this post was submitted on 10 Jan 2025
1096 points (97.8% liked)

Fuck Cars

9931 readers
400 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] -2 points 4 days ago (9 children)

Regressive tax. Yet another kick in the face of the lower class. Why not a progressive tax based on personal income? It works pretty well for speeding tickets in northern Europe.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 4 days ago (2 children)

I'm all for reducing traffic, but yeah, how is this not at least partially regressive? Folks who can only afford to live in New Jersey but then have to work in NYC now have yet another new expense.

But maybe I'm not aware of just how ubiquitous subway stations are in New Jersey that go into NYC. Would it be an easy transition?

[–] [email protected] 23 points 4 days ago (2 children)

It's my understanding that poor people in NYC already take public transit. It's just the rich people who drive.

Besides, less traffic in NYC probably means cheaper parking, so people who have to drive will probably see their cost unchanged.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I mean you're just making efficient transportation something that wealthy people can just buy...

[–] [email protected] 30 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Private vehicles aren't efficient, they're convenient.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

Your comment presumes that everyone has access to public transit that suits their needs. Many people do not.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 38 points 4 days ago (11 children)

This is great, should be implemented in all cities. Most people who can use public transport should.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (4 children)

In SF they allocated some extra carpool lanes (taken from the total number of highway lanes) and started calling them "express lanes" instead of carpool lanes. Everybody cheered-- because transit hipstering is a great thing for the people who it actually works well for in our mediocre system. I guess everytone else is SOL. In SF it started out that you could still use them for free if you had 2 people in the car. Now its 3 people minimum to ride free, and the prices crept higher. Now you'll very often see all non-express lanes stopped with traffic but the price for express lanes high and the express lanes clear of traffic-- that road throughput capacity underused. Its become a rich persons lane, at the cost of reducing capacity of the total system. When it got put in they said the max would be $8.00, shortly after they doubled that, with no max per day. Fees rack up since they charge over short distances. Now I've started seeing express lanes on main thoroughfares that arent highways.

Theres a patchwork of diconnected and not well thought out transit systems, with little hope of retrenching them to have usable coverage like NYC has. You'll end up using an uber or taxi to get to your final destination most of the time, and parking at transit stations is difficult, time consuming, and expensive.

This is not the solution you think it is. It just makes things better for the rich, and does nothing for the poor and middle class. This is like the "clear" lane at the airport security. Once its in, its not going away. Pricing is not in the control of people who have your best interests at heart. If you're poor, your time is not worth as much as a rich persons. They are commoditizing the hours of your life and many of you cheer for it. Without progressive pricing for this you're just getting fleeced.

The funds created arent going toward new projects . They are used for road maintenance, enforcement, and debt repayment in the county where the road is This simply frees up general funds that had been used for that before these went in, so no direct benefit in terms of transit projects is mandated.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 4 days ago (1 children)

As someone who takes public transit into SF every work day. It exists. It works. It's faster than driving

[–] [email protected] -5 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

It works.

It works for you in your current situation. But this policy affects people who are not in your exact situation as well, and it DOESNT work for them. I know you want to do something, anything, but we need it to be more than this.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 4 days ago (2 children)

As I understand it, poor and middle class people are already taking public transit. It's the rich people who are driving in New York. This is making it easier for deliveries, taxis, buses, and emergency vehicles to get through by getting all of the entitled rich people off the road.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›