been warming every couple years and all those glaciers really aren't melting rapidly?
................ hahahahahahaha.
You DO realize that ice takes up more space than water, correct? So when you fill your glass all the way to the brim with ice and then it melts, your glass is no longer "full"?
And this graph surely looks awfully similar, statistically speaking, especially when you consider you're talking about MILLIONS of square kilometers:
Alarmists like you have been tolling the bell for the end of the world since, well, the beginning of the world. You've all been wrong.
And this graph surely looks awfully similar, statistically speaking, especially when you consider you're talking about MILLIONS of square kilometers:
Alarmists like you have been tolling the bell for the end of the world since, well, the beginning of the world. You've all been wrong.
I think ownership will drop for surebut not numbers shown. Uber type/like subscriptions will exist where you call a car shared or individual on an app and it picks you up self driven and drops you off. It may not fit everyone but many it will.
We pretty much had one car for years to cover taxi service the crown Vic. If people no longer own dust will settle to a few models to perform the pickup and drop off task.
We pretty much had one car for years to cover taxi service the crown Vic. If people no longer own dust will settle to a few models to perform the pickup and drop off task.
Car ownership and operation is definately cost driven, and it does seem that the costs are always increasing, mostly in heavily populated areas. If cheaper modes of transportation are readily and easily accessible then people might consider not owning a car.
Cars also provide a huge tax revenue from all aspects of ownership (sales tax, gas tax, license fees, inspection fees, etc) for most states to construct and maintain roads, etc. If the world became all self driving cars that people pay to take them someplace, then all that lost revenue would have to be made up from some other sources. The hungry tax monster must keep eating.
If the cost of ownership starts getting too high, most people start cutting back on driving, or cut back insurance coverage levels, or sell some of their multi vehicles and only own 1 instead of 3. I think it will be a long time before the majority of the population can't afford to own at least 1 car. And most people want the freedom to jump in their car and go wherever they want, when they want.
Lots of people who could afford a car still might not want the hassle, and would rather pay to jump into a self driving car so they could focus on play with social media on their cell phones without causing a wreck instead of putting everyone in danger if driving themselves.
Cars also provide a huge tax revenue from all aspects of ownership (sales tax, gas tax, license fees, inspection fees, etc) for most states to construct and maintain roads, etc. If the world became all self driving cars that people pay to take them someplace, then all that lost revenue would have to be made up from some other sources. The hungry tax monster must keep eating.
If the cost of ownership starts getting too high, most people start cutting back on driving, or cut back insurance coverage levels, or sell some of their multi vehicles and only own 1 instead of 3. I think it will be a long time before the majority of the population can't afford to own at least 1 car. And most people want the freedom to jump in their car and go wherever they want, when they want.
Lots of people who could afford a car still might not want the hassle, and would rather pay to jump into a self driving car so they could focus on play with social media on their cell phones without causing a wreck instead of putting everyone in danger if driving themselves.
Originally Posted By: Reddy45
Originally Posted By: Wurlitzer
Originally Posted By: Astro14
Originally Posted By: Wurlitzer
In most of western Europe they have dependable public transportation such as train systems, bus systems, and bike lanes. It makes it a lot easier to go places and a lot cheaper. I would love for America to catch up and do the same thing. You can still own a car but without having to depend on it.
We never will "catch up".
We didn't have the population density to make public transportation viable outside of a few pockets (e.g. DC-BOS corridor) before the development of the automobile while Europe had long established cities.
Further, the growth of America, building of cities and town, was concurrent with the automobile. It's a symbiotic relationship. We couldn't have our population/living pattern without the car and for the most part, we are now too spread out for public transportation to be practical and viable in most of the country.
Europe limited that growth by taxing fuel heavily from the outset, initially making cars the toys of the rich, instead of the enabler of the commoner.
If Henry Ford hadn't changed the cost of cars, the US today would look very different. Suburbs would be as non-existent here as they are in Europe. Call it "sprawl" if you like, but the fact remains, that most of American growth happened subsequently to the car, and light rail, bus, rail, etc. just can't replace the car.
Now, Uber? Self-driving cars? Car sharing? All use existing infrastructure (roads) and have the potential to change how we get around. But it won't happen in a decade and it won't be rail/bus that supplants the car in the US. They simply don't work with the way we've built.
