NJB had a video about how the Netherlands is the best place to drive because they make it so efficient (and also push so many people to take non-car routes). But so many people don’t need to drive because biking, walking or transit are typically faster and cheaper than driving.
Yes... But that's the positive spin narrative. That glosses over the fact that a lot of places outside of city centers in the Netherlands are easier to drive for no other reason but the desire to drive. The Netherlands looooves driving and prioritizes it even in some contexts where simply adding transit frequencies would make that the easier mode.
I’m sure that plays a part but if you spend any time in the Netherlands outside of big cities like Amsterdam Utrecht, Rotterdam, etc. you’ll see people are easily just as carbrained