SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
An article over at Motherboard covers the growing inequities in the US resulting from the cultivation of individualized transport options.
Carsharing, ridesharing, ride-hailing, public transit, and cycling—"all of those things are needed to replace personal cars," said [Robin Chase, co-founder of Zipcar].
It's a nice idea, but to actually kill car ownership, we're first going to need to have some very uncomfortable conversations about class and equity in the United States. Public transit used to be the great equalizer, but affordable private rides have become the new favorite of the middle class. When richer people give their money to private ride-hailing or carsharing companies, public transit loses money—and that's not good for cities, societies, or the environment.
[...] This dependence on ride-hailing is having the adverse effect of increasing traffic congestion, which in turn makes bus service slower and more frustrating. Besides, until cities change dramatically—i.e. more parks, fewer parking lots, less sprawl, better accommodations for active and public transit—decreased rates of car ownership likely won't benefit the environment if we're still travelling the same distances in cars.
Those living in countries that still have good or remnants of good mass transit will have different insights. It is unlikely that without good, reliable, vast public transit networks, there will be social and economic equity, assuming that is a goal. While public transit can suck, especially in the US, it is sometimes necessary to take one for the team and vote with your wallet. Unfortunately the situation is often framed as a false dilemma, that there can only be private cars or only mass transit, but not both coexisting and used for different ends at different times by the same people.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @12:07AM (26 children)
Only retarded people think uber and similar are car-sharing. It isn't sharing if you have to pay for it. The corporations have a lot of people fooled by this. The corporations want you to call it sharing because sharing is warm and fuzzy and only grinches don't share.
"But that's just a saying. Don't be so picky" I hear you say. But remember, those that choose the words also choose the story. Why else would corporations want to call it "sharing"? Right up there with co-opting "like" and "friend", it is a sneaky way to control the narrative and fool the idiots in city halls across the world.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Wednesday February 14 2018, @12:14AM (21 children)
Unless you just want to say "Uber/Lyft", it's unfortunately the easy way to label these new services, because we simply don't have a word for them yet. They're not cabs, because they're directly competing with the traditional cab companies, and most Americans don't seem to know what a "black car" service is, plus these are hailed by smartphone app instead of calling on the phone and making an appointment like in the old days.
Come up with a better descriptor that differentiates them from cabs (because, after all, many times when we discuss them we're talking about their differences with cabs), and maybe people will happily adopt your new term.
The other thing that really is different about them is that one driver can work for both, at the same time (but not on the same ride of course); they'll have phones for each, and pick up a hail on either one. Also, drivers don't have to work shifts, can pick up hails while commuting home from work, etc. Most drivers probably do do this as a full-time job, but there are plenty who don't, and it's really a side gig.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @12:21AM (1 child)
It's called a ride-hailing app, or just ride-hailing. It isn't "ride sharing" any more than Walmart is "product sharing".
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @02:45AM
A man was walking down the sidewalk to his workplace. It was a good day for Nickson, as evidenced by his beaming smile. On Nickson's way to work, a woman casually strolled past him.
Crash! Slam! Bang! These sounds could be heard coming from inside a certain house, and they seemed to continue endlessly. If one were to look inside said house, it would appear as though a tornado went through it; tables and chairs were knocked over; there were broken windows; glass cups were shattered all over the floor; there were large holes in the walls, as if objects flew through them; and, in general, every aspect of the house was in disarray. A man could be seen assuming the fetal position in a dark corner, sobbing. That man was Nickson.
Nickson, once a kind, cheerful man, was now a mere shell of what he once was. A grave injustice was done to him, transforming his life forevermore. If things continued as they were, only depression, anger, and suicide awaited. Would Nickson give up so easily?
No. Nickson would never give up. Nickson would never allow evil to prevail. Nickson would struggle against injustice. The man slowly rose up, his face displaying the ferocity of a god of war. Nickson was going to strike back.
With only a bit of effort, Nickson identified his target. He learned about the target's schedule, their family, and their habits. Using this information, Nickson devised a grand plan that would allow him to exact his revenge. "Justice will prevail!" Nickson shouted. It was time to execute his scheme.
Captured. The target, along with members of their family that met certain criteria, was captured and imprisosoned within Nickson's house. Tightly bound to metal bars, they could do nothing but stare in horror at the man whose eyes seemed to be made of fire. Beaten. Pain. Screaming. Violated. Pain. Screaming. Mutilated. Pain. Screaming. Silence.
The next day, Nickson walked out of his house in triumph. The man had returned to his former self now that the wrongs committed against him were made right. Indeed, no woman would enter Nickson's presence without acknowledging his superiority ever again.
(Score: 5, Informative) by takyon on Wednesday February 14 2018, @12:21AM (8 children)
It's right there in the headline: Ride-Hailing.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @12:29AM (4 children)
That's fine if all you read is the headline. Here's what's in the summary... "carsharing", "ridesharing", "carsharing companies". The more you read, the more you learn.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday February 14 2018, @02:18AM (3 children)
Then for pete sake read ALL THE WAY to the end of the sentence, where you would find that part had nothing to do with ride-hailing, but actually did have a lot to do with car sharing serviced. http://www.zipcar.com/ [zipcar.com]
There are about a dozen of these shared car services.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 3, Informative) by NotSanguine on Wednesday February 14 2018, @03:52AM (1 child)
IIUC, Zipcar is not a "car sharing" service. Rather it's a "car rental" service that specializes in short-term rentals and allows pick up wherever the car has been left by the previous renter.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday February 14 2018, @09:08PM
There is no definition of share which requires no contribution from all sharing partners.
You seem to be confusing the word Gift or Slavery with the word sharing.
The actual method of contribution doesn't enter in to it.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @07:40AM
Doh! Do you think car rental companies are sharing their cars or renting their cars?
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Wednesday February 14 2018, @03:57AM (2 children)
The problem with this term is that, just looking at the two words ("ride" + "hailing"), it doesn't really uniquely describe Uber/Lyft. To get a traditional cab, you have to "hail" it, by standing on the curb and raising your arm, and it stops and gives you a ride, hence, "ride-hailing".
Maybe we'll get lucky and Uber will go out of business (and Travis will go bankrupt), some other better company (or two) will get started as a new competitor to Lyft, and then "Uber" will become a word like "Kleenex" to describe these services.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Wednesday February 14 2018, @04:18AM
It's, uh, virtual ride-hailing. Over the cloud. With an AI pricing algorithm.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @01:41PM
What’s the problem? “Hail” just means “signal.” You send a signal from your phone to the service so the car knows to pick you up. Traditional taxis have done this for decades via the phone numbers printed all over them using radio dispatchers.
The only difference — quite literally — is the “with a computer” suffix in the patent application.
(Score: 2) by pipedwho on Wednesday February 14 2018, @12:29AM (8 children)
How about "private taxi services". But, 'taxi' implies you're paying money, so it doesn't sound as warm and fuzzy and 'ride sharing'.
Same with those 'car share' services where you find a 'car share' car on the side of the street and drive it away. How about calling them 'car hire'. That's basically what they are, but with a much finer grained billing service. But, then 'hire' implies you're paying money, again, not so warm and fuzzy.
These terms came about from clever marketing campaigns. And through natural selection, the least offensive, least 'corporate' sounding terms succeeded.
"I tried to think of the most harmless thing. Something I loved from my childhood. Something that could never, ever possibly destroy us..." Mr CarShare.
(Score: 3, Funny) by frojack on Wednesday February 14 2018, @02:19AM (6 children)
Your pointless insistence that anything you pay for is not sharing must be really irritating to your flat mates.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 5, Funny) by pipedwho on Wednesday February 14 2018, @04:10AM
Wait, you're not that kid in pre-school that always insisted you really do share things with other kids? He always 'shared' his crayons (for an upfront fee of 5c per crayon per day). And it's true, he let the other kids play with the shitty broken matchbox car from the toy box, but for the low fee of 20c per car he was happy to share some of those other shiny cars he'd hoarded earlier!
I suppose you're right, technically every transaction is 'sharing', "I'm sharing my money with the supplier of the service."
I'm currently sharing my house with my house sharer. I pay them money periodically, and they let me keep sharing it with them.
I also pay for internet connection sharing. I don't mean with just the other people in the house, I mean with all the other people using my ISP (and technically everybody else on the internet).
Tomorrow, I'll even pay to share the train with a few hundred other people. "Public transport" my arse, lets call that ride sharing too. Technically, there's way more 'sharing' going on between train passengers than in a car of 2 people. Unless your Uber driver also has the flu. And technically I even get to 'pay' for that later too.