This is all true. But the European model would still benefit America, even with the existing infrastructure and community layouts. A train station in every major municipality; buses from the municipality to the smaller suburbs/towns/communities; bike lanes from the suburbs/towns/communities to peoples homes.
Most major cities have some link to rail, because that's how cities formed very early on. But anyone whose time is valuable will be quick to realize that taking rail to another city is not feasible when a plane ticket is only slightly more expensive and cuts the time by 10.
I once checked to see if I could take Amtrak from Dallas to Los Angeles. It can be done, but the trip is around 4-5 days! With most people working jobs that only permit a few weeks of vacation each year, that just isn't a feasible way to travel when you can hop on a plane and be there in 3 hours.
The European model works because Europe is Europe, not because the methods they developed can be applied to every other nation.
Going from Dallas to LA is like going from Paris to Warsaw. People in Europe would likewise just fly this distance. So you are right in saying that for this distance flying would be the better option. But you haven't negated my suggestion that a European style train/bus/bike system wouldn't also be beneficial in America. "The European model works because Europe is Europe" is a non-statement, elaborate on it to explain why and give some validity to your statement.
Originally Posted By: Wurlitzer
Originally Posted By: Astro14
Originally Posted By: Wurlitzer
In most of western Europe they have dependable public transportation such as train systems, bus systems, and bike lanes. It makes it a lot easier to go places and a lot cheaper. I would love for America to catch up and do the same thing. You can still own a car but without having to depend on it.
We never will "catch up".
We didn't have the population density to make public transportation viable outside of a few pockets (e.g. DC-BOS corridor) before the development of the automobile while Europe had long established cities.
Further, the growth of America, building of cities and town, was concurrent with the automobile. It's a symbiotic relationship. We couldn't have our population/living pattern without the car and for the most part, we are now too spread out for public transportation to be practical and viable in most of the country.
Europe limited that growth by taxing fuel heavily from the outset, initially making cars the toys of the rich, instead of the enabler of the commoner.
If Henry Ford hadn't changed the cost of cars, the US today would look very different. Suburbs would be as non-existent here as they are in Europe. Call it "sprawl" if you like, but the fact remains, that most of American growth happened subsequently to the car, and light rail, bus, rail, etc. just can't replace the car.
Now, Uber? Self-driving cars? Car sharing? All use existing infrastructure (roads) and have the potential to change how we get around. But it won't happen in a decade and it won't be rail/bus that supplants the car in the US. They simply don't work with the way we've built.
This is all true. But the European model would still benefit America, even with the existing infrastructure and community layouts. A train station in every major municipality; buses from the municipality to the smaller suburbs/towns/communities; bike lanes from the suburbs/towns/communities to peoples homes.
Most major cities have some link to rail, because that's how cities formed very early on. But anyone whose time is valuable will be quick to realize that taking rail to another city is not feasible when a plane ticket is only slightly more expensive and cuts the time by 10.
I once checked to see if I could take Amtrak from Dallas to Los Angeles. It can be done, but the trip is around 4-5 days! With most people working jobs that only permit a few weeks of vacation each year, that just isn't a feasible way to travel when you can hop on a plane and be there in 3 hours.
The European model works because Europe is Europe, not because the methods they developed can be applied to every other nation.
Going from Dallas to LA is like going from Paris to Warsaw. People in Europe would likewise just fly this distance. So you are right in saying that for this distance flying would be the better option. But you haven't negated my suggestion that a European style train/bus/bike system wouldn't also be beneficial in America. "The European model works because Europe is Europe" is a non-statement, elaborate on it to explain why and give some validity to your statement.
Originally Posted By: Wurlitzer
Going from Dallas to LA is like going from Paris to Warsaw. People in Europe would likewise just fly this distance. So you are right in saying that for this distance flying would be the better option. But you haven't negated my suggestion that a European style train/bus/bike system wouldn't also be beneficial in America. "The European model works because Europe is Europe" is a non-statement, elaborate on it to explain why and give some validity to your statement.
With the exception of making bike lanes more common, most major metros in America already have the things you list. Bus service is quite common in most cities for commuters, and we agree that trains have limitations. I wouldn't be opposed to high speed trains in certain regions like the northeast or the west coast, if that's what you're also getting at.
But the cultural reasons why people in Europe prefer to live a certain way just wouldn't stick in America, unless you had folks like George Soros fund groups who push for those types of cultural revolutions.
