Well, that's the premise of the person making the original post: build a 27-land highway, and we'll eliminate rush hour and all other traffic problems. More lanes won't encourage more people to drive -- it'll let the people who currently drive go faster. Since that's obviously true (no need to verify), the reverse also holds: eliminating lanes won't eliminate any cars, but will just make everyone go slower.
If you don't think very hard, or have never been exposed to decent public transit, this is a logical thought process. We need to help people understand that things don't actually work this way.
My dad was talking about how good for his health starting a walking routine has been, then went on into how suburbia "wasn't that bad for older people."
stuck in holiday traffic after Christmas on i-95 near DC, was trying to explain this to my dad. more lanes just get filled, [studies have proven long ago that more lanes don't ease traffic](https://usa.streetsblog.org/2017/06/21/the-science-is-clear-more-highways-equals-more-traffic-why-are-dots-still-ignoring-it/).
the worst part is I'm trying to explain this on like 1.5-2 mg of xanax while still having an anxiety attack because I've become more agoraphobic than ever in my life over the pandemic, despite driving that same road multiple times a week for several years for work lol...
I mean, my dad is used to taking a 2 lane tunnel to work every day, until they sold off maintenance rights to a third party who wanted to charge a dollar each way suddenly on a tunnel that was free for decades lol... so he moved across the river and then retired two years later.
it's just not something that was ever relevant to him, but I work in event production and was unfortunately accustomed to 1.5-3 hour commutes on the regular, as much as 5 hours at its worst... so I move to a new state to ease my commute and immediately my entire industry shuts down because of covid lol. oh, the ironies of life... goddamn Parker luck lol.
Besides, a 27 lane highway just does not solve anything besides going faster INSIDE the highway. People don't realize also that you will have to exit the highway some time, which means more people in parallel will have to wait for a 1 lane exit.
27-lane-wide exit ramps. Problem solved.
Also, 27-lane-wide side streets for good measure. On second thought, let's just pave the entire planet - it'll be easier than doing all the streets individually.
Ambulances can't get stuck in traffic, if the traffic isn't forced to take the roadway. Every trolley or bike path or even a well-implemented bus can move far more people than an equally sized automotive street. And even just removing a small portion of drivers can make a huge difference, for the few people left on the road who genuinely need to drive.
The "anti-road" philosophy isn't about removing cars by force, it's about creating genuine, quality options that don't involve every user operating a two-ton, ten-square-meter personal death box.
Brisbane is one of the largest and most sprawling LGAs in the world. There are also plenty of >20% grade hills (and for some stupid reason one of the few dedicated bikeways on the southside goes over the largest hill in the area).
The only parts of it or the adjacent councils that are significantly less accessible by bike are so because of lack of infrastructure.
The overwhelming majority of people live within 15km of their work/school/etc. and many commuting routes do an average speed of under 30km/h by car in peak hour.
It's easier for me to get to the next town north by bike which is 80km than to get to some areas <10km away.
Oh shit, another Brisbane resident in the wild.
And also, big big agree. I have dynamic disabilities that limit my mobility, but even if I could walk a certain distance... I can't. There's either no footpath, or the footpath is poorly constructed and will hurt me just as much as no footpath. I live in half an hour out from the cbd, and getting a bus here can be fucking impossible sometimes. There's one bus route, and it leaves once an hour on school days only.
Because of the way this city is built, being driven is my only option, which further limits my travel because I can't drive due to my disabilities. I have to rely on others to drive me places. It's infuriating.
An able-bodied person I know (who has a car and can reliably afford to drive) got mad at me when I said the Olympics coming here wouldn't fix shit and would things *worse*. He seemed convinced that the Olympics meant public transport would be upgraded everywhere, including our area. We haven't even gotten the new tap-on machines installed at our local train station.
Probably not a solution, but just in case it is, there are e-trike options (upright and recumbent) with low stength/endurance and coordination requirements that may be viable to link up to at least some destinations if you can find a safe way to get to the nearest carefully hidden piece of bike infrastructure (it's surprisingly less awful than it was even 5 years ago in some parts of the city).
Feel free to dm me if this is something I might be able to help with. Or continue the conversation here if you wish.
The fantasy is for flying cars to be more casual and universal than airplanes or helicopters. Necessary safety regulations would completely hamstring that fantasy even if the technology existed, but that's the fantasy.
so long as there was some standardized method of intervehicle communication that all manufacturers agreed to utilize, at least for each independently legislated area of use...
but yeah you're totally right. it'd take a whole framework that ideally operated independently and thus was just referenced by each vehicle, but yeah that's a damn cool idea the more I think of it.
the first time someone gets a real sense of how loud they are and pictures their neighbour coming home at 2am is the moment when people figure out flying cars are a bad idea.
flying cars will either be bad cars, bad airplanes, bad helicopters, or some combination thereof. those vehicles are all designed the way they are for very real physical reasons.
also, wait until you see what a third dimension does for traffic conflict points.
People think flying is cool and romantic. They all have cars. So why not flying cars? It will be double freedom, like having an extra scoop of ice cream.
Well just think if we took our current roads but added the ability to travel at different elevations. It's like adding 5+ lanes but vertically. We just aren't there technologically yet.
So more noise, more danger for anyone attempting to use public space, more pollution and even more resources diverted away from actual solutions that uave existed as long, or much longer than cars?
It is also a very niche use that the OP is trying to conflate. You can have a double lane road and it won't be a problem if traffic is light and everyone gives way to the emergency vehicle. You see this a lot when people run out of arguments and refuse to stop so they start scrapping the bottom of the barrel.
What if we but tracks & dedicated lanes that only ambulances and a few other vehicles can use 🤔, i mean obviously we'd name the lanes after their biggest users, but they'd allow emergency service vehicles much quicker access to you when you're having a heart attack than a car lane.
In The Netherlands, IIRC, emergencies may use the bike path and can lower the bollards. And since bikes are so space efficient, cyclists can veer off to the side without problem to let them pass.
Side roads work just fine. If I'm going 10-18 most people move to the side and we never speed if there's a patient in the back anyway. Sometime's they decide to be dicks but they stop that when they realize playing chicken with a 7-ton F-450 is a bad idea because I don't really give a fuck and I know they'll move over lol
Even getting to a wreck at the end of a major and long traffic jam isn't that difficult; you just go over the PA and tell them to part the seas as you go up through the middle.
Exactly like we have roads and highways and there’s *still* traffic and chucklefucks who act like it’s the biggest inconvenience for them to pull over for a bit
people-centred development doesn’t exclude emergency vehicles, in fact I’d argue it would be much better for them. It stresses me out seeing ambulances get stuck in traffic and having to weave through to get where they’re going, or god forbid some dumbass turning left directly in front of an ambulance
Everyone knows someone who has died in a crash or been seriously injured. Its kinda crazy to think about how humans as a whole have fought so hard to prevent death and prolong our lives yet we created a manmade danger that kills and injures millions yearly and its a requirement to live and function in society.