Since my snarky reply ended up in the top level of the thread below due to some fat fingering of the mouse, I thought I'd repost it here where it belongs in the interest of thread sharing and all.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @04:22AM
My flat mates are cats, and I share quite a bit with them. And they never pay me a nickel. Perhaps I'm doing it wrong? Do tell, Frojack.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @06:09AM
The entire point is exactly that - anything you pay for is not sharing. The number of reporters, politicians, and regular people that haven't figured it out is staggering. And kinda sad because uber isn't some nice sharing company. Uber is a mean multinational corporation that will out fox, out maneuver, and out lawyer amateur municipal politicians and wreck where you live.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by maxwell demon on Wednesday February 14 2018, @06:33AM (2 children)
That's not what he said. But anything you pay for on an use basis is not sharing. If several people together buy a car and each of them may use it as it fits, that is sharing. If one buys a car and then let's everyone use the car against payment, that is car rental. And if you pay someone else to drive you in his car, that is taxi.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday February 14 2018, @09:03PM (1 child)
So how is that different than several people contributing to a club, that buys cars, and lets users drive them as if they were their own, paying gas, and maintenance based on usage?
Sharing isnt you getting something free. That's called a gift.
Sharing means sharing benefits AND contributions.
Freeloading millennials just can't seem to understand this.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Thursday February 15 2018, @07:09AM
So how is that different
What exactly are you referring to with "that"?
Then the cars would be shared, but the maintenance and the gas would not.
Nowhere did I claim it is. Where in "If several people together buy a car" do you see "getting a car for free"? I think you urgently need to work on your reading comprehension.
Yes. Note that sharing the contributions is exactly the opposite of everyone paying per his own use.
I don't see how what "freeloading millennials" can or cannot understand is in any way relevant for the correct definition of the word "sharing".
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @02:49AM
Private taxi service implies that they're being regulated as such. Uber and Lyft need to die in a fire. Uber in particular blatantly violates the law by treating employees as independent contractors and pays substantially below minimum wage while taking a loss to put taxi companies out of business. It's a shitty business model and needs to be put an end to as soon as possible.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @02:10PM
They are illegal taxi companies. The normal taxi companies have started adopting apps and online scheduling. The only different between them and Uber/Lyft is scale, following their local laws (which hinders their scaling abilities), and being far less corrupt (they used to be just as corrupt, which is why all the taxi laws were created in the first place). You should call Uber/Lyft as taxis as they have no functional difference.
(Score: 5, Informative) by sjames on Wednesday February 14 2018, @12:59AM (1 child)
Quite simply, Uber and Lyft call themselves ride sharing in hopes of pulling the wool over regulator's eyes. They are very much yet another cab service except they want to call the drivers contractors and they don't want to deal with medallions, commercial insurance, or other regulatory measures. But it swims like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by pipedwho on Wednesday February 14 2018, @04:49AM
Agreed.
It's like when some clever spark in the government here changed all the local 'SPEED CAMERA AHEAD' signs to say 'SAFETY CAMERA AHEAD' (and updated the Motor Traffic Act to match). Clever little 'marketing' trick to distract from the real reason those cameras are there. And they always seem to be at sites with artificially low speed limits.
I applaud the guy that went around with 'REVENUE' stickers in the same colour and font and changed the local camera signs to read 'REVENUE CAMERA AHEAD'.
(Score: 1) by anubi on Wednesday February 14 2018, @09:05AM (1 child)
Boy, the BSA, MPAA, and RIAA sure went after sharing.... what a bunch of grinches!
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @12:47PM
What exactly are the Boy Scouts of America sharing? No. Don't tell me, I don't want to know.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Wednesday February 14 2018, @12:10AM (17 children)
When richer people give their money to private ride-hailing or carsharing companies, public transit loses money—and that's not good for cities, societies, or the environment.
It's better for the environment than all those richer people driving their own personal vehicles, and then needing to find places to park them. Fewer cars to manufacture, and no need for wasting valuable urban space on parking lots.
This dependence on ride-hailing is having the adverse effect of increasing traffic congestion, which in turn makes bus service slower and more frustrating.
Try building some subways then. And then try hiring competent people to run them. In advanced nations, they manage to do this just fine, and apologize profusely when the train leaves 20 seconds too early. In shitty countries, they have fatal accidents on the subways and city trains, and there's no exact timetable for the trains at all.
Ride-sharing/ride-hailing/whatever you call it is really a symptom, not a cause: it's a symptom of a shitty public transit infrastructure. There's absolutely nothing that middle-class people can do about it, so they're turning to these services as a band-aid, because they're better than cabs.
Why wasn't this writer at Motherboard complaining about cabs before?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by frojack on Wednesday February 14 2018, @02:33AM (7 children)
You really need to get out of the city once in a while son. Its a beautiful world where you can actually open your eyes and see something beside inner city blight and bricks.
This whole article is geared toward people who live so deep in the canyons they have anxiety attacks any time the see an horizon.
Ride-hailing works fine in the suburbs, rural areas, and small towns. My sister uses it in her gated community in Florida, my long time college buddy uses Uber to get to the grocery store in Alaska, my car-less neighbor on the west coast uses it just to go to his grandson's soccer games.
But I see your point: If you get rid of those parking lots in the city core you can put up even more sky blocking apartment buildings. Take all those streets and use them for mass transit. Find other people to pay for it, because city dwellers never pay for their own mass transit.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @03:01AM
If you get rid of those parking lots in the city core[,] you can put up even more sky blocking apartment buildings
...or turn that space into municipal parks which don't add to the heat island effect.
...or maybe even a community "garden" where food is grown.
Stop thinking like it's still the 20th Century.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @04:30AM (4 children)
Yeah, it's just blighted areas, ghettos and darkies stealing stuff, Like these places:
https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=Central+park+views&btnG=Search+Images&gbv=1 [google.com]
https://www.google.com/search?q=Paris+views+of+the+Seine&btnG=Search&hl=en&gbv=1&tbm=isch [google.com]
https://www.google.com/search?q=Amsterdam+views&btnG=Search&hl=en&gbv=1&tbm=isch [google.com]
https://www.google.com/search?q=Sydney+views&btnG=Search&hl=en&gbv=1&tbm=isch [google.com]
Yup, just nasty, nasty jungles with hostile, murderous natives.
"Of course you'll have a bad impression of New York if you only focus on the Pimps and C.H.U.D.s." [wikia.com], Frojack.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @07:49AM (1 child)
Dude, almost all of each of those URLs is noise.
Here's all you need for a link to Google Images:
https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&q=Central+park+views [google.com]
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @10:41AM
Why do I care? A better question is why do you care?
I'm just showing some provincial moron how stupid he is. I'm not going to put effort into editing the URLs Straight up copypasta.
It's a waste of my time. Don't like it? Go ahead and edit the rest of them. That's a wonderful use of your time, I'm sure.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @03:11PM (1 child)
Hard to claim the high ground when someone says "inner city blight" and you immediately say "darkies stealing stuff".
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @05:48PM
Yes. I suppose you might think that. Perhaps you should re-read my comment, then view the links I posted. You might find it enlightening.
Given that you're probably too lazy for mouse clicks, I'll give you a hint: Poe's law [wikipedia.org] strikes again!
Sigh.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday February 14 2018, @01:36PM
Worth pointing out, having lived there, that those areas either don't have any public transit or their public transit is a joke of a checkbox that doesn't work and no one uses it.
Uber can't take money from a service that doesn't exist. They can take money from properly legally licensed and insured taxi services, which they do.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @03:06AM
In Japan, they hire cute girls and at peak hours have them push the last passengers to board into the cars, saying "Excuse me. Excuse me." or something similar, so that the trains stay on schedule.
(Hint for any lonely guys needing a human touch.)
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2, Troll) by crafoo on Wednesday February 14 2018, @04:00AM (1 child)
No you don't understand. Either you lay down in your own grave and express sorrow to your murderers OR you are an evil sonofabitch alt-right nazi that is accelerating the suppression, enslavement, and suffering of the expanding poor population. It's a simple either-or situation people! It's so simple you dummy.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @03:49PM
Is it some sort of emotional release to cry like a baby? I hope your not one of those adult baby fetish people...
(Score: 3, Interesting) by TheRaven on Wednesday February 14 2018, @12:02PM
Paris has experimented with making the metro free when their pollution levels get too high, to encourage people to use it instead of driving. I wonder what would happen if a city like Paris made the Velib and Metro free at point of use (maybe keep a refundable deposit for the Velib) for an extended period. Would the reduction in traffic have a sufficient impact on the air quality and economy to cover the cost of operating it?