The American attitude is about liberation and self-reliance and the nation's roots begin with the Boston Tea Party where we said 'screw it' to the Brits who were attempting to tell us how we live our lives. There's a certain rebelliousness and "blank slate" mindset that says we don't have to imitate other nations to do things.
Does this attitude come with certain stereotypes or downfalls? Of course, but that is the case with literally everything in this world. I see nothing wrong with embracing who we are, to define how things should be.
Going from Dallas to LA is like going from Paris to Warsaw. People in Europe would likewise just fly this distance. So you are right in saying that for this distance flying would be the better option. But you haven't negated my suggestion that a European style train/bus/bike system wouldn't also be beneficial in America. "The European model works because Europe is Europe" is a non-statement, elaborate on it to explain why and give some validity to your statement.
With the exception of making bike lanes more common, most major metros in America already have the things you list. Bus service is quite common in most cities for commuters, and we agree that trains have limitations. I wouldn't be opposed to high speed trains in certain regions like the northeast or the west coast, if that's what you're also getting at.
But the cultural reasons why people in Europe prefer to live a certain way just wouldn't stick in America, unless you had folks like George Soros fund groups who push for those types of cultural revolutions.
The American attitude is about liberation and self-reliance and the nation's roots begin with the Boston Tea Party where we said 'screw it' to the Brits who were attempting to tell us how we live our lives. There's a certain rebelliousness and "blank slate" mindset that says we don't have to imitate other nations to do things.
Does this attitude come with certain stereotypes or downfalls? Of course, but that is the case with literally everything in this world. I see nothing wrong with embracing who we are, to define how things should be.
When self driving cars finally work, the need for personal ownership will diminish, and a ride to the shops is press a hail button on an app.
Higher utilisation rates of the cars on the road will mean less carparks and cars parked along the side of the road, and less congestion as a result.
Higher utilisation rates will mean less cars sold, but replaced/repaired more frequently.
Personally I think THAT's the future of public transportation that will sit alongside trains and busses.
(Greens are currently going after trains now in Oz...Goods trains at the present time, which then gives them increased road transport as a target as well...their ongoing agenda is relentless).
Higher utilisation rates of the cars on the road will mean less carparks and cars parked along the side of the road, and less congestion as a result.
Higher utilisation rates will mean less cars sold, but replaced/repaired more frequently.
Personally I think THAT's the future of public transportation that will sit alongside trains and busses.
(Greens are currently going after trains now in Oz...Goods trains at the present time, which then gives them increased road transport as a target as well...their ongoing agenda is relentless).
Originally Posted By: Reddy45
Originally Posted By: Wurlitzer
Going from Dallas to LA is like going from Paris to Warsaw. People in Europe would likewise just fly this distance. So you are right in saying that for this distance flying would be the better option. But you haven't negated my suggestion that a European style train/bus/bike system wouldn't also be beneficial in America. "The European model works because Europe is Europe" is a non-statement, elaborate on it to explain why and give some validity to your statement.
With the exception of making bike lanes more common, most major metros in America already have the things you list. Bus service is quite common in most cities for commuters, and we agree that trains have limitations. I wouldn't be opposed to high speed trains in certain regions like the northeast or the west coast, if that's what you're also getting at.
But the cultural reasons why people in Europe prefer to live a certain way just wouldn't stick in America, unless you had folks like George Soros fund groups who push for those types of cultural revolutions.
The American attitude is about liberation and self-reliance and the nation's roots begin with the Boston Tea Party where we said 'screw it' to the Brits who were attempting to tell us how we live our lives. There's a certain rebelliousness and "blank slate" mindset that says we don't have to imitate other nations to do things.
Does this attitude come with certain stereotypes or downfalls? Of course, but that is the case with literally everything in this world. I see nothing wrong with embracing who we are, to define how things should be.
Yes, the American mindset will be the biggest barrier to overcome. We can only hope that we accommodate our growing population with a proven method. We don't want to wake up in decades future and look up at our Beijingish pollution, while we are stuck in traffic on a 10 lane highway that already needs to be rebuilt into a 12 lane, on our 75 minute commute across the wasteful urban sprawl, and say "hey, couldn't we just have spent all this money on more sensible infrastructure years ago and avoided all this?".
Originally Posted By: Wurlitzer
Going from Dallas to LA is like going from Paris to Warsaw. People in Europe would likewise just fly this distance. So you are right in saying that for this distance flying would be the better option. But you haven't negated my suggestion that a European style train/bus/bike system wouldn't also be beneficial in America. "The European model works because Europe is Europe" is a non-statement, elaborate on it to explain why and give some validity to your statement.