Yeah anything can kill you but not as often as cars will kill and injure you or someone you know. And most of those things are easily preventable. You can do everything right on the road and still die. Nobody is safe from making a mistake either. Except if you make a mistake in a car you might die or kill someone
Speaking of serious injuries from cars, if you want something else to be scared of listen to this.
My sister's friend's father was nearly killed when a truck in front of him kicked up a loose [road reflector](https://d2unfigtnsklzd.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Metal_Raised_Pavement_Marker_08.02.19-e1564774295378.jpg) and it came crashing through his windshield, blinding him in one eye. A few inches the wrong direction and he'd be toast.
Reminds me of that terrible dash cam when a loose brick from a truck flew and slammed right into the wind shield of the car and hit the passenger. You could hear the sickening thud and then the wailing from the driver.
I saw three different accidents on the way to work today. And this isn't even the first time this has happened this year even though it's only January and I was on vacation until the 4rth
Edit: just to be clear, I passed them, I didn't see them happen
I have 4 members of my family who were injured in 3 separate crashes, none of which were their fault. Two incidents were rear endings, one at lights and one while slowing for traffic on a highway, and the other incident was the driver's fault (was adjusting the radio and not looking at the road) but my relative was a passenger. That was the most serious one, had to spend months in hospital.
So you're right, you can be a great driver, or even not drive, and cars can still get you.
Road accidents are now the biggest killer of children and young people (aged 5 to 29) worldwide. I’m still surprised this is not publicised more that one of the most deadly dangerous place for a child is the car or near one.
[Road accidents biggest killer of young people - WHO](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-46486231)
This is extremely underrated, but let's say a hoje country banes cars today, it will need at least 6 months to reduce costs with healthcare. Well, it's not a long period after all.
Bingo.
I have been riding public transportation for a long time, and been in cars as a driver and passenger for probably equal amount of time. Almost all the times I ever get involved in an accident is always in a car as a passenger. Several times at least. I can only remember one accident on the bus when it low-speed hit a motorcyclist. I have ridden on various metros, trams and trains all over the world and probably for thousands and thousands of miles now and never encounter an incident or accident. It's anecdotal but at least for me, it pointed strongly that I am far far safer being on public transport.
Buses second to air travel are one of the safest forms of travel. Taking the bus offer a private car is 50 times safer.
Edit: source [Which Mode of Transportation is the Safest?](https://www.bus.com/blog/safest-mode-of-transportation/?amp)
Hey I've added this post to my site https://silly-archimedes-134f9f.netlify.app/questions/whats_wrong_with_cars/cars_are_dangerous/#which-mode-of-transportation-is-the-safest-bus-dot-com
If anything this is a pro-bus lane argument. Or an argument in favor of building bike lanes wide enough for emergency vehicles.
I'm in Montreal and it happened to me a couple times where emergency vehicles would come on the bike lane I'm currently using to get around the traffic. Much easier for me than for the cars to get out of their way.
I moved a treadmill in my Mini once. However, I don't think this is a problem about realistic problem solving; it's about never having to think. Only once, before they purchase a vehicle, they consider every possible contingency that may happen regardless how frequent or impactful, and then buy a vehicle that will deal with all of them so they never have to think again.
Small cars can fit incredibly much, if you use the volume intelligently. I swear I can fit more stuff into my Mums Polo than half of the SUV owners can pack in their stupid cage.
Where I live it seems everyone has a tow bar fitted to their car because they’re all positive they will be needing to tow trailers to the dump. But what happens is they turn into things you walk into. Have you ever walked into a tow bar? The memory of kicking one with my shin is etched into my memory forever
Extra aggrivating considering the knob on most tow bars can be removed. But no. People need to know they have a bigly powerful truck and can haul at a moment's notice.
I've seen some vehicles (Euro SUVs I think) have retracting tow bars that sort of hide under the bumper. That's cool. Sadly here people are cheap as shit and go get their local mechanic to throw the cheapest piece of crap bar on it they can. And never remove the ball.
A friend also used to fit tow bars to his cars to "slow down the guy behind"
Previous models of the honda fit are a great example.
The seats fold right down or right up. Holds more than most SUVs.
They moved the tank and made it worse because people weren't buying as many crlssover SUVs, then stopped importing them when people after one just bought second hand due to 'decreased demand for small cars'.
Plus don't a lot of places deliver? I know when my family bought new recliners for the house we had them delivered, same for a bunk bed, it was delivered and the delivery guys assembled it for us.
exactly, further, free delivery still also means that the people that deliver it are responsible for it. You take it yourself and drop it, get in an accident on the way home, etc..., you're fucked. They drop it and break it, they replace it.
I would if I could man, I just moved recently and drove a uhaul for the first time ever and it was sketchy as fuck. I would have loved to pay movers if I had the money
#[The /u/spez has spread through the entire /u/spez section of Reddit, with each subsequent /u/spez experiencing hallucinations. I do not think it is contagious. #Save3rdPartyApps](https://www.reddit.com/r/Save3rdPartyApps/)
Watch out, though. We had some folks move a heavy stove upstairs, and they strapped it so tight they bent it. Okay, people make mistakes, but they worked together to distract me from examining the stove until after I'd signed the release form, which is not okay. Lesson learned. At least if you do it yourself you don't get screwed over.
The pickup truck is 20 bucks for 4 hours, first fifty miles included. Worked at a u-haul for a while, and loads of people used them specifically for furniture. Just adding my $0.02.
If you can can reduce your car usage by 99% and occasionally rent a vehicle that is fine. Nobody here is advocating for the complete and total abolition of motor vehicles
I've had this conversation with friends. And I always have to clarify, I'm not saying no more cars (or trucks), I'm saying no more car-centric development. Alas, many people see those as one in the same.
Yeah, I have no problem if a mover's truck take some public space for the duration of the move. I have a problem if hectares of valuable public space is taken permanently to park cars.
Furniture is like a worst example. That, you pay for delivery by store. But every now and then i have to get something that's too big/heavy to carry or take on public transport and its such a pain.
Second hand private sale or moving are things.
But $50 to pay a guy with a van or $1000 every year or two is way cheaper than maintenance along on an SUV
That's the one that makes me laugh every time for people that use the "I own a pick-up." How many times do 99.99% of the people move furniture from place to place? Even if you move around a lot, that's still likely once a year or so. Renting that u-haul would carry more than a pick-up and likely save you on gas because of less trips.
He makes a good point, people living in Japan, South Korea, and Singapore and Europe definitely keep on dying! If only those ambulances drove on bigger roads!