When I was a student, in my first year I was living somewhere that was about 45 minutes walk from campus and was right at the top of a hill so not particularly fun to access by bicycle, but I could get a bus pass for around £200 that let me take busses anywhere in the city for the entire academic year (in my second year, I moved within easy walking distance of campus and the city centre, so took the bus a lot less and didn't bother with the pass). While I was living in the same city, the bus prices went up to the point where it was cheaper get a taxi for 2-3 people for most trips. When I went back last year, it was cheaper to get a taxi than to take the bus for anything other than really long trips by a single person. They'd tried deploying bendy busses and spent millions remodelling the city centre so that they could fit, and then three years later had cancelled the entire project and gone back to smaller busses because not enough people were riding the busses to make it worth having the larger ones.
London gets good use of the tube by capping the total cost per day. Once you've made a couple of trips, the additional cost of extra ones is zero, which means that if you're using the tube or bus to get to work then the cost of using it to go out in the evening is zero. If you're using the tube a lot, then an annual travelcard has a lower cap than the pre-pay version, so it's an even better deal. This is coupled with a congestion charge that increases the cost of driving a car into the city and makes public transport a much more attractive option most of the time.
sudo mod me up
(Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday February 14 2018, @03:18PM (4 children)
Speaking of that, what causes mass transit debate?
The problem with SN is I'm not seeing any argument point in the article that is beyond the turn of the century. Let me drop some modern memes about the topic that no one has mentioned so far. Personally I think they kinda defuse the whole argument to the point of ending the debate, they are awesome memes.
I've read the whole "mass transit fandom" thing described as hipster imperialism and also as hipster colonialism.
Its really no different than a century ago, back then Londoners would rant and rave about how they have the right answer to govern an empire and they should naturally rule mere residents of India and why won't those stupid backwards inhuman savages cooperate and stay in the Empire as subjects which is what smart people would do, because we're better people, who know better than they do how to live, so at the point of a gun we have a moral obligation to improve those savages? Yeah that worked out real well, didn't it? We're "beyond" that way of thinking, right?
The same Londoners today are jerks demanding that their choo choos rule the waves and only morons, whom they should rule over, would live any other way, so its OK for us superior people to force them at the barrel of a government gun to live like us, so hope you enjoy your new choo choos we're forcing you to pay for via massive tax increases.
Hipster Colonialism, not even once. Down with the Imperialists! Hipster Imperialism is not exactly the Federation Prime Directive.
From the outside looking in, even the most jaded outsiders think there's nothing wrong with a London solution to a London problem, but the failure of Hipster Colonialism is you need the Imperial Army Muskets to gun down 1247 unarmed civilians to enforce a London solution to a New Dehli problem, to mix some historical metaphors.
There's people who just can't be made to understand that colonialism failed for a reason, not because "we didn't try hard enough" or "bad luck". A century ago they wanted an Empire, today they want choo choos, but its the same thought process across centuries.
Another meme, respect of the ancients: Wikipedia seems to claim the first subway opened in London in 1863... its 2018... anywhere mass transit makes sense it was profitably installed a century ago, and relatively slow rate of change means any change or expansion is going to be glacial compared to the amount of talk about the topic.
Another modern mass transit meme: There's an anti-globalist rant meme on the topic where all real estate must be the same across the world, so if a London solution works in London then at the point of a gun the whole world needs to be like London or else. With a side dish of Hipster Taliban gonna bulldoze the Statue of Liberty and the Great Pyramid because if every city can't have a French statue with Jewish poem on it, and huge piles of rock, then no cities should have them because all cities have to be the same, see the subway/transit rant. So you "must buy choo choo's or else" are gonna get ignored until you put up or shut up by bulldozing the Statue of Liberty. I live near a "great city" (not so great, but whatever) that does not have a London Eye ferris wheel so we'll build a shitty subway after London bulldozes their ferris wheel, because all real estate must be identical to be good globalists, right? I mean its a moral injustice that some cities don't do mass transit, right? So why don't you guys fire up the bulldozers first, then we'll think about buying ridiculous choo choos.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @03:53PM
Were you the series of contracts guy? Would explain your previous absence and your current vocal posts with no sign of the AC troll now.
How would society work without gov again?
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Wednesday February 14 2018, @04:03PM (1 child)
You need to get your meds prescription checked.
Basically, you seem to be arguing that people in a municipality have no right to govern themselves, and make laws to benefit their community, which is asinine and amounts to anarchy.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Thursday February 15 2018, @01:30PM
Not really.
The hipster imperialism meme is based on the idea the left is very proud about being "post imperial" and "post colonial" WRT the whole superiority implies inherent dominion thing. So the same people that thought themselves better than Indians therefore British India is a great idea, a century later spend endless electrons lecturing the entire world must give up cars because it works great for us in London and we're superior therefore have dominion over the world and what we say, must be done. Hipster Imperialism, or Hipster Colonialism awesome. Its a variation on the theme of Californication where CA residents who ruined CA, move to another state and ruin it. Kinda like the immigration/invasion argument.
Another meme is actually a recycled old logical fallacy where you drop a $20 on the ground in front of three economists and they refuse to pick it up because an efficient marketplace means $20 bills don't fall to the ground. So we've had subways for 160 years depending on finer definitions and where they work they've appeared and where they don't work, frankly by now they're never gonna work. Its exactly like demanding more hydroelectric dams be installed, its old old old tech, if it hasn't been installed for centuries, there's a reason, and it isn't going to be installed, ever.
The final meme is a variation on cultural imperialism, people that think they're superior because they don't want McDonalds in every world capital city on the planet none the less want choo choos. So one named corporation to rule them all is bad, but strict enforcement of one architectural style, according to a certain level of authoritarian personality, is inherently good thus the whole world need choo choos because they work in London, or whatever.
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Thursday February 15 2018, @01:38AM
Where can I find *any* references to such a "meme"?
Not here: https://me.me/t/public-transportation [me.me]
Or here: http://knowyourmeme.com/search?q=public+transportation [knowyourmeme.com]
Or here: https://www.memecenter.com/tag/%20public%20transportation [memecenter.com]
Or here: http://memebase.cheezburger.com/tag/public-transportation/page/6 [cheezburger.com]
Quit making stuff up. It just confirms what we all know -- you're full of it.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @12:12AM
If individualized transportation is the problem, there is one thing we can all collectivise for:- Free helicopter rides for communists [knowyourmeme.com]
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Sulla on Wednesday February 14 2018, @12:15AM (55 children)
When I was in high school there were a couple occasions where I took the bus to get to the university library to work on various AP reports. The city in which I lived prided itself on quality of its public transportation, but what the trip still cost me an hour in each direction, drastically cutting into the amount of time I was able to spend studying. In college I was in a city where we had free bus passes to get us around, i would have to choose between going to class that day or spending three hours on a bus (there and back) to get basic shopping done. Everytime I took a bus I encountered the same problem, people who are sick, people who smelled like shit, a unclean bus, and higher costs than if I had driven my own vehicle
The city in which I currently live just spent 30 million upgrading our bus system by carving two and four lane roads into three and five by imminent domaining from whatever property owner happened to be on the wrong side of the road. Routes did not improve, time to get from place to place did not improve, they are not spending any more on security or cleaning, but hey the busses are totally more visible now.
Maybe where I don't live transit isn't disgusting, but with all the pedos trying to pick up kids (plenty of reports recently), the transients assaulting people (three cases this month at bus stops), the flu, etc, i would go into debt to buy my kids a vehicle and pay their insurance and pay their gas before I ever considered having them take the bus.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 5, Insightful) by PartTimeZombie on Wednesday February 14 2018, @12:30AM (20 children)
The problem is where you live.
Try getting on to the Tube at Bank station in London on any weekday. It is very full, and you will probably have to queue, but it is full of incredibly wealthy bankers in £3,000 suits because the Tube is the best way of getting around.
Buses full of sick people is also a symptom of a broken health system. Civilised countries provide proper taxpayer funded healthcare.
Even better, visit Berlin and ride their underground. Because they're Germans it runs on time and is really clean and fast, which doesn't mean they don't complain about it. They also speak better English than you or me.
(Score: 3, Touché) by NewNic on Wednesday February 14 2018, @12:49AM (2 children)
[Pedant mode on!]
As shown by the sentence above [it should be ".. than you or I" with an implicit "do" at the end].
https://www.quora.com/What-should-the-last-word-in-this-sentence-be-Wealthy-individuals-can-effectively-cast-more-votes-than-you-or-___ [quora.com]
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 4, Touché) by PartTimeZombie on Wednesday February 14 2018, @02:07AM (1 child)
Tol' ya dint I?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @04:57AM
Fricking Cockneys!
(Score: 0, Troll) by frojack on Wednesday February 14 2018, @02:41AM (2 children)
There it is. Gimmie free. Gimmie gimmie.