With the exception of making bike lanes more common, most major metros in America already have the things you list. Bus service is quite common in most cities for commuters, and we agree that trains have limitations. I wouldn't be opposed to high speed trains in certain regions like the northeast or the west coast, if that's what you're also getting at.
But the cultural reasons why people in Europe prefer to live a certain way just wouldn't stick in America, unless you had folks like George Soros fund groups who push for those types of cultural revolutions.
The American attitude is about liberation and self-reliance and the nation's roots begin with the Boston Tea Party where we said 'screw it' to the Brits who were attempting to tell us how we live our lives. There's a certain rebelliousness and "blank slate" mindset that says we don't have to imitate other nations to do things.
Does this attitude come with certain stereotypes or downfalls? Of course, but that is the case with literally everything in this world. I see nothing wrong with embracing who we are, to define how things should be.
Yes, the American mindset will be the biggest barrier to overcome. We can only hope that we accommodate our growing population with a proven method. We don't want to wake up in decades future and look up at our Beijingish pollution, while we are stuck in traffic on a 10 lane highway that already needs to be rebuilt into a 12 lane, on our 75 minute commute across the wasteful urban sprawl, and say "hey, couldn't we just have spent all this money on more sensible infrastructure years ago and avoided all this?".
Originally Posted By: Wurlitzer
Originally Posted By: Reddy45
Originally Posted By: Wurlitzer
Going from Dallas to LA is like going from Paris to Warsaw. People in Europe would likewise just fly this distance. So you are right in saying that for this distance flying would be the better option. But you haven't negated my suggestion that a European style train/bus/bike system wouldn't also be beneficial in America. "The European model works because Europe is Europe" is a non-statement, elaborate on it to explain why and give some validity to your statement.
With the exception of making bike lanes more common, most major metros in America already have the things you list. Bus service is quite common in most cities for commuters, and we agree that trains have limitations. I wouldn't be opposed to high speed trains in certain regions like the northeast or the west coast, if that's what you're also getting at.
But the cultural reasons why people in Europe prefer to live a certain way just wouldn't stick in America, unless you had folks like George Soros fund groups who push for those types of cultural revolutions.
The American attitude is about liberation and self-reliance and the nation's roots begin with the Boston Tea Party where we said 'screw it' to the Brits who were attempting to tell us how we live our lives. There's a certain rebelliousness and "blank slate" mindset that says we don't have to imitate other nations to do things.
Does this attitude come with certain stereotypes or downfalls? Of course, but that is the case with literally everything in this world. I see nothing wrong with embracing who we are, to define how things should be.
Yes, the American mindset will be the biggest barrier to overcome. We can only hope that we accommodate our growing population with a proven method. We don't want to wake up in decades future and look up at our Beijingish pollution, while we are stuck in traffic on a 10 lane highway that already needs to be rebuilt into a 12 lane, on our 75 minute commute across the wasteful urban sprawl, and say "hey, couldn't we just have spent all this money on more sensible infrastructure years ago and avoided all this?".
I wasn't disparaging the American mindset when it comes to transportation. It is what it is -- at times it's the greatest thing in the world and at times it could be better.
Ultimately we all have our own opinions about the mindset.
But I personally don't see any reason for any country to emulate another country, in any regard. What makes us unique is what makes us unique, and attempting to make everything the same would lead to a terrible end result.
Originally Posted By: Reddy45
Originally Posted By: Wurlitzer
Going from Dallas to LA is like going from Paris to Warsaw. People in Europe would likewise just fly this distance. So you are right in saying that for this distance flying would be the better option. But you haven't negated my suggestion that a European style train/bus/bike system wouldn't also be beneficial in America. "The European model works because Europe is Europe" is a non-statement, elaborate on it to explain why and give some validity to your statement.
With the exception of making bike lanes more common, most major metros in America already have the things you list. Bus service is quite common in most cities for commuters, and we agree that trains have limitations. I wouldn't be opposed to high speed trains in certain regions like the northeast or the west coast, if that's what you're also getting at.
But the cultural reasons why people in Europe prefer to live a certain way just wouldn't stick in America, unless you had folks like George Soros fund groups who push for those types of cultural revolutions.