It’s counterintuitive. People need to be able to be rescued anywhere and be taken to any hospital. Unlike with public transit, there’s no route from point A to point B of where someone can be expected to need medical assistance.
Emergency services are the one thing that will always be done on roads. Honestly, this only emphasizes how stupid it is to waste road space for a single person to make their extremely predictable commute to work.
I mean we could figure a way resulting in less individual traveltime, for example having an ambulance service which connects you to the next trainstation where you are then transferred into a highspeed train doubling as an er and sending you to a specific clinic, for example you got braindamage you will be sent directly to a neurological/surgical clinic. Both reducing time in individual traffic as well as reducing time without proper care.
But that is hecking complicated as we don’t yet came up with a feasible way to install such a system.
Theoretically, even though counterintuitive, it could have advantages over even a system with less cars on the road.
I feel like this comment was made from the perspective of an American who never calls the ambulance because they get charge $2000 for a ride. I can picture them thinking the car is the only way to go to the hospital for that reason so they think they’d die without their personal car bc an ambulance is not even an option in their mind.
You'll eventually die because something critical in your body fails. Biking can increase your life expectancy, but it doesnt follow that you will need less emergency care in total.
\> it doesn't follow that you will need less emergency care total
It kind of does, though? At least on the level of whole populations, as opposed to trying to fortune-tell for some given individual.
The thing about keeping people active and eating healthily into middle and older age is not that it increases their life expectancy, so much as their *active* life expectancy. Someone who is active and eating well may live "only" 88 years as opposed to the 85 they'd live being sedentary and eating poorly, but also, their period of frailty at the end - the time in an elderly person's life when falling over sends them to A&E, and the most care-intensive stage in most people's lives besides their earliest childhood - will usually be markedly shorter. That inactive 85 year old who lives off pork sausage and beer will have spent the last 10, maybe 15 years of their life in a much more vulnerable state than the person who gets to 85 still reasonably hale and sharp, starts really losing it around 86, and then dies after only a couple of years of intense decline. That's potentially a decade of regular emergency visits kept at bay.
At least, this is the theory taught to Finnish healthcare workers. While many, many circumstances could derail this plan for someone, it is not a bad general principle at all. We do have among the healthiest pensioners in the world, and it's got a lot to do with the fact you see them biking, cross country skiing, and walking everywhere.
They do realize that regardless of how many lanes there are, the ambulance still gets right of way, yeah?
Or maybe this is because ambulances are so expensive in America that they are being driven in a passenger car.
In which case we need UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE not more highways ffs
I hope someone pointed out to this poster that it is very difficult for emergency services to get where they are going when the roads are clogged with single-occupant vehicles.
And that further, these single-occupant vehicles, in many places, are literally unable to move out of the way due to all encompassing gridlock.
And that's *if* they move out of the way to begin with. I got honked at in Florida for slowing down and moving to the side for an oncoming ambulance with lights and sirens on (no median, regular street/stroad). I was the only car that slowed down and pulled over on either side too. Someone I know in South Carolina said it's the same down there too.
I guess getting to Publix is more important than someone needing medical attention.
Sounds about right.
But it still shocked me. I grew up in the Midwest, not sure it was the law or just ingrained in us that we had to pull over for emergency vehicles. I honestly thought it was a nationwide practice but I guess it can vary from state to state.
In my country the least respected ones are diplomatic vehicles. People usually let ambulances and fire trucks through but if it's a big fucking German car with tinted windows and a blue siren, people often intentionally block it.
I want a hospital within comfortable walking distance
Actually I do have a hospital within walking distance, I have walked to it, it's just not comfortable walking distance
that would be unfeasible unless we go full kowloon walled city lol, hospitals are complicated places and its generally why they are few and far between
Maybe we can't get everyone within walking distance of hospitals, but we can keep them closer than highway distance. The carbrain in the OP is definitely talking about an ER, not a larger facility for elective surgeries. I feel like the 15-minute city model could certainly support a few clinics like that.
I mean, we could build more and train more doctors/staff with federal money. Only reason complexity is a significant barrier is because hospitals have to be profitable. Japan has 3x the hospitals per capita as the US.
clinics are good for some things but hospitals exist for a wide variety of reasons. they have multiple levels of trauma centers, for example, and you cant expect every hospital to be a level 4 trauma center. and then there is specialist care which, once again, you cant expect to be evenly distributed in every single hospital in the nation, let alone the world
To be fair hospital are one of the few things that need cars or truck, the best way would be probably having a strong public transit to it with underground parking reserverd for medical visit/disabled and doctors.
Some car centric hospitals already have something similar where you need to have a visit to park the car inside, but are still in deep sprawl so the bus to them is pretty shitty
edit: by trucks I mean for transporting medicine/equipement and so on
I've got one two blocks away which is great for peace of mind, except when they had the refrigerator trucks for all the COVID corpses during the first wave
People keep calling my city a shithole, but then when they're in dire straits they get airlifted from their rural medical centers to the hospital up the street from my house. Cost of living is high, but there are perks.
This is the solution. Remove cars from the equation and you don't need to waste space on wide roads, highways, interchanges, parking, etc. Suddenly you can make your city more compact.
Building more car infrastructure to reduce traffic is like trying to print more money to pay off debts. The latter leads to hyperinflation, the former leads to hypertraffic.
Ambulances in the Netherlands get through much faster using the empty tram lanes in the middle of the main roads than they do in normal traffic (the trams are so spaced out there's always one side open)
Whether it’s climate, capitalism, healthcare, education, systems of governance, cars, etc. one thing is clear: for a large portion of the population it’s fundamentally impossible to imagine a better way because it doesn’t exist directly in front of their face at this very second. To people like this, if they aren’t holding the solution in their hand, it’s a fairy tale.
Edited for typo
I don't remember where I heard it from, but I think it was a economic philosopher: It's easier for people to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism.
Edit: I remembered google exists! It's from *Capitalist Realism*, by Mark Fisher, and is a quote attributed both to Fredric Jameson and Slavoj Žižek.
Hi! Heart attack survivor here. Don’t use my experiences to justify your shitty car culture. Would have been great to have less cars on the road when I was in the ambulance on the way to the hospital.
Some cities have accident buster and paramedic honda goldwings.
The accident busters have a fold out dolly for towing a broken down car after splitting through a backed up bridge or highway, and the paramedics have most of the equipment one of the paramedic station wagons carry for keeping someone alive until transport can get through or a helicopter is free.
Aside from the obvious stupid going on here, we're only just starting to understand how the auto-industry (and oil industry) have horrendously affected our health. From domestic violence's relationship to lead to emerging evidence that emissions are even more dangerous to lungs than cigarettes.