And of course these free health care nations riding around on germ breeding mass transit never get sick, right?
Groped by aribic speaking smelly men, but never sick.
https://gatesofvienna.net/2018/01/groping-in-berlin/ [gatesofvienna.net]
https://sputniknews.com/europe/201712301060427682-german-new-year-party-safe-zone-appraisal/ [sputniknews.com]
Such a wonderful place.
No sickness either!!! https://www.thelocal.de/20170210/this-is-where-the-flu-has-been-hitting-germany-hardest [thelocal.de]
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @06:38AM
This is why I never let frojack on my bus. He keeps thinking like this, and he is a source of public dis-utility. Get off my bus, frojack!
(Score: 3, Informative) by PartTimeZombie on Wednesday February 14 2018, @07:33PM
Free? Who said anything about free?
It is certainly cheaper to do healthcare the civilised way however, as the World Bank shows here. [worldbank.org]
Scroll down to the US, it's just below UK and it shows you spend 17.1% of your GDP on healthcare, as opposed to the UK's 9.1%.
If you would like to talk about outcomes, this report on a study shows the US has the worst outcomes too. [abc.net.au]
Nobody thinks healthcare is free, we just prefer not to be bankrupted if we get sick.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @03:29AM
In the city where I live there are 2 types of buses 'express' and 'local'. The price difference is about 80 cents.
It really just depends on where you live. Go north and it is gheto. Go south and million dollar houses and bankers. Your ride will vary....
(Score: 2) by sjames on Wednesday February 14 2018, @05:36AM
I can see the space savings, but since the car has to drive a while just to get to me, I don't see the environmental benefit compared to the car turned off and waiting for me. Concentrating the wear and tear on a few less vehicles doesn't necessarily mean less cars made over-all. It may even mean more cars made due to the added wear deadheading between pick-ups.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Unixnut on Wednesday February 14 2018, @08:00AM (2 children)
> Try getting on to the Tube at Bank station in London on any weekday. It is very full, and you will probably have to queue, but it is full of incredibly wealthy bankers in £3,000 suits because the Tube is the best way of getting around.
That's because the government deliberately crippled the alternatives to the point where they have no choice. Those wealthy bankers don't ride the tube out of some solidarity with the poor, or because they like it, it is because they have no choice. Only the very very top can even consider commuting by car (you know you "made it" in a London financial firm when they provide you with a parking space in the city as a perk).
So yes, if you coerce people, you will find many will do it. I don't see your point, unless it is to say more people should be coerced into doing what they wouldn't do normally?
> Buses full of sick people is also a symptom of a broken health system. Civilised countries provide proper taxpayer funded healthcare.
I don't know, the NHS is held up to the world as the poster child of "taxpayer funded healthcare done right", to the point where its adherents will defend it and its funding with a level of fanaticism comparable to religious extremists.
Despite this, it's still so damn bad that if you actually want healthcare in the UK, you need to pay extra for private insurance on top of the NHS costs (unless you want to experience a third world level health service)
Also, the London underground and Buses in general are still full of sick people, and still make excellent breeding grounds for all kinds of bacteria and viruses. This, I don't think is a solvable problem (unless you shrink wrap everyone in public transport and give them their own air filters). Shoving a bunch of strangers tightly together in a tin can will provide ample breeding grounds for all kind of nasty. You need just one carrier to spread illness rapidly in the system.
> Even better, visit Berlin and ride their underground. Because they're Germans it runs on time and is really clean and fast, which doesn't mean they don't complain about it. They also speak better English than you or me.
The more I hear about it, the more it sounds the Germans got it right. From public transport, to healthcare, to unemployment support, to privacy protections. One of these days I will probably go visit, and if it is as good as I've heard, I might just stay there.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by NewNic on Wednesday February 14 2018, @06:45PM (1 child)
Having lived in several countries, I can tell you that the service people get from the NHS is excellent. Yes, you might have to wait for a hip replacement, but my relatives have received excellent care for cancer, without any wait times, and, for my parents, excellent and compassionate care at the ends of their lives.
On the other hand, in the USA, the care we have received has often been poor, designed to increase billing rather than really serve our healthcare needs.
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 2) by Unixnut on Thursday February 15 2018, @10:45AM
> Having lived in several countries, I can tell you that the service people get from the NHS is excellent. Yes, you might have to wait for a hip replacement, but my relatives have received excellent care for cancer, without any wait times, and, for my parents, excellent and compassionate care at the ends of their lives.
Having also lived in several countries (3 to be exact), I can tell you the NHS service was not only awfully poor, but actually resulted in my having permanent health problems. Saying that, I've never experienced the USA healthcare, which is apparently so crap it makes the NHS look good, while being a lot more expensive.
I originally wrote a full detail of my experiences with the NHS, and how they actually caused me permanent health damage due to their incompetence, mistakes and unaccountability, but I felt it too personal to post on a public forum. My apologies.
Fundamentally in my experience, the NHS is:
- Unaccountable (I can't get any redress for their mistakes, so they don't really bother to make sure what they do is right)
- Uncaring (Just a number in their quotas, half the times they just didn't even bother giving me a proper examination)
- Expensive (the above wasn't free, I actually had to pay for everything, in addition to my monthly taxes to the NHS)
- Incompetent (Three times I needed medical help, three times I ended up worse for wear)
Now thankfully I never had cancer, so I don't know how the NHS is when dealing with cancer, but a public health service should be able to take care of a wide ranging amount of health issues of the population, not hyper specialise in one or another area. The goal is to provide for a generally healthy and productive populace.
If the NHS really was good, nobody would bother paying extra to get private health insurance here, nor would they bother flying to other countries to get treatment. However as many people do both, it shows the NHS is lacking.
Not to even get me started on the exodus of medical staff and doctors due to the awful working conditions and poor pay, so many in the medical profession have either gone fully private, or left the country.
That is not to say we should do the US healthcare system, just something more like the French/German public healthcare systems, which seem to manage to give a far higher overall standard of healthcare, without as many problems as the NHS has (and without as much waste).
(Score: 2, Troll) by VLM on Wednesday February 14 2018, @02:04PM (8 children)
No, just no.
Some googling finds us the Transport for London 2017/2018 budget plan published by the invader mayor's office (UK is doing sort of a Vichy England thing) The mayor signed off on a claim of 10.2 billion pounds. Google claims the greater london population which optimistically overlaps the 10B pound coverage area has 8.5 million people. Google can convert UK pounds to ameriburger dollars pretty easily and I can do arithmetic in my head. Given all that:
Doing some revolutionary math and waving lots of hands to translate that into terms Ameriburgers can easily understand, that's $1647 per year to keep the system more or less working, assuming they're funding it adequately for the long term etc etc. This is merely the government "chip in" not accounting for any user fees, and I'm sure London doesn't let people take transit for free... Thats like 50% of my total property tax bill this year, that just isn't happening.
Most of the worlds population can never afford a government subsidy of $1700 not to mention the immense user fees. Like it or not, its just cheaper to use cars.
These kind of cherry picked discussions are analogous to my claiming the Statue of Liberty rocks but its not scalable to put a full size replica in every backyard so we'll have to stick with postcards and framed portraits in most of the world. Then an epic freakout from New Yorkers stomping their feet that us provincials are morons because they have a perfectly good Statue of Liberty and (forgetting its only because there's only one) it draws huge tourist crowds so its actually revenue positive and therefore we need massive government social engineering to ensure that every back yard in the country has a full size replica of the Statue of Liberty sitting next to the bbq and lawn chairs.
I don't know how to be more crystal clear; yes, I agree someone built the Great Pyramid one time long ago, and no one argues its really cool if you personally get to see it, and its a great tourist lure, BUT that doesn't mean "great pyramid as a business plan" scales to every cemetery burial plot for every person who ever lived in the world.
How about you can't do Disney World without the monorail. No one argues that Disney World would be better off without the monorail, or that it isn't cool, or that tourists don't like it. A subculture of superfans lives there and loves riding the monorail and I am SO happy for them. However nice one monorail is for tourists and a couple unusual people to enjoy in the narrow geographic confines of Disney World, it would be utter madness for the government to socially engineer a monorail from every parking lot in the entire united states to the epcot center (or WTF exactly).