The American attitude is about liberation and self-reliance and the nation's roots begin with the Boston Tea Party where we said 'screw it' to the Brits who were attempting to tell us how we live our lives. There's a certain rebelliousness and "blank slate" mindset that says we don't have to imitate other nations to do things.
Does this attitude come with certain stereotypes or downfalls? Of course, but that is the case with literally everything in this world. I see nothing wrong with embracing who we are, to define how things should be.
Yes, the American mindset will be the biggest barrier to overcome. We can only hope that we accommodate our growing population with a proven method. We don't want to wake up in decades future and look up at our Beijingish pollution, while we are stuck in traffic on a 10 lane highway that already needs to be rebuilt into a 12 lane, on our 75 minute commute across the wasteful urban sprawl, and say "hey, couldn't we just have spent all this money on more sensible infrastructure years ago and avoided all this?".
I wasn't disparaging the American mindset when it comes to transportation. It is what it is -- at times it's the greatest thing in the world and at times it could be better.
Ultimately we all have our own opinions about the mindset.
But I personally don't see any reason for any country to emulate another country, in any regard. What makes us unique is what makes us unique, and attempting to make everything the same would lead to a terrible end result.
Originally Posted By: Wurlitzer
Yes, the American mindset will be the biggest barrier to overcome. We can only hope that we accommodate our growing population with a proven method. We don't want to wake up in decades future and look up at our Beijingish pollution, while we are stuck in traffic on a 10 lane highway that already needs to be rebuilt into a 12 lane, on our 75 minute commute across the wasteful urban sprawl, and say "hey, couldn't we just have spent all this money on more sensible infrastructure years ago and avoided all this?".
It's a nice theory but the reality is that there's no appetite for public transportation from the government. That would involve raising taxes. It's very hard to do any kind of infrastructure project. The facts that the entire infrastructure of the country is slowly falling apart should clue you in that the great dream of some efficient public transit is just a pipe dream.
Yes, the American mindset will be the biggest barrier to overcome. We can only hope that we accommodate our growing population with a proven method. We don't want to wake up in decades future and look up at our Beijingish pollution, while we are stuck in traffic on a 10 lane highway that already needs to be rebuilt into a 12 lane, on our 75 minute commute across the wasteful urban sprawl, and say "hey, couldn't we just have spent all this money on more sensible infrastructure years ago and avoided all this?".
It's a nice theory but the reality is that there's no appetite for public transportation from the government. That would involve raising taxes. It's very hard to do any kind of infrastructure project. The facts that the entire infrastructure of the country is slowly falling apart should clue you in that the great dream of some efficient public transit is just a pipe dream.
Originally Posted By: Wolf359
The facts that the entire infrastructure of the country is slowly falling apart should clue you in that the great dream of some efficient public transit is just a pipe dream.
The only kind of 'efficient public transport' I'd use is the kind which turns up when I want it, goes direct from where I am to where I want to go, and doesn't require me to share it with bedbugs and crazy people.
Since the Greenists can't provide that, they spend their time trying to make driving worse instead.
As for the magical self-driving cars that we'll rent when we need them, anyone who thinks that we can all get rid of our private cars and not be gouged through the nose by self-driving car owners is deluding themselves. If people no longer have any alternative way to get around, the prices will make taxis look cheap.
Oh, and don't forget, any time the government decide to make you a non-person, you'll no longer be able to travel because the cars won't let you.
The facts that the entire infrastructure of the country is slowly falling apart should clue you in that the great dream of some efficient public transit is just a pipe dream.
The only kind of 'efficient public transport' I'd use is the kind which turns up when I want it, goes direct from where I am to where I want to go, and doesn't require me to share it with bedbugs and crazy people.
Since the Greenists can't provide that, they spend their time trying to make driving worse instead.
As for the magical self-driving cars that we'll rent when we need them, anyone who thinks that we can all get rid of our private cars and not be gouged through the nose by self-driving car owners is deluding themselves. If people no longer have any alternative way to get around, the prices will make taxis look cheap.
Oh, and don't forget, any time the government decide to make you a non-person, you'll no longer be able to travel because the cars won't let you.
Originally Posted By: Wolf359
Originally Posted By: Wurlitzer
Yes, the American mindset will be the biggest barrier to overcome. We can only hope that we accommodate our growing population with a proven method. We don't want to wake up in decades future and look up at our Beijingish pollution, while we are stuck in traffic on a 10 lane highway that already needs to be rebuilt into a 12 lane, on our 75 minute commute across the wasteful urban sprawl, and say "hey, couldn't we just have spent all this money on more sensible infrastructure years ago and avoided all this?".