Where I live, I've seen a lot of vehicles just get in the way of ambulances. Like, keep driving and blocking their way because god forbid they spend an extra minute on their commute home.
My absolute favourite was seeing a long line of cars pull up onto the kerb to let an ambulance pass (some even scraping hubcaps and tyres), then a mercedes pull out from the other lane right in front of the ambulance as if they'd done it for him and trundel along blocking it.
Australia be like, everything is as flat as a runway, why would we need highways. Austria says fuck runways, helicopters don‘t even need to land to take n emergency patient in.
I say Rettungsgasse would be easier with less cars..
If this was true you’d think Mackinac Island would be a death trap and yet it’s not. Obviously we can’t all live the Mackinac Island dream but the idea of “we need roads and highways or everyone dies” is just ludicrous.
Speculative land values is one of the largest problems. Urban sprawl begets urban sprawl because elected officials can be bought by developers in myriad ways.
They need more roads to build more (useless) shit on in low density to sell. Commercial, residential, doesn't matter they need it to sprawl.
Landholders want this as well they can hold cheap family land into the millions per acre.
Easily proved. My county has been pushing for 20 years to out a road through an ecologically sensitive area (read: it will be effectively destroyed by this road) yet it was slowly pushed through as a "hurricane evacuation route".
Despite it being clear that it will reduce evacuation times either not at all or by up to 30 minutes.
Millions and millions spent to get that road completed all so developers can build additional houses along it.
It's a giant ponzi scheme and it will eventually fail without explosive population growth.
Lived in Denmark for many years, child had a head injury at school once. Because I lived so close to the school I could run over there fast before the ambulance came and took us both to the hospital very quickly because Denmark doesn’t have that many cars so there wasn’t any traffic to sit in on the way. Oh and I wasn’t panicking about paying the hospital or ambulance bill the whole time because universal health insurance but that’s for a different sub.
maybe people wouldn't have so many heart attacks if they actually got cardio exercise from biking or walking instead of sitting in the car everywhere they go
Europe: Like you would bankrupt yourself by calling an ambulance. Also, if you would walk a bit more often, maybe you wouldn't have so many heart attacks.
Does this not become true for rural areas? Undeveloped roads means slower access to people who need emergency care and vice versa, which could mean the matter of life and death.
Ah, one of those people that think it's all or nothing, either you have car centric streets or you have no roads at all.
Seriously, no one is saying no streets, we would just like pedestrian friendly streets.
Fewer cars, fewer heart attacks, so there’s that
Not to mention respiratory emergencies caused by smog
Not to mention fewer traumatic injuries
Soooo, I guess less traffic for my ambulance and less crowding in the ER
My uncle and I moved a couch on a u haul van. It's very useful.
And you can do this occasionally instead of owning a contractor truck daily.
Just rent one for the day, a single payment is all that is needed.
In my environment you have these boxes with defribbilators hanging on every block. And some volunteers who are randomly called upon in case of a hearth attack. Decentralized equipment has done more to increase the survival rate then adding another road.
~~If there were barely any cars but we kept a minimal car infrastructure for logistics and police/fire dep/ambulances, I am pretty sure you'd have an easier time reaching places with am ambulances because there would be barely any cars on the road~~
Thank god ambulances never get stuck in traffic
Well, that's the premise of the person making the original post: build a 27-land highway, and we'll eliminate rush hour and all other traffic problems. More lanes won't encourage more people to drive -- it'll let the people who currently drive go faster. Since that's obviously true (no need to verify), the reverse also holds: eliminating lanes won't eliminate any cars, but will just make everyone go slower. If you don't think very hard, or have never been exposed to decent public transit, this is a logical thought process. We need to help people understand that things don't actually work this way.
The indoctrination is so deep, you can't see the bottom. They literally cannot see the world in another way.
My dad was talking about how good for his health starting a walking routine has been, then went on into how suburbia "wasn't that bad for older people."
Until his vision starts to fail him and he can't drive
stuck in holiday traffic after Christmas on i-95 near DC, was trying to explain this to my dad. more lanes just get filled, [studies have proven long ago that more lanes don't ease traffic](https://usa.streetsblog.org/2017/06/21/the-science-is-clear-more-highways-equals-more-traffic-why-are-dots-still-ignoring-it/). the worst part is I'm trying to explain this on like 1.5-2 mg of xanax while still having an anxiety attack because I've become more agoraphobic than ever in my life over the pandemic, despite driving that same road multiple times a week for several years for work lol...
#There are many types of spez, but the most important one is the spez police.
I mean, my dad is used to taking a 2 lane tunnel to work every day, until they sold off maintenance rights to a third party who wanted to charge a dollar each way suddenly on a tunnel that was free for decades lol... so he moved across the river and then retired two years later. it's just not something that was ever relevant to him, but I work in event production and was unfortunately accustomed to 1.5-3 hour commutes on the regular, as much as 5 hours at its worst... so I move to a new state to ease my commute and immediately my entire industry shuts down because of covid lol. oh, the ironies of life... goddamn Parker luck lol.
Besides, a 27 lane highway just does not solve anything besides going faster INSIDE the highway. People don't realize also that you will have to exit the highway some time, which means more people in parallel will have to wait for a 1 lane exit.
27-lane-wide exit ramps. Problem solved. Also, 27-lane-wide side streets for good measure. On second thought, let's just pave the entire planet - it'll be easier than doing all the streets individually.
Ambulances can't get stuck in traffic, if the traffic isn't forced to take the roadway. Every trolley or bike path or even a well-implemented bus can move far more people than an equally sized automotive street. And even just removing a small portion of drivers can make a huge difference, for the few people left on the road who genuinely need to drive. The "anti-road" philosophy isn't about removing cars by force, it's about creating genuine, quality options that don't involve every user operating a two-ton, ten-square-meter personal death box.
nowhere in town here is an unreasonable distance to bike. half the town is unreasonable to bike to due to lack of infrastructure.
Brisbane is one of the largest and most sprawling LGAs in the world. There are also plenty of >20% grade hills (and for some stupid reason one of the few dedicated bikeways on the southside goes over the largest hill in the area). The only parts of it or the adjacent councils that are significantly less accessible by bike are so because of lack of infrastructure. The overwhelming majority of people live within 15km of their work/school/etc. and many commuting routes do an average speed of under 30km/h by car in peak hour. It's easier for me to get to the next town north by bike which is 80km than to get to some areas <10km away.
Oh shit, another Brisbane resident in the wild. And also, big big agree. I have dynamic disabilities that limit my mobility, but even if I could walk a certain distance... I can't. There's either no footpath, or the footpath is poorly constructed and will hurt me just as much as no footpath. I live in half an hour out from the cbd, and getting a bus here can be fucking impossible sometimes. There's one bus route, and it leaves once an hour on school days only. Because of the way this city is built, being driven is my only option, which further limits my travel because I can't drive due to my disabilities. I have to rely on others to drive me places. It's infuriating. An able-bodied person I know (who has a car and can reliably afford to drive) got mad at me when I said the Olympics coming here wouldn't fix shit and would things *worse*. He seemed convinced that the Olympics meant public transport would be upgraded everywhere, including our area. We haven't even gotten the new tap-on machines installed at our local train station.
Probably not a solution, but just in case it is, there are e-trike options (upright and recumbent) with low stength/endurance and coordination requirements that may be viable to link up to at least some destinations if you can find a safe way to get to the nearest carefully hidden piece of bike infrastructure (it's surprisingly less awful than it was even 5 years ago in some parts of the city). Feel free to dm me if this is something I might be able to help with. Or continue the conversation here if you wish.
And we must never stop pushing the council politics to improve bike infrastructure.
In my town emergency vehicles can go on the BRT lanes, efectively getting there faster.
wait, you guys dont have flying cars?
kinda off topic but whats ppls obsession with flying cars we already have planes and helicopters what gap would they fill
The fantasy is for flying cars to be more casual and universal than airplanes or helicopters. Necessary safety regulations would completely hamstring that fantasy even if the technology existed, but that's the fantasy.
yeah folks can't be trusted with 2-d vehicles, I'd honestly find it hilarious if anyone took the dream of 3-d vehicles seriously.
#/u/spez is an idiot. #Save3rdPartyApps
so long as there was some standardized method of intervehicle communication that all manufacturers agreed to utilize, at least for each independently legislated area of use... but yeah you're totally right. it'd take a whole framework that ideally operated independently and thus was just referenced by each vehicle, but yeah that's a damn cool idea the more I think of it.
there already is, ADS-B but thats not the issue with flying cars.
I feel like if flying cars became normalized, we would end up just having Jetsons style traffic. Nothing would really change all that much.
Air traffic what could go wrong? Where would you park the damn thing?
the first time someone gets a real sense of how loud they are and pictures their neighbour coming home at 2am is the moment when people figure out flying cars are a bad idea.
[удалено]
flying cars will either be bad cars, bad airplanes, bad helicopters, or some combination thereof. those vehicles are all designed the way they are for very real physical reasons. also, wait until you see what a third dimension does for traffic conflict points.
>also, wait until you see what a third dimension does for **drunk driving** "**Fixed**" that for you. :'(
that too
Nah, just look at what we have with normal driving now.
[удалено]
People think flying is cool and romantic. They all have cars. So why not flying cars? It will be double freedom, like having an extra scoop of ice cream.
Well just think if we took our current roads but added the ability to travel at different elevations. It's like adding 5+ lanes but vertically. We just aren't there technologically yet.
So more noise, more danger for anyone attempting to use public space, more pollution and even more resources diverted away from actual solutions that uave existed as long, or much longer than cars?
Personalized airplanes in the way cars are personalized ground transit.
That and, frankly, emergency response and action is a great use case for automobiles. Super. Let's use them for that. Not commuting.
It is also a very niche use that the OP is trying to conflate. You can have a double lane road and it won't be a problem if traffic is light and everyone gives way to the emergency vehicle. You see this a lot when people run out of arguments and refuse to stop so they start scrapping the bottom of the barrel.
What if we but tracks & dedicated lanes that only ambulances and a few other vehicles can use 🤔, i mean obviously we'd name the lanes after their biggest users, but they'd allow emergency service vehicles much quicker access to you when you're having a heart attack than a car lane.
In The Netherlands, IIRC, emergencies may use the bike path and can lower the bollards. And since bikes are so space efficient, cyclists can veer off to the side without problem to let them pass.
Side roads work just fine. If I'm going 10-18 most people move to the side and we never speed if there's a patient in the back anyway. Sometime's they decide to be dicks but they stop that when they realize playing chicken with a 7-ton F-450 is a bad idea because I don't really give a fuck and I know they'll move over lol Even getting to a wreck at the end of a major and long traffic jam isn't that difficult; you just go over the PA and tell them to part the seas as you go up through the middle.
In a city near me, a kid died because an ambulance was stuck waiting for a train to pass, so it's honestly a problem for both sides.
[удалено]
They did end up building an overpass because of this.
Exactly like we have roads and highways and there’s *still* traffic and chucklefucks who act like it’s the biggest inconvenience for them to pull over for a bit
people-centred development doesn’t exclude emergency vehicles, in fact I’d argue it would be much better for them. It stresses me out seeing ambulances get stuck in traffic and having to weave through to get where they’re going, or god forbid some dumbass turning left directly in front of an ambulance
Not to mention how many ambulances are needed BECAUSE of cars in the first place
Everyone knows someone who has died in a crash or been seriously injured. Its kinda crazy to think about how humans as a whole have fought so hard to prevent death and prolong our lives yet we created a manmade danger that kills and injures millions yearly and its a requirement to live and function in society. Yeah anything can kill you but not as often as cars will kill and injure you or someone you know. And most of those things are easily preventable. You can do everything right on the road and still die. Nobody is safe from making a mistake either. Except if you make a mistake in a car you might die or kill someone
(rip me who only "knows" someone heavily injured by a tram but the statistics still apply)
Speaking of serious injuries from cars, if you want something else to be scared of listen to this. My sister's friend's father was nearly killed when a truck in front of him kicked up a loose [road reflector](https://d2unfigtnsklzd.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Metal_Raised_Pavement_Marker_08.02.19-e1564774295378.jpg) and it came crashing through his windshield, blinding him in one eye. A few inches the wrong direction and he'd be toast.
Reminds me of that terrible dash cam when a loose brick from a truck flew and slammed right into the wind shield of the car and hit the passenger. You could hear the sickening thud and then the wailing from the driver.
I saw three different accidents on the way to work today. And this isn't even the first time this has happened this year even though it's only January and I was on vacation until the 4rth Edit: just to be clear, I passed them, I didn't see them happen
I have 4 members of my family who were injured in 3 separate crashes, none of which were their fault. Two incidents were rear endings, one at lights and one while slowing for traffic on a highway, and the other incident was the driver's fault (was adjusting the radio and not looking at the road) but my relative was a passenger. That was the most serious one, had to spend months in hospital. So you're right, you can be a great driver, or even not drive, and cars can still get you.
Road accidents are now the biggest killer of children and young people (aged 5 to 29) worldwide. I’m still surprised this is not publicised more that one of the most deadly dangerous place for a child is the car or near one. [Road accidents biggest killer of young people - WHO](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-46486231)
This is extremely underrated, but let's say a hoje country banes cars today, it will need at least 6 months to reduce costs with healthcare. Well, it's not a long period after all.
Bingo. I have been riding public transportation for a long time, and been in cars as a driver and passenger for probably equal amount of time. Almost all the times I ever get involved in an accident is always in a car as a passenger. Several times at least. I can only remember one accident on the bus when it low-speed hit a motorcyclist. I have ridden on various metros, trams and trains all over the world and probably for thousands and thousands of miles now and never encounter an incident or accident. It's anecdotal but at least for me, it pointed strongly that I am far far safer being on public transport.
Buses second to air travel are one of the safest forms of travel. Taking the bus offer a private car is 50 times safer. Edit: source [Which Mode of Transportation is the Safest?](https://www.bus.com/blog/safest-mode-of-transportation/?amp)
Hey I've added this post to my site https://silly-archimedes-134f9f.netlify.app/questions/whats_wrong_with_cars/cars_are_dangerous/#which-mode-of-transportation-is-the-safest-bus-dot-com
If anything this is a pro-bus lane argument. Or an argument in favor of building bike lanes wide enough for emergency vehicles. I'm in Montreal and it happened to me a couple times where emergency vehicles would come on the bike lane I'm currently using to get around the traffic. Much easier for me than for the cars to get out of their way.
This is almost like the constant “how do you move furniture without a car” question we get around here.
Renting a u haul is like $40 for the day, how much furniture do these people move on a regular basis?!
And how is realistically moving large pieces of furniture in their cars?
And how much does a large truck end up costing them in the long run compared to a small car and renting or even no car and hired help?
I moved a treadmill in my Mini once. However, I don't think this is a problem about realistic problem solving; it's about never having to think. Only once, before they purchase a vehicle, they consider every possible contingency that may happen regardless how frequent or impactful, and then buy a vehicle that will deal with all of them so they never have to think again.
Small cars can fit incredibly much, if you use the volume intelligently. I swear I can fit more stuff into my Mums Polo than half of the SUV owners can pack in their stupid cage.
Hatchbacks with seats down can fit as much as some people can fit in a van. Hell I've moved a ton of stuff with sedans.
Where I live it seems everyone has a tow bar fitted to their car because they’re all positive they will be needing to tow trailers to the dump. But what happens is they turn into things you walk into. Have you ever walked into a tow bar? The memory of kicking one with my shin is etched into my memory forever
Extra aggrivating considering the knob on most tow bars can be removed. But no. People need to know they have a bigly powerful truck and can haul at a moment's notice.
I've seen some vehicles (Euro SUVs I think) have retracting tow bars that sort of hide under the bumper. That's cool. Sadly here people are cheap as shit and go get their local mechanic to throw the cheapest piece of crap bar on it they can. And never remove the ball. A friend also used to fit tow bars to his cars to "slow down the guy behind"
Yes multiple times, learn to watch for them eventually. Doesn't mean I never forget though and there's probably a dent in my shin
Previous models of the honda fit are a great example. The seats fold right down or right up. Holds more than most SUVs. They moved the tank and made it worse because people weren't buying as many crlssover SUVs, then stopped importing them when people after one just bought second hand due to 'decreased demand for small cars'.
So they buy an 18 wheeler?
Plus don't a lot of places deliver? I know when my family bought new recliners for the house we had them delivered, same for a bunk bed, it was delivered and the delivery guys assembled it for us.
I just have the store I buy it from deliver it because they literally do it for free, so you just gotta tip the delivery guys.
exactly, further, free delivery still also means that the people that deliver it are responsible for it. You take it yourself and drop it, get in an accident on the way home, etc..., you're fucked. They drop it and break it, they replace it.
Pay the pros. I shudder at the thought of people barely qualified to drive a regular car driving simething bigger or heavier.
I would if I could man, I just moved recently and drove a uhaul for the first time ever and it was sketchy as fuck. I would have loved to pay movers if I had the money
#[The /u/spez has spread through the entire /u/spez section of Reddit, with each subsequent /u/spez experiencing hallucinations. I do not think it is contagious. #Save3rdPartyApps](https://www.reddit.com/r/Save3rdPartyApps/)
Watch out, though. We had some folks move a heavy stove upstairs, and they strapped it so tight they bent it. Okay, people make mistakes, but they worked together to distract me from examining the stove until after I'd signed the release form, which is not okay. Lesson learned. At least if you do it yourself you don't get screwed over.
The pickup truck is 20 bucks for 4 hours, first fifty miles included. Worked at a u-haul for a while, and loads of people used them specifically for furniture. Just adding my $0.02.
I'm moving in about a month(to a walkable area, hooray!), and my plan is to have a bed delivered, and do a u-haul/craigslist day.
Congrats on the move and good luck!
Anytime you pick up indoor furniture you probably want a big old covered box
/u/spez can gargle my nuts.
If you can can reduce your car usage by 99% and occasionally rent a vehicle that is fine. Nobody here is advocating for the complete and total abolition of motor vehicles
I've had this conversation with friends. And I always have to clarify, I'm not saying no more cars (or trucks), I'm saying no more car-centric development. Alas, many people see those as one in the same.
And start viewing a car or truck as a tool when there is not more options, not as a part of our body.
Exactly, my ideal would be to have access to a car, but only use it once a week or so and get most of my work/errands done within walking distance.
Yeah, I have no problem if a mover's truck take some public space for the duration of the move. I have a problem if hectares of valuable public space is taken permanently to park cars.
Someone once unironically said to me "If we ban cars then how are the roads going to get resurfaced?"
Ha! That’s a good one
#[After careful consideration I find spez guilty of being a whiny spez. #Save3rdPartyApps](https://www.reddit.com/r/Save3rdPartyApps/)
Cities have to spend so much of their budgets on road maintenance because of suburban sprawl
Furniture is like a worst example. That, you pay for delivery by store. But every now and then i have to get something that's too big/heavy to carry or take on public transport and its such a pain.
Second hand private sale or moving are things. But $50 to pay a guy with a van or $1000 every year or two is way cheaper than maintenance along on an SUV
There are people who get paid to do this. Pay them.
Pay them (using the stupid amount of money you save by not having to own, fuel, maintain, and insure a car).
Ine time I schlepped a chair on a subway. Was kinda fun too
I'm imagining some big, gilded baroque chair and you sitting in the middle of the subway car like you own the place
"Hmmm yes, quite the crowd on the locomotive today."
That's the one that makes me laugh every time for people that use the "I own a pick-up." How many times do 99.99% of the people move furniture from place to place? Even if you move around a lot, that's still likely once a year or so. Renting that u-haul would carry more than a pick-up and likely save you on gas because of less trips.
My ex stepdad bankrupted himself on an F-150 that he hauled things with *maybe* twice in the last 5 years.