All the hipster talk about the worship of the "eliminate the car" mantra is basically fuck you I live in an old city and you don't, so being a loser you don't deserve the basics of life like ability to commute ha ha you can't afford subways and we'll take away your car insert Simpsons evil laugh ha ha ha ha ha. I have a cans of PBR in the fridge and hipster jeans on my pants and organic artisinal locally brewed kombucha so that makes me cool and everyone else and every other lifestyle sucks, is kinda lame way to go thru life.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by TheRaven on Wednesday February 14 2018, @03:30PM (6 children)
Not in a city the density of London. The congestion charge was introduced because London has some of the worst air quality in the civilised world and, in spite of the public transport system, still has huge areas of stationary traffic. If you take the 49.9% of people in London that commute by public transport (2011 census numbers) and put them in cars, then the roads simply will not work. Now, you can argue that the correct solution is to move people out of London, but thinking that cars are cheaper is assuming that they will work at all.
Oh, and you're complaining about those numbers, but ignoring the fact London is spending a similar amount on road maintenance (£2.5bn in the city budget, plus a large slice of the £30bn that the Highways Agency and local authority + local enterprise partnerships spend each year). Once you factor in the cost of cars and fuel and the externalities of the fact that London air pollution knocks an average of two years of the life expectancies of residents, cars don't sound so cheap.
sudo mod me up
(Score: 2) by TheRaven on Wednesday February 14 2018, @04:24PM (1 child)
sudo mod me up
(Score: 1) by Sulla on Wednesday February 14 2018, @04:36PM
I would pay triple that in additional taxes each year before I even considered not having two vehicles. It is very hard to compare most of the world to the US I think when it comes to mass transit. The butcher is three miles from my house, my office is five, my wife's work is about seven, the cigar shop is four, and the grocery store is two. Yeah I could walk these distances or ride a bike, but why waste my time like that?
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Thursday February 15 2018, @01:47AM (1 child)
Please correct me if I'm wrong Raven, but aren't there really significant numbers of people who commute to London via NationalRail as well, and then use the Underground to get to their places of work?
Many big US cities see their populations *double* during working hours. I'd suspect the same is true for London, no?
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by TheRaven on Thursday February 15 2018, @10:23AM
I'm not sure if the census numbers that I found refer to people that work in London or people that live in London.
sudo mod me up
(Score: 2) by VLM on Thursday February 15 2018, @01:16PM (1 child)
The endless circle completes, in that most of humanity doesn't want to live in London so they don't, therefore in a discussion about why we must abolish private ownership of cars, the proof of why it would work great for the entire world, is it only works for a tiny fraction of the population. All transit discussions seem inevitably devolve to this circular argument.
(Score: 2) by TheRaven on Friday February 16 2018, @10:40AM
sudo mod me up
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @03:56PM
Speaking of sucky lifestyles, going through life bitter and angry is pretty low on the list of fulfilling lifestyles.
(Score: 2) by pipedwho on Wednesday February 14 2018, @12:42AM (3 children)
But, your Eminence, the wrecking ball was swinging imminently towards his domain! Motion denied.
(Score: 3, Funny) by c0lo on Wednesday February 14 2018, @02:11AM (2 children)
This is who you do a FTFY properly.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @03:16AM (1 child)
Muphry's law [wikipedia.org]
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday February 14 2018, @03:46AM
(or just intended amplification of the effect)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @12:44AM (3 children)
Why throw the old pedo bogeyman? Especially, considering 99% of child abuse is perpetrated by someone close or known to the family, not some random dude on the bus offering candy to kids.
In a civilised country, where there is decent public transport, everyone uses it, not just the vagrants, derelicts, and ..... pedos.
(Score: 1) by Sulla on Wednesday February 14 2018, @12:47AM (2 children)
I brought it up because I was just reading the forth article from this month where someone tried to pull a person into a car or harassed a person on a bus, we had three cases last month as well.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 2) by sjames on Wednesday February 14 2018, @01:22AM (1 child)
So the problem exists whether they ride the bus or not.
At least on the bus, it can't go too far since there is necessarily a witness.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @09:10AM
Or, Sulla IS the Pedobear? Possible? Remorse and guilt are a common feature of pedos. Just Saying!!!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @01:10AM (17 children)
That is right: personal transit is more efficient for the users. If there are traffic jams, it is because there are too many people, and mass transit will not fix the problem. The only problem that buses or subways solve is to make transit possible for people who don't drive cars. Automated cars will solve that problem.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @02:59AM (3 children)
Nice trolling there.
Automated cars have a poor person per square foot rating. Even if you pack a car with the maximum number of passengers, it's still lower than what you'd get with a busy bus. The times when the bus isn't full tend to be times when you don't have as much traffic anyways.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday February 14 2018, @06:53AM (2 children)
Which is a pretty meaningless statistic.
But there are two things to note. First, it's better than an empty bus. And second, they're going where they want to go, not where the bus route goes. Point to point has long been shown to be preferred to mass transit which doesn't do that. I've been on mass transit rides where they had a much lower density of passenger than single passenger cars following each other at a safe distance. For the meaningless little that is worth.
Those automatic cars wouldn't be on the road in that case. Nor would perfect utilization be that important. Let us recall that peoples' time is far more important than slightly better usage of transportation assets.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @09:13AM (1 child)
The obvious rebuttal is, . . . . I got nothing. khallow just said time is valuable. And yet, he posts on SoylentNews. If I were Republican, my head would explode at this point.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday February 14 2018, @02:33PM
I could be doing something valuable, like riding on a bus.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @03:52AM
As the AC first responding to you noted, you're clearly trolling.
Berlin's beautiful, amazing Metro has already been mentioned in the (meta)thread.
Build it, build it nice, and keep it nice and they will come.
Japan, China, France, and Germany have figured out mass transit and make USA look like something out of the dark ages.
Much of USA is stuck on stupid, in build-no-public-infrastructure mode.
Trying to be Indonesia, I'm guessing. (The final state of Capitalism.) [googleusercontent.com] (orig) [dissidentvoice.org]
Los Angeles County has a light rail system.
Taking it to the airport, we were zooming by all the stalled bumper-to-bumper traffic on the 105 freeway that runs parallel to The Green Line.
...and at the airport end, there are gratis shuttle buses.
Again, when people use mass transit, things get better real fast.
.
I blockquoted this the other week and here it is, apt again.
[1] Currently, a day pass for bus service in the OC (not including express routes) is $5; $1.50 for seniors.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by Unixnut on Wednesday February 14 2018, @08:13AM (11 children)
> That is right: personal transit is more efficient for the users. If there are traffic jams, it is because there are too many people, and mass transit will not fix the problem.
That is quite insightful. I think that is the fundamental problem. If there are too many people per square kilometer, then all kinds of things break down.
The higher the density of humans, the more problems you have with garbage, sewage, traffic, congestion, living affordability, illness & health, etc... The solutions given: mass transit, autonomous cars, etc... are just temporary band aids.
I would think the solution is to decentralize. Why do we need to shove humans like pack rats into concrete cubes in one place? Sure, back in the day when sending a message 200 miles would take 5 days, and sending a message internationally would take months, I saw the reason to pack people into cities. Increased communication really was a benefit, and it improved a lot in society, to the point where it was worth the hassles of living in a city,
However now we have developed communication technology to the point where it is almost transparent where you are geographically located. I could be writing this post in the middle of a world urban centre, or out in some long forgotten village in the middle of nowhere , and apart from maybe an increase in latency of 30ms, you wouldn't notice.
We here, can debate and communicate across the world from all kinds of places. We can work, interact and get things done across the world. I kind of expected that increase in internet access to rural areas would result in an exodus from cities, as people would be able to work from home, not have to commute at all.
Yet I didn't expect the idea of having to "go to work" to be so ingrained in society that many would willingly waste all that fuel/energy propelling a person to an office to type on a PC and back again, every day, when said person can do the same thing from home.
Maybe it is just a case of society being slow to adjust to new technology, and one day the only people who commute to work are those who actually have to physically be there for their job.
(Score: 2) by TheRaven on Wednesday February 14 2018, @12:07PM (3 children)
sudo mod me up
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Unixnut on Wednesday February 14 2018, @12:21PM (2 children)
That sounds like a very inefficient way to structure a country. Why did they do it that way?
I mean, sure, you don't want heavy industry/commerce right next to your home, but it is perfectly feasible to have light commerce/industrial and residential together. Light residential and recreational even makes more sense to have nearby.
Unless you are a developing country, heavy manufacturing is going to be a small percentage of your economy. The bulk of it would be services and light manufacture/commercial, which (with prudent planning) can be near residential places.
Seems nothing sillier than forcing the entire working populace through the transport system twice a day. Waste of man hours, energy and resources.
(Score: 3, Informative) by TheRaven on Wednesday February 14 2018, @03:20PM (1 child)
Historical context is important. Most UK cities, for example, began as clusters of towns or villages that gradually expanded until they were overlapping. All of the component parts were largely self contained, because most people got around them by walking. Most of the roads were initially developed to support a horse and cart. During the industrial revolution, factories had to be built within walking distance of wherever the workforce lived, and the same applied to shops.