It's a nice theory but the reality is that there's no appetite for public transportation from the government. That would involve raising taxes. It's very hard to do any kind of infrastructure project. The facts that the entire infrastructure of the country is slowly falling apart should clue you in that the great dream of some efficient public transit is just a pipe dream.
It's amazing the things the richest nation on earth "can't afford". Our taxes need to be reconsidered: who gets taxed, how much, and where those taxes go.
Originally Posted By: Wurlitzer
Yes, the American mindset will be the biggest barrier to overcome. We can only hope that we accommodate our growing population with a proven method. We don't want to wake up in decades future and look up at our Beijingish pollution, while we are stuck in traffic on a 10 lane highway that already needs to be rebuilt into a 12 lane, on our 75 minute commute across the wasteful urban sprawl, and say "hey, couldn't we just have spent all this money on more sensible infrastructure years ago and avoided all this?".
It's a nice theory but the reality is that there's no appetite for public transportation from the government. That would involve raising taxes. It's very hard to do any kind of infrastructure project. The facts that the entire infrastructure of the country is slowly falling apart should clue you in that the great dream of some efficient public transit is just a pipe dream.
It's amazing the things the richest nation on earth "can't afford". Our taxes need to be reconsidered: who gets taxed, how much, and where those taxes go.
Originally Posted By: Wurlitzer
Originally Posted By: Wolf359
Originally Posted By: Wurlitzer
Yes, the American mindset will be the biggest barrier to overcome. We can only hope that we accommodate our growing population with a proven method. We don't want to wake up in decades future and look up at our Beijingish pollution, while we are stuck in traffic on a 10 lane highway that already needs to be rebuilt into a 12 lane, on our 75 minute commute across the wasteful urban sprawl, and say "hey, couldn't we just have spent all this money on more sensible infrastructure years ago and avoided all this?".
It's a nice theory but the reality is that there's no appetite for public transportation from the government. That would involve raising taxes. It's very hard to do any kind of infrastructure project. The facts that the entire infrastructure of the country is slowly falling apart should clue you in that the great dream of some efficient public transit is just a pipe dream.
It's amazing the things the richest nation on earth "can't afford". Our taxes need to be reconsidered: who gets taxed, how much, and where those taxes go.
Since we're rich we don't have to ride buses and trains. We use private vehicles. The infrastructure around here isn't falling apart. [censored] states are a different story.
Originally Posted By: Wolf359
Originally Posted By: Wurlitzer
Yes, the American mindset will be the biggest barrier to overcome. We can only hope that we accommodate our growing population with a proven method. We don't want to wake up in decades future and look up at our Beijingish pollution, while we are stuck in traffic on a 10 lane highway that already needs to be rebuilt into a 12 lane, on our 75 minute commute across the wasteful urban sprawl, and say "hey, couldn't we just have spent all this money on more sensible infrastructure years ago and avoided all this?".
It's a nice theory but the reality is that there's no appetite for public transportation from the government. That would involve raising taxes. It's very hard to do any kind of infrastructure project. The facts that the entire infrastructure of the country is slowly falling apart should clue you in that the great dream of some efficient public transit is just a pipe dream.
It's amazing the things the richest nation on earth "can't afford". Our taxes need to be reconsidered: who gets taxed, how much, and where those taxes go.
Since we're rich we don't have to ride buses and trains. We use private vehicles. The infrastructure around here isn't falling apart. [censored] states are a different story.
Originally Posted By: Reddy45
Originally Posted By: Wurlitzer
Originally Posted By: Reddy45
Originally Posted By: Wurlitzer
Going from Dallas to LA is like going from Paris to Warsaw. People in Europe would likewise just fly this distance. So you are right in saying that for this distance flying would be the better option. But you haven't negated my suggestion that a European style train/bus/bike system wouldn't also be beneficial in America. "The European model works because Europe is Europe" is a non-statement, elaborate on it to explain why and give some validity to your statement.
With the exception of making bike lanes more common, most major metros in America already have the things you list. Bus service is quite common in most cities for commuters, and we agree that trains have limitations. I wouldn't be opposed to high speed trains in certain regions like the northeast or the west coast, if that's what you're also getting at.
