europe stifles drivers in favor of mass transit and walking

[bcbm]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/27/science/earth/27traffic.html?_r=2&ref=world

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

I don't know about the rest of Europe, but certainly in the UK anti-car measures have not been accompanied by significant decreases in public transport fares, which kind of defeats the point.

Which is a shame.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

I don't know about the rest of Europe, but certainly in the UK anti-car measures have not been accompanied by significant decreases in public transport fares, which kind of defeats the point.

Which is a shame.

Infact privatisations and deregulations of public transportation systems (railways, buses) and similar have resulted in the fares for mass transportation also increasing significantly.

Late British Railways for example was required to run most of its line on a profitable basis and Thatcher government gradually decreased fare subsidies, and similar practices have been enacted elsewhere in Europe; indeed, driving is not all that much more expensive than going by rail or bus here in Sweden these days.

[Pirx]

Banning cars from inner cities would be an act of great humanity. People of today seem to have no clue about the gigantic loss of life quality during the automobile revolution. Take a lovely medieval town and imagine lethal streams of lava revolving through the streets. In former times capitalism made sheep eat men, now he makes cars eat men.

[Revolutionair]

Going by car is significantly cheaper in the Netherlands. You pay around 23 euros to go from Zoetermeer to Amsterdam if you go by train.

[Johnny Kerosene]

Why not just make more hybrids and work more on all those other fancy renewable fuels?

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

Why not just make more hybrids and work more on all those other fancy renewable fuels?

Because it has social and city-planning considerations more directly important than whether it pollutes or not.

[Blackscare]

Because it has social and city-planning considerations more directly important than whether it pollutes or not.


Also, regardless of fuel consumption, the amount of energy and material required to furnish a very large swathe of society with totally unnecessary (and dangerous) individual transport is obscenely wasteful.


I think there are a lot of people doing good work getting the message out that non-renewable fuels are running out, their negative environmental impact, etc, but I feel as if all this is distracting the world at large from our general wastefulness. The best way to sell these kinds of efforts to people, going by the tactics of their mainstream advocates at least, seems to be convincing people that actual consumption patterns don't really have to change, which is absurd.

I mean, one day we'll be mining landfills for all of the precious minerals and rare-earth metals we throw away in the form of electronics, etc. Can you imagine how absurd that day will be, or how terribly stupid previous generations will look?

[bcbm]

one day we'll be mining landfills for all of the precious minerals and rare-earth metals we throw away in the form of electronics, etc.not one day, this is happening right now in many countries :-(

[Olentzero]

driving is not all that much more expensive than going by rail or bus here in Sweden these days.Hejsan, läget?

I took a quick look at the article and it seems awfully Zurich-focused to me. What's going on in Stockholm certainly flies in the face of the main assertion:



The monthly fare for public transportation will increase at the beginning of August or September by SEK 100 (around $15 US) to a total of SEK 790 (around $130 US).
Privatization of the light rail system has resulted in a degradation in quality - more delays due to technical failures, and two winters in a row where even a light dusting of snow throws rail traffic into chaos.
There is a proposal to remake Slussen, a fairly popular downtown waterfront area; the proposal will actually increase vehicular traffic, as well as the levels of noise and air pollution.
Another large project - on the order of some SEK 30 billion - is the Stockholm Bypass (Förbifart Stockholm), which seems to be nothing more than an excuse to throw money at private construction firms and give cars a further reason for existing.

So all in all, I'd take the NYT's assertion that Europe is out to annoy drivers with an extremely large grain of salt. Of course, this is the newspaper that swallowed Bush's and Powell's assertions that Iraq was brimming with WMDs hook, line, and sinker, so you can't say you weren't forewarned.

[Tim Finnegan]

Across Europe, Irking Drivers Is Urban PolicyJesus, there's a self-involved headline if you ever saw it. Ever think, dear journalist, that perhaps they simply weren't considering feeling of entitled middle-class drivers? :confused: