• driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I never said roads, I said car centric infrastructure. You can have roads without being car centric. And elaborating on that, car centric infrastructure restrict the movement on everyone who don’t drive, for example poor people who can’t afford a car, gas, insurance… or younger people who can’t drive yet, or older and people with disabilities that can’t safely drive.

      • Shake747@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        How does it impede on those who can’t drive? Because they’re not allowed to move as freely as someone with a car? How would taking away everyone’s car help that scenario?

        • driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Car centric infrastructure makes everything apart, so you can’t walk anywhere, public transit is unfeasible because the low density, and biking is extremely dangerous. They are not only not allowed to move “as freely”, they cannot movebat all. I don’t know where you get this “taking everyone’s car”, you’re the only one talking about it. You can can have infrastructure that is inclusive to everyone, even people with cars.

        • silent_water [she/her]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          have you ever been to an American city? everything is at the service of roads, cars, and space to park the cars. we have thoroughfares through residential neighborhoods, monstrous intersections that are unsafe to cross by foot, infrastructure that’s unsafe to use by any mode of transportation that isn’t a car – because the cars will run you over – and it’s all wildly more expensive and less efficient than a functioning public transportation system. think of it like this – if more people can get where they need to go by public transit, the roads won’t be so congested.

          • Shake747@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Right, the road won’t be so congested, but you have to run on a specific schedule and only go to specific places.

            You have to pay for all of this somehow too, be it through fares at a toll or taxed by your gov. It won’t be any cheaper running transit. Maybe even more expensive, because they still have to maintain the roads, but now the cost of vehicle repair is on the gov/Corp and not the individual. More tolls or more taxes.

            • silent_water [she/her]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              a functioning public transit system covers the whole city, nearly point to point, and it runs on a regular schedule with buses and trains arriving every few minutes.

              but who’s going to pay for it???

              it’s really a good thing no one has ever run the numbers on this and there’s absolutely no literature analyzing the costs of various forms of public infrastructure to determine which is the most cost effective. there’s no way at all anyone has ever done that.