But the cultural reasons why people in Europe prefer to live a certain way just wouldn't stick in America, unless you had folks like George Soros fund groups who push for those types of cultural revolutions.
The American attitude is about liberation and self-reliance and the nation's roots begin with the Boston Tea Party where we said 'screw it' to the Brits who were attempting to tell us how we live our lives. There's a certain rebelliousness and "blank slate" mindset that says we don't have to imitate other nations to do things.
Does this attitude come with certain stereotypes or downfalls? Of course, but that is the case with literally everything in this world. I see nothing wrong with embracing who we are, to define how things should be.
Yes, the American mindset will be the biggest barrier to overcome. We can only hope that we accommodate our growing population with a proven method. We don't want to wake up in decades future and look up at our Beijingish pollution, while we are stuck in traffic on a 10 lane highway that already needs to be rebuilt into a 12 lane, on our 75 minute commute across the wasteful urban sprawl, and say "hey, couldn't we just have spent all this money on more sensible infrastructure years ago and avoided all this?".
I wasn't disparaging the American mindset when it comes to transportation. It is what it is -- at times it's the greatest thing in the world and at times it could be better.
Ultimately we all have our own opinions about the mindset.
But I personally don't see any reason for any country to emulate another country, in any regard. What makes us unique is what makes us unique, and attempting to make everything the same would lead to a terrible end result.
I disagree. If America needs improvement in any way (especially in ways that are already proven effective by the rest of the industrialized world e.g. healthcare, transportation, economy, among other things) then we should strive to make those improvements. You say that "attempting to make everything the same would lead to a terrible end result" but this is again proven false by the European example. European countries still have their unique cultural identities with a comprehensive public transportation system. A "terrible end result" has not at all been the result over there. I'm not suggesting we become European, only that we learn from their example on some things.
Originally Posted By: Wurlitzer
Originally Posted By: Reddy45
Originally Posted By: Wurlitzer
Going from Dallas to LA is like going from Paris to Warsaw. People in Europe would likewise just fly this distance. So you are right in saying that for this distance flying would be the better option. But you haven't negated my suggestion that a European style train/bus/bike system wouldn't also be beneficial in America. "The European model works because Europe is Europe" is a non-statement, elaborate on it to explain why and give some validity to your statement.
With the exception of making bike lanes more common, most major metros in America already have the things you list. Bus service is quite common in most cities for commuters, and we agree that trains have limitations. I wouldn't be opposed to high speed trains in certain regions like the northeast or the west coast, if that's what you're also getting at.
But the cultural reasons why people in Europe prefer to live a certain way just wouldn't stick in America, unless you had folks like George Soros fund groups who push for those types of cultural revolutions.
The American attitude is about liberation and self-reliance and the nation's roots begin with the Boston Tea Party where we said 'screw it' to the Brits who were attempting to tell us how we live our lives. There's a certain rebelliousness and "blank slate" mindset that says we don't have to imitate other nations to do things.
Does this attitude come with certain stereotypes or downfalls? Of course, but that is the case with literally everything in this world. I see nothing wrong with embracing who we are, to define how things should be.
Yes, the American mindset will be the biggest barrier to overcome. We can only hope that we accommodate our growing population with a proven method. We don't want to wake up in decades future and look up at our Beijingish pollution, while we are stuck in traffic on a 10 lane highway that already needs to be rebuilt into a 12 lane, on our 75 minute commute across the wasteful urban sprawl, and say "hey, couldn't we just have spent all this money on more sensible infrastructure years ago and avoided all this?".
I wasn't disparaging the American mindset when it comes to transportation. It is what it is -- at times it's the greatest thing in the world and at times it could be better.
Ultimately we all have our own opinions about the mindset.
But I personally don't see any reason for any country to emulate another country, in any regard. What makes us unique is what makes us unique, and attempting to make everything the same would lead to a terrible end result.
I disagree. If America needs improvement in any way (especially in ways that are already proven effective by the rest of the industrialized world e.g. healthcare, transportation, economy, among other things) then we should strive to make those improvements. You say that "attempting to make everything the same would lead to a terrible end result" but this is again proven false by the European example. European countries still have their unique cultural identities with a comprehensive public transportation system. A "terrible end result" has not at all been the result over there. I'm not suggesting we become European, only that we learn from their example on some things.
- Status
Similar threads