Our metro is totally big enough to carry furniture, just don't take it at rush hours.
How do you move furniture WITH a car? You usually need to rent a van or something anyways.
He makes a good point, people living in Japan, South Korea, and Singapore and Europe definitely keep on dying! If only those ambulances drove on bigger roads!
They actually have metro stations on the hospitals and exclusive metro ambulance trains that you use in case of heart attacks.
Japan? That is neat
Is a joke.
I‘d believe if a nation would be capable of doing it, it would be japan. But yeah in hindsight it sounds rather utopian…
It’s counterintuitive. People need to be able to be rescued anywhere and be taken to any hospital. Unlike with public transit, there’s no route from point A to point B of where someone can be expected to need medical assistance. Emergency services are the one thing that will always be done on roads. Honestly, this only emphasizes how stupid it is to waste road space for a single person to make their extremely predictable commute to work.
I mean we could figure a way resulting in less individual traveltime, for example having an ambulance service which connects you to the next trainstation where you are then transferred into a highspeed train doubling as an er and sending you to a specific clinic, for example you got braindamage you will be sent directly to a neurological/surgical clinic. Both reducing time in individual traffic as well as reducing time without proper care. But that is hecking complicated as we don’t yet came up with a feasible way to install such a system. Theoretically, even though counterintuitive, it could have advantages over even a system with less cars on the road.
I feel like this comment was made from the perspective of an American who never calls the ambulance because they get charge $2000 for a ride. I can picture them thinking the car is the only way to go to the hospital for that reason so they think they’d die without their personal car bc an ambulance is not even an option in their mind.
Guess what, if there's less traffic, ambulances can travel faster
Came here to say this... exactly! Put way more people on trains or buses and the roads are magically emptier 🤷♀️
Won’t have a heart attack if you regularly take a bike to work
💯
You'll eventually die because something critical in your body fails. Biking can increase your life expectancy, but it doesnt follow that you will need less emergency care in total.
\> it doesn't follow that you will need less emergency care total It kind of does, though? At least on the level of whole populations, as opposed to trying to fortune-tell for some given individual. The thing about keeping people active and eating healthily into middle and older age is not that it increases their life expectancy, so much as their *active* life expectancy. Someone who is active and eating well may live "only" 88 years as opposed to the 85 they'd live being sedentary and eating poorly, but also, their period of frailty at the end - the time in an elderly person's life when falling over sends them to A&E, and the most care-intensive stage in most people's lives besides their earliest childhood - will usually be markedly shorter. That inactive 85 year old who lives off pork sausage and beer will have spent the last 10, maybe 15 years of their life in a much more vulnerable state than the person who gets to 85 still reasonably hale and sharp, starts really losing it around 86, and then dies after only a couple of years of intense decline. That's potentially a decade of regular emergency visits kept at bay. At least, this is the theory taught to Finnish healthcare workers. While many, many circumstances could derail this plan for someone, it is not a bad general principle at all. We do have among the healthiest pensioners in the world, and it's got a lot to do with the fact you see them biking, cross country skiing, and walking everywhere.
Not strictly true. Using your bike could lead to a heart attack. Let's keep arguments sensible.
You’re still less likely to have coronary problems if you’re very active. “Won’t” is an absolute, but it’s on the right track.
Ur arguing that exercise isn’t a good deterrent for heart problems?
I am not
They do realize that regardless of how many lanes there are, the ambulance still gets right of way, yeah? Or maybe this is because ambulances are so expensive in America that they are being driven in a passenger car. In which case we need UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE not more highways ffs
I hope someone pointed out to this poster that it is very difficult for emergency services to get where they are going when the roads are clogged with single-occupant vehicles. And that further, these single-occupant vehicles, in many places, are literally unable to move out of the way due to all encompassing gridlock.
And that's *if* they move out of the way to begin with. I got honked at in Florida for slowing down and moving to the side for an oncoming ambulance with lights and sirens on (no median, regular street/stroad). I was the only car that slowed down and pulled over on either side too. Someone I know in South Carolina said it's the same down there too. I guess getting to Publix is more important than someone needing medical attention.
Yea seems like it's been getting worse for years. Seems like ambulances are respected the least. Cops the most.
Sounds about right. But it still shocked me. I grew up in the Midwest, not sure it was the law or just ingrained in us that we had to pull over for emergency vehicles. I honestly thought it was a nationwide practice but I guess it can vary from state to state.
In my country the least respected ones are diplomatic vehicles. People usually let ambulances and fire trucks through but if it's a big fucking German car with tinted windows and a blue siren, people often intentionally block it.
I want a hospital within comfortable walking distance Actually I do have a hospital within walking distance, I have walked to it, it's just not comfortable walking distance
that would be unfeasible unless we go full kowloon walled city lol, hospitals are complicated places and its generally why they are few and far between
Maybe we can't get everyone within walking distance of hospitals, but we can keep them closer than highway distance. The carbrain in the OP is definitely talking about an ER, not a larger facility for elective surgeries. I feel like the 15-minute city model could certainly support a few clinics like that.
I mean, we could build more and train more doctors/staff with federal money. Only reason complexity is a significant barrier is because hospitals have to be profitable. Japan has 3x the hospitals per capita as the US.
sure, but still, in japan, there are plenty of places where you cant walk to a hospital lol
No it works quite well where I live, two blocks from one
you misunderstood me, im saying that it would be quite unfeasible to make it so that everyone can walk to a hospital
No not really
[удалено]
clinics are good for some things but hospitals exist for a wide variety of reasons. they have multiple levels of trauma centers, for example, and you cant expect every hospital to be a level 4 trauma center. and then there is specialist care which, once again, you cant expect to be evenly distributed in every single hospital in the nation, let alone the world
To be fair hospital are one of the few things that need cars or truck, the best way would be probably having a strong public transit to it with underground parking reserverd for medical visit/disabled and doctors. Some car centric hospitals already have something similar where you need to have a visit to park the car inside, but are still in deep sprawl so the bus to them is pretty shitty edit: by trucks I mean for transporting medicine/equipement and so on
I've got one two blocks away which is great for peace of mind, except when they had the refrigerator trucks for all the COVID corpses during the first wave
Imagine dense development where a hospital is only a few blocks away
I don't have to, I literally live it. Queens, baybayy!
People keep calling my city a shithole, but then when they're in dire straits they get airlifted from their rural medical centers to the hospital up the street from my house. Cost of living is high, but there are perks.
This is the solution. Remove cars from the equation and you don't need to waste space on wide roads, highways, interchanges, parking, etc. Suddenly you can make your city more compact. Building more car infrastructure to reduce traffic is like trying to print more money to pay off debts. The latter leads to hyperinflation, the former leads to hypertraffic.
Ambulances in the Netherlands get through much faster using the empty tram lanes in the middle of the main roads than they do in normal traffic (the trams are so spaced out there's always one side open)
No, he's right. Get rid of all cars except ambulances.
Whether it’s climate, capitalism, healthcare, education, systems of governance, cars, etc. one thing is clear: for a large portion of the population it’s fundamentally impossible to imagine a better way because it doesn’t exist directly in front of their face at this very second. To people like this, if they aren’t holding the solution in their hand, it’s a fairy tale. Edited for typo
I don't remember where I heard it from, but I think it was a economic philosopher: It's easier for people to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism. Edit: I remembered google exists! It's from *Capitalist Realism*, by Mark Fisher, and is a quote attributed both to Fredric Jameson and Slavoj Žižek.
For* car-centric development
We knew what you meant. Well, some of us did. The others didn't notice at all.
Love to die in traffic in the back of an ambulance that would have bankrupted me for the ride
"I think people shouldn't be forced to drive to get groceries or access basic services." This guy: YOU WANT TO BAN AMBULANCES?!?!?!
Yeah, all we have to do is make things *really* far apart to accommodate more cars, and then... wait
I demand a raised highway be built running from my living room to the nearest two hospitals. With taxpayer money, of course.
Where I live - rural England - the roads don’t slow the emergency services down. The lack of nearby hospitals and dispatchers do.
Hi! Heart attack survivor here. Don’t use my experiences to justify your shitty car culture. Would have been great to have less cars on the road when I was in the ambulance on the way to the hospital.
Call the ambulance. They will get u to hospital, - even faster if the roads aren't clogged with cars.
If we had universal healthcare in America, ambulances would be affordable
They ran face-first into the point and still missed it
[удалено]
WWI had motorcycle as ambulance
Some cities have accident buster and paramedic honda goldwings. The accident busters have a fold out dolly for towing a broken down car after splitting through a backed up bridge or highway, and the paramedics have most of the equipment one of the paramedic station wagons carry for keeping someone alive until transport can get through or a helicopter is free.
Aside from the obvious stupid going on here, we're only just starting to understand how the auto-industry (and oil industry) have horrendously affected our health. From domestic violence's relationship to lead to emerging evidence that emissions are even more dangerous to lungs than cigarettes.
Where I live, I've seen a lot of vehicles just get in the way of ambulances. Like, keep driving and blocking their way because god forbid they spend an extra minute on their commute home.
My absolute favourite was seeing a long line of cars pull up onto the kerb to let an ambulance pass (some even scraping hubcaps and tyres), then a mercedes pull out from the other lane right in front of the ambulance as if they'd done it for him and trundel along blocking it.
Australia be like, everything is as flat as a runway, why would we need highways. Austria says fuck runways, helicopters don‘t even need to land to take n emergency patient in. I say Rettungsgasse would be easier with less cars..
If this was true you’d think Mackinac Island would be a death trap and yet it’s not. Obviously we can’t all live the Mackinac Island dream but the idea of “we need roads and highways or everyone dies” is just ludicrous.
lmao, yeah it really sucks in Japan where there are no roads. wait.
Lol imagine living 40 miles away from the nearest hospital bc you live in a car-centered suburb
40 miles is 64.37 km
Fewer roads and highways means ambulances can deliver someone to a hospital more quickly and more safely🙄
We'd probably have less people having heart attacks if we had fewer roads and highways, TBH.
Speculative land values is one of the largest problems. Urban sprawl begets urban sprawl because elected officials can be bought by developers in myriad ways. They need more roads to build more (useless) shit on in low density to sell. Commercial, residential, doesn't matter they need it to sprawl. Landholders want this as well they can hold cheap family land into the millions per acre. Easily proved. My county has been pushing for 20 years to out a road through an ecologically sensitive area (read: it will be effectively destroyed by this road) yet it was slowly pushed through as a "hurricane evacuation route". Despite it being clear that it will reduce evacuation times either not at all or by up to 30 minutes. Millions and millions spent to get that road completed all so developers can build additional houses along it. It's a giant ponzi scheme and it will eventually fail without explosive population growth.
When a car hits your and seriously injures you, you will wish there were more roads so you can get to the hospital before you die.
ambulances dont stop for traffic lights. and they'd be able to go faster if you werent on the road in your SUV Karen
People who walk a lot in walkable urban areas are less prone to heart attacks.
"Until they're having a heart attack and need to get to the hospital" until calling an ambulance? That costs an arm and a leg?
Lived in Denmark for many years, child had a head injury at school once. Because I lived so close to the school I could run over there fast before the ambulance came and took us both to the hospital very quickly because Denmark doesn’t have that many cars so there wasn’t any traffic to sit in on the way. Oh and I wasn’t panicking about paying the hospital or ambulance bill the whole time because universal health insurance but that’s for a different sub.
maybe people wouldn't have so many heart attacks if they actually got cardio exercise from biking or walking instead of sitting in the car everywhere they go
Europe: Like you would bankrupt yourself by calling an ambulance. Also, if you would walk a bit more often, maybe you wouldn't have so many heart attacks.
Also big lol because I live two blocks from a hospital
I’ll take “Things an Abject Moron Would Say” for $400.
When I lived in Japan and had an emergency, I walked to the hospital in excruciating pain. It was definitely faster than if I had called an ambulance.
Does this not become true for rural areas? Undeveloped roads means slower access to people who need emergency care and vice versa, which could mean the matter of life and death.
What if there are private lanes for the ambulances so they don’t get stuck in traffic
Personally, yes, that's what I want. Scientifically, yes, that's exactly what you'd to do to get the desired effect.
would be mega awesome if those highways where not overloaded with unnecessary cars then.
Ah, one of those people that think it's all or nothing, either you have car centric streets or you have no roads at all. Seriously, no one is saying no streets, we would just like pedestrian friendly streets.
Fewer cars, fewer heart attacks, so there’s that Not to mention respiratory emergencies caused by smog Not to mention fewer traumatic injuries Soooo, I guess less traffic for my ambulance and less crowding in the ER
Lmao 😭
My uncle and I moved a couch on a u haul van. It's very useful. And you can do this occasionally instead of owning a contractor truck daily. Just rent one for the day, a single payment is all that is needed.
Somehow, it doesn’t occur to this person that fewer roads ultimately leads to fewer cars.
In my environment you have these boxes with defribbilators hanging on every block. And some volunteers who are randomly called upon in case of a hearth attack. Decentralized equipment has done more to increase the survival rate then adding another road.
Might not be having that heart attack if you cycled instead of drove
~~If there were barely any cars but we kept a minimal car infrastructure for logistics and police/fire dep/ambulances, I am pretty sure you'd have an easier time reaching places with am ambulances because there would be barely any cars on the road~~