In contrast, most US cities experienced their big expansion at around the time that cars became cheap enough to own, and back when fuel was very cheap. As such, they're designed around the idea that you drive pretty much anywhere. This is particularly visible somewhere like San Diego, where six-lane highways run through the middle of the city and residents expect to drive anywhere more than a block away.
sudo mod me up
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Thursday February 15 2018, @02:07AM
That's mostly because one of the most influential planners [wikipedia.org] of the 20th century absolutely *hated* cities.
He pushed hard to make life completely automobile-based, rather than walking, bicycling or using public transit. If he'd had his way, he would have devastated significant portions of New York City with highways across major thoroughfares [wikipedia.org]:
The most famous of these failed plans was the Lower Manhattan Expressway [curbed.com], which would have razed what is now some of the most expensive real estate in NYC, as well as several very crowded neighborhoods.
Sadly, Moses' disciples didn't have the sort of opposition that he did, and you can see it in cities all over the US.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Wednesday February 14 2018, @01:14PM (5 children)
It seems like there are many folks who are disgusted by the idea of traveling on public transportation with strangers. They want their car. And they don't want to share it with anyone.
And there are those who find public transportation to be not only more efficient, but to their liking.
As a general rule, these two sets of folks are often at odds not only when it comes to transportation but also in terms of urban living vs. suburban/rural living. What's more, they tend to diverge as to whether most people are kind, decent human beings or nasty scumbags who would happily shoot you in the back of the head if it made them a few pennies.
These kinds of dichotomies really remind me of the split in Asimov's writings between the Spacers [wikipedia.org] who despise human contact and use robots and automation to allow each individual to be alone as much as possible, without those other icky humans, and Settlers [wikipedia.org] who prefer to live in communities, share their space with other people and (gasp!) reproduce by having sex.
No, the parallels aren't perfect, but I find it interesting that Asimov homed in on those different ideas that humans have about themselves, other humans and societies. I think that's part of what made him such an engaging writer -- despite the technology and far-flung settings, he wrote real, human stories.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by Unixnut on Wednesday February 14 2018, @01:54PM (4 children)
> As a general rule, these two sets of folks are often at odds not only when it comes to transportation but also in terms of urban living vs. suburban/rural living. What's more, they tend to diverge as to whether most people are kind, decent human beings or nasty scumbags who would happily shoot you in the back of the head if it made them a few pennies.
It is quite fascinating, I agree. I suspect it is due to experiences. My anecdotes are as follows:
- I was born and grew up in a big urban city. My experience of other people (from neighbours, to work, to strangers in the street or on public transport) has generally been a case of assholes, scumbags and people who would fuck you over if they could earn a few pennies on it. I've had it all, from being screwed out of money owed, to being robbed, to racist abuse, to people trying to hurt me with weapons. As such, the less contact you have with other human beings, the better. People here, if you walk around, always stare into the ground when they are outside. I once didn't do this, and would look and smile at people as I walked around. Reactions ranged from confusion to people actually hurling abuse at me. So I didn't do it again.
- A friend of mine lives in the countryside, and it couldn't be more different. Everyone assumes everyone else is nice, people get along, help each other, and they even share each others stuff. Very much a community feeling, of helping and being helped in return. Complete strangers will look at you, and even with you a good morning on your way to work.
Indeed I am in the process of making the transition to the countryside, and to be honest, I'm having trouble adjusting the most to the idea of strangers actually being decent human beings. Neighbours particularly I have trouble interacting with, despite it being the most commonly done thing in rural communities (being invited over to dinner/drinks). It just feels like an alien world. There is even a higher chance of actually having sex, women seem more interested in you as a person, rather than how high you sit on the social ladder and the size of your wallet, as has been my experience dating city girls.
I think cities breed assholes, quite frankly. The "rat race", chasing ever higher the social ladder, trying to keep up (or beat) prices going up by getting as much money as you can, obsession with status and material wealth, showing off to others how much better you are doing in the "race", etc... it breeds a nasty, dog eat dog culture. Also, shoving all people of the world in one pot results in clashes of cultures, of ideologies, of religions and even hygiene standards.
And then you get the locals resenting all the foreigners, the poor ones blame them for everything being expensive, or $some_other_problem, and before you know it you have issues of racial attacks and other unpleasantness.
Increasing density of cities means more and more people crammed into smaller and smaller spaces, with less and less "personal space", resulting in stress, aggravation and breakdowns. It would not surprise me to find that it is mostly city dwellers that need to see shrinks, or use "meditation apps", or just pop brain pills to stay functional.
It isn't even a matter of public transport. The people I met in the country I would not mind sharing a bus with at all (and have done so without a problem).
You do however get a wide variety of world cuisine, and always some events happening, so cities are great places to visit and go out, but I think they are horrid to live.
> No, the parallels aren't perfect, but I find it interesting that Asimov homed in on those different ideas that humans have about themselves, other humans and societies. I think that's part of what made him such an engaging writer -- despite the technology and far-flung settings, he wrote real, human stories.
Very true. Asimov was the first SciFi I ever read, and who got me hooked. I am a big fan of his work.
The parallels do seem to be there, but I do find it funny that the people most packed together are the ones who detest human contact the most. Maybe because they are forced to be in contact with other humans constantly, to the point where having "your space alone" is a luxury.
I guess the flip side, of one man on a desert island, would be overjoyed at interacting with another human being, anyone, just to compensate for loneliness.
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Wednesday February 14 2018, @05:16PM (3 children)
Your perspective is quite interesting. Thanks for sharing it. I've had (mostly) the opposite experience.
I was also born, grew up and, in fact, still live in the most urban city in the US.
While I have encountered assholes throughout my life, the vast majority of people that I've interacted with have been decent, kind and happy to help.
Yes, in a big city where there's little personal space, people generally don't smile and say hello as they walk by, and usually not on public transport either. However, I've discovered that this is actually a form of respect. In a place that's crowded, if you smile and say hello to everyone you pass by, you'll be doing that for *hours* rather than doing the things you need and/or want to do. What's more, since it is crowded, personal space is at a minimum. In that circumstance, when you inject yourself into someone else's space, you're reducing what small personal space they have. As such, that's rather rude.
At the same time, if you have need to interact with others, my experience has been, except in a very few situations, quite positive. Yes, I've had people be nasty to me, or combative. Yes, I've had guns pointed at me more than once. Yes, I even got mugged once. However, in over fifty years, those experiences are rare enough that I can remember each instance. I can't even count the number of times that people have been kind, concerned and happy to interact, and even assist if necessary.
I've traveled quite a bit around the US, and lived in various places, both big and small, and I have to say that most of the people I've interacted with have similarly been kind and pleasant.
I'm not sure why our experiences have been so different. I suppose we could compare notes and see if we can figure it out.
I have to disagree with that first point. As I mentioned, almost all of the people I deal with are decent, friendly and don't give me a moment's trouble or concern. I will say that I've met many people who moved to my city who tend to get burned out by, as you say, the "rat race" and end up leaving. And there certainly are those who are obsessed with material gain. I don't really like those people either and choose not to be around them. There certainly are many, many more people who are not quite so obsessed. At the same time, the big city can be a hard place to make a living.
Most of the people I know (either personally or professionally) are pretty decent, and while they do look out for number one, they don't see life as a zero sum game.
I revel in the multitude of cultures, clothing, languages and cuisines. There certainly are bigoted people here, who hate and fear what's different. But I've seen Muslims friendly with orthodox Jews (in fact, I, an Atheist, and three friends, a Christian, a Muslim and an Orthodox Jew have dinner together on a pretty regular basis), people ranging from ashen pale to deep brown sharing friendships, romantic relationships and families. As for personal hygiene, well I've found that to be quite varied wherever I've gone.
Just within a quarter mile square around where I live there are very wealthy folks, middle class folks, relatively poor folks and *very* poor folks. What's more, there are many cultures. Asians, South Asians, Caribbean people from many different cultures, people of European extraction, Middle Easterners and more. I don't see any of that. In fact, the last time I heard about a racial attack was when some guy came in from hundreds of miles away, intent on killing black folks. He slashed one guy with a sword and was promptly arrested.
Sure, there are bigots here. And as long as they keep their bigotry to themselves in public, and only take it out when they're with their bigoted scumbag compatriots, no one really cares.
Here's a news flash for you: There are assholes and scum of *all* stripes.
I can't speak for everyone, but as I mentioned above, we have surprisingly effective ways to deal with the lack of personal space. It does get to some people, although it's been my experience that those are mostly people that have come from elsewhere (whether it be commuters from the suburbs -- you couldn't pay me to do that --- Ugh!) or folks from other places that find it difficult to fit in. Most of the people from here that have issues will generally just move elsewhere, like yourself.
I'm glad you've surrounded yourself with people who are decent, caring and kind. I think that's critical to having a good life.
I will say that some of the *worst* experiences I have had with other humans has been in suburban areas. In small towns and rural areas, I've found that people are generally quite decent and pleasant. I guess the common thread is that when you treat others with kindness and respect, you'll usually get the same back. But there are assholes everywhere.
As for Asimov, he really carried these things to extremes, but it was the Spacers who didn't want to be around others, so much so that they'd reproduce by having robots transport gametes to be fertilized in artificial wombs rather than spend time with anyone. They lived on vast rural estates by themselves, shunning even audiovisual communications with other humans.
The Settlers, on the other hand, lived together in large urban centers with big populations and procreated the old-fashioned way -- in order to be around other humans.
Most of the folks around me enjoy the company of their fellow humans. We are, after all, a social species used to living in groups. I wonder if you'll share the name of this "big city" in which you grew up, so I'll know where most of the assholes are. Because they aren't here.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by Unixnut on Thursday February 15 2018, @11:24AM (2 children)
That is interesting, a very different experience indeed.
One thing you mentioned is that you are in the US. I am talking about the UK (London is where I am from), and while we speak English, culturally they are very different.
I had a look, and apparently the US is the first in the world on dwelling size per person, while the UK is last:
https://www.apartmenttherapy.com/average-home-sizes-around-the-151738 [apartmenttherapy.com]
So firstly, it seems you and I on opposite ends of the density spectrum. Based on what I've figured out, the average size of a home for an urban American is about what I can expect in a rural house (the rural house I am now in is around 700 sqft). How big was your urban apartment? The flat I lived in was around 400sqft, and that was considered large for a 1 bedroom (because it was built decades ago, when everything was bigger).
Based on those numbers, we here are 2.8 times more tightly packed in then you. Imagine your place being about 3 times smaller (and everyone 3x closer together) to get an idea. With that kind of density you start treading on other peoples toes (and nerves) quite rapidly.
Also, American apartments tend to be built in well defined clear blocks, with ample space between them and well laid out. Here the city is old and not well planned out for the amount of people in it.
My experience with neighbours has been overly negative. Usually when a neighbour gets in contact with me, it means a lot of stress, arguing and probably yet another trip to the lawyers. Then there are issues with vandalising of my property, pettiness, arguments over small things like where the bins were left out, or where someone parked their car, etc... just, lots of petty shit that is a waste of life and money, and that can't be solved because no matter how you look at it, there just isn't enough space, so you are constantly fighting over who has the right to what little space there is and and how. Not to mention being able to hear everything your neighbours are doing gets tiring.
And I don't need people to say hello to me, but looking up once in a while, or at least not hurling abuse at me if I smile at them would not be bad. I mean seriously, if you don't like that I smiled at you just look away and carry on. Not need to get abusive about it.
As for the experiences. Well, one thing I can say is that Americans practice assimilation of culture. You have people from all over the world, but they "leave their problems at the door", and become Americans, even if they keep some of their culture, tradition and customs (that is kept private).
Round here people keep their identity far more. I don't know what exactly, but it isn't just the locals being xenophobes. Recently there was a massive brawl on the street down the road between Turks and Kurds because of what is going on in the middle east right now. You have radical Islamists attacking, you have east europeans being abused for "taking our jobs" from the locals, and then the anger directed at Asians for seemingly being successful in business. Essentially people live in fear of one another round here, and the less human contact you have, the better.
Everywhere you go there is division and fingerpointing and arguing, since the UK decided to vote to leave the EU, the anti-immigrant rhetoric has really gone up a notch. I've had racial abuse since I was a child in school, it is just something that is common here, especially if you don't look white. However it has really gone up lately.
We also don't have guns (unless you are a criminal or the police), so normally a criminal knows you are unarmed, and is far more likely to have a go then otherwise. Usually they are armed with a blade of some kind, stabbings are very common here, for all kinds of reasons. The only time I've been stabbed (or rather, almost stabbed, moved out the way, and just ended up with a nasty scar where the blade hit my arm) was because of where I was descended from, and it wasn't from a local either.
I've been to other big cities, but visiting is very different to living, so I cannot compare. Indeed for visiting, London is awesome, I cannot recommend it enough, however I would not recommend living here unless you are very rich (and if you are very rich, well, then wherever you go, you will have a pleasant experience).
So, maybe the US overall is a more pleasant place to be an urbanite. I dislike the suburbs because of the dreary identical homes, that have no real flare or uniqueness. It is a sea of grey and misery to me.
I ended up going to Oxford, which, being a university town, means it is very diverse, and the locals in addition to being very nice, are really tolerant of different peoples and cultures (I guess after centuries of hosting students, you get used to all kinds of people). Plus the increased space means nobody has a reason to start an argument over who has the right to place their garbage here or there, so fewer reasons to argue, and more reasons to be pleasant to one another.
So there we go, a bit of background :-)
(Score: 3, Interesting) by NotSanguine on Thursday February 15 2018, @10:44PM (1 child)
As, I imagine, it is in the UK, in the US, flat sizes (and rental/purchase costs) vary wildly [businessinsider.com]. In New York City (where I live) the median cost of a one bedroom is US$2,200 and is 750sq feet. However, even within NYC, prices and sizes vary significantly by area and access to public transportation. I've been searching around trying to find a breakdown of costs by area within NYC, but my search hasn't led me to any decent comparisons.
I grew up in several different neighborhoods in NYC, with varying flat sizes. Where I live now (and for the past 20+ years) is a 2BR 600sq ft flat in a five (we count the ground floor as floor one) story walk-up building with a total of 20 flats. This is pretty typical for what we call "pre-war" building (the war in question is WWI, in case you're interested). My rent is about 2/3 of my neighbors due to rent regulation [wikipedia.org] laws.
When I was in London a few years ago (and I had a lovely time) I made sure to look at house/flat listings in the windows of every estate agent I walked by. I noted that housing in London is a bit more expensive than NYC. Which is rather interesting, since Greater London [wikipedia.org] is approximately twice the size of NYC [wikipedia.org] with a similar population. As such, NYC is about twice as crowded as London.
I did run across this comparison of London and NYC [businessinsider.com], and found that they are, in many respects, quite similar.
My experience has been (mostly) positive with neighbors, although, as I mentioned previously, there are assholes *everywhere*.
It's sad that some folks are so petty. I don't really concern myself with my neighbors, other than to say hello, be helpful if I can, and ogle (I live quite near a private university, and a number of students, mostly women in their late teens/early twenties live in other flats in my building) now and again.
I guess there are fewer issues (at least in the areas you mention) because each building (there are a couple dozen of similar or larger size on my block alone) has its own set of bins, and bullding superintendents [wikipedia.org] or someone contracted by them will empty the trash/recycling bins and place them out on the sidewalk for collection (in my neighborhood, collection is Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday mornings, Tuesday being the only day for the collection of recyclables) the nght before collection.
Parking is wholly egalitarian, with no restriction on *who* can park where, but with alternate-side (cars may not park on side or the other on alternate days for several hours to allow street sweepers [youtube.com] to clean the streets, along with no parking zones for schools and fire hydrants [wikipedia.org].
Vandalism can always be an issue, but that hasn't been a big issue in NYC, at least in areas where I've lived, over the past thirty years or so. There was a report the other day of a cemetery being vandalized [ny1.com].
I mostly can't hear what my neighbors are doing, although with my windows open others can, apparently, hear what I'm doing. On one occasion, I walked out of the building with my (then) girlfriend and a neighbor remarked on how much in love we must be. Granted, that GF was pretty loud. ;)
I'll need to continue this in another comment, as I ran into the 10k character limit. More to come.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 3, Interesting) by NotSanguine on Thursday February 15 2018, @10:45PM
And here's the rest...
Wow! that rarely happens to me, but as I mentioned previously, given the lack of personal space, we generally (many women would disagree and the men who are such scumbags deserve a punch in the face) try not to invade that space. This guy [gothamist.com] has some interesting points to make about that. Also, New Yorkers tend to be pretty straightforward and there's much less of the "smile to your face, stab you in the back" mentality in my experience, than there is in other places. I find it quite refreshing.
NYC is *quite* multicultural. One of my neighbors (she's in her 80s) barely speaks English, even though she's lived here for decades. Headscarves, Yarmulkes, turbans and other cultural attire are quite common. The ubiquitous NYC neighborhood delis/bodegas [gothamist.com] in my neighborhood (historically, a Puerto Rican/Dominican neighborhood) are mostly run by Muslims these days. Unsurprisingly, most of them do not serve any pork products. I could go on and on, but there's plenty of cultural diversity here, as well as plenty of bigotry. It all depends on the neighborhood in which you live and the type of people with whom you associate.
I (and most folks in NYC -- this is assuredly not true in other areas of the US) generally aren't afraid. What we are is *aware* of what's going on around us.
There is quite a bit of hatred of immigrants and other cultures around the US. However, given that NYC is so diverse, that's much less here. As I mentioned, there's plenty of bigotry and intolerance in NYC too, but most people know better than to flaunt it, as they're likely to be roundly criticized and, in some cases, ostracized. I've had some encounters with folks who, either based on how I look, or their own lack of self awareness, have exposed their bigotry and hatred to me. In every case, they thought I would be sympathetic to their hateful rhetoric. They were wrong.
In other places in the US (especially the south), I've seen and heard blatantly bigoted remarks tossed off as if they were normal. I guess they are in those places. For example, I was in New Orleans talking with a middle-aged woman and the topic of soft drinks came up. You'd think that wouldn't be an area where bigotry would raise its ugly head, but I mentioned that I preferred Pepsi over Coca Cola. She replied, "Well, around here the white people drink Coke and the niggers drink Pepsi."
I was flabbergasted. Not just because of *what* she said, but that her statement was offered in a mundane and matter-of-fact way that I was compelled to look at my watch to see if someone had set the clocks back to 1955 or something.
Sure there's plenty of anti-immigrant sentiment and outright hatred of minorities in the US, as well as violence by those bigots, but you don't see that much in NYC, as we attempt to be inclusive and civilized (although I will most certainly not spell that word with an 's'!).
This is generally true in NYC [wikipedia.org] as well, with permits being required for gun ownership/concealed carry.
I can't speak to London (although I was never harassed or robbed when I was there. In fact, the only people who were rude to me were some tourists from the US -- sigh), but crime, and especially violent crime, particularly murder [wikipedia.org], are at their lowest levels since recording of such statistics began (1928).
I was threatened with a knife by the driver of a black car (a high-end taxi) when I touched the door of his car (quite accidentally) with the door of a yellow cab (the NYC analog of London's black cabs). Fortunately, (I was 19 at the time) I had my skateboard with me and was able to use it to defend myself/keep this crazed moron away until he calmed down.
I've had guns pointed at me by criminals (once at age 12, and once at age 19) and was mugged once in my early twenties. All of those incidents were at the height of the "crack wars" in NYC. Things were much different in NYC in the 1970s, 80s and early 90s.
I find it sad that you've been attacked and disrespected because of what you look like, rather than *who* you are. That's wrong. And such speech and behavior should be called out as the bigotry and hatred it is, not accepted, not tolerated and not swept under the rug.
I was taught to judge people by what they do and say, not what they look like. This was strongly reinforced by my upbringing in such a diverse place. Yes, I have been (although, not through any desire or request of my own) the recipient of "white male privilege," but I don't want it.
I want to be judged, as Martin Luther King, Jr. famously said [aol.com], "where [i] will not be judged by the color of [my] skin but by the content of [my] character."
I've visited many other big cities as well and I agree, it's really not possible to understand what it's like to live someplace unless you actually live there. And being rich is definitely preferable *wherever* you might live.
I've lived in a few other cities in the US (Cleveland, Memphis, Tampa and San Jose) and family members live (or have lived) in Seattle, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Chicago, and I haven't found any other place like NYC in the US. Other places tend to be much more fractious, segregated along ethnic/racial lines and less welcoming of cultural diversity. So, perhaps my experience is the outlier rather than yours. If so, that's really sad.
In the US, many (most?) areas which, based on population, would be considered cities are much more suburban in their design and lifestyle, which is why most cities in the US have such crappy public transportation. The prototypical example of this is Los Angeles. I've spent quite a bit of time there, as I have a number of relatives who live in the area. It's not so much a city as it is an agglomeration of suburban communities linked by the freeway. San Jose (where I lived) is much the same, and I hated living there, for many of the reasons you cite.
On the other hand, when I've been to small towns (much smaller than Oxford) across the US, I've found them to be wonderfully pleasant, with (for the most part) kind, decent people.
Unfortunately, I don't know much about Oxford, except from information gleaned about the university culture, the books of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colin_DexterColin Dexter and associated television adaptations (Inspector Morse [wikipedia.org], Lewis [wikipedia.org], Endeavour [wikipedia.org]) and the discussions I had with a middle-aged couple from Oxford (the husband was a council official, don't remember what it was he actually did) while on holiday in the Caribbean.
As I mentioned previously, I'm glad you've found a place for yourself where you feel comfortable and can surround yourself with kind and decent people. In the end, I guess it really doesn't matter *where* you live, what's important is *how* you live.
Thanks for sharing your experiences and I hope my ramblings were entertaining, if not instructive.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2, Interesting) by VLM on Wednesday February 14 2018, @02:43PM
The problem with decentralization is we already invented that and it's called white people living in $800K houses in the suburbs often working at home/remote, and hipster mass transit fans are politically allied with anti-white racists.
Its like trying to convince a Klansman that if they want to experience the joys of a country united by racial nationalism they should move to Haiti, there's multiple little problems both contemporary and historical with that "solution".
So in a "Emperors New Clothes" style of speech and thinking, we in the legacy media sense of conformist leftism, need to pretend there's no solution other than building monorails and whatnot. The result of endless handwringing about lack of mass transit is inevitable.
(Score: 2) by Apparition on Wednesday February 14 2018, @01:10AM (5 children)
Yep. You honestly couldn't pay me a million dollars a year to take public transportation. I wouldn't do it. It's loud, smelly, the buses are old, they're cramped, and they add a minimum of 75 minutes to my transit time back and forth to work, each way. That's two and a half hours of my day, gone, stuck in a cramped smelly beaten up bus. One day about twelve years ago when my two choices to get home from work were to either walk thirteen miles or take public transportation, I walked.
Over the past three years, I take Lyft back-and-forth to work at least two days a week. Compared to public transportation, it's a nice, pleasant experience. I hail a car, about ten minutes later it shows up in front of my home. The ride is quiet and peaceful, no smells other than the occasional air freshener, and I arrive to work/home in about thirty minutes compared to one hour and 45 minutes if I took public transportation. It costs about $31 each way including tip, but it's worth every penny to avoid public transportation.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @02:16AM (3 children)
> ... walk thirteen miles
Did you stick your thumb out? Yes, I know hitchhiking has gone out of style in the USA. However, there must be plenty of older folks like me that had good experiences when we were young and would consider picking up someone who didn't look too scary.
In the early '90s, I picked up two guys with their thumbs out, in a rest stop near Badlands SD. They kept me company (one even did some driving) through to NY State. Haven't seen many thumbs out since then and I think the country is poorer for it -- this was real ride sharing.
(Score: 2, Disagree) by frojack on Wednesday February 14 2018, @02:47AM (2 children)
Oh, most of them are sizing you up to do some driving in your car.
Its far less safe these days, but it was never particularly safe unless you knew the thumbs, because you live in the same town with them.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @09:15AM (1 child)
(Note to self: frojack has never hitched. Ever. )
(Score: 1) by Sulla on Wednesday February 14 2018, @04:42PM
My grandfather stabbed on two different occasions by hitchhikers. I am sure there were hundreds of other occasions where there were no problems, but I don't want to get stabbed and any chance is higher than the chance of me not ever being stabbed from not participating.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @05:14AM
Same, I fucking hate public transportation. I've been threatened by a male and sexually harassed by some crazy woman. It takes for-ev-er to get anywhere. If you miss the bus (maybe because it came _early_), too fucking bad, wait another full cycle in the cold or rain or whatever.
I really got into cycling when I didn't have a car - it was far better (and faster) to cycle even across the whole city than take a god forsaken bus.
And while I'm on a rant, fuck cabbies, too. Been ripped off a couple times, they're often smelly, grumble if your trip is too short, etc.. Yeah fuck all that, I'll keep driving my truck.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 14 2018, @01:59AM (1 child)
Sulla,
Wow, sucks to be you and have to live in a country infected by Republicans who will not spend on public infrastructure, mental health, and public health! Maybe you should consider moving to some civilized country, a socialist one, or Washington State?
(Score: 1) by Sulla on Wednesday February 14 2018, @04:45PM
I prefer Oregon's income tax to Washington's sales and use tax. Although I think Oregon just passed a sales/use tax on vehicles. In addition the City of Eugene has a guy who literally ran as a communist on the council and has been controlled by the left for decades.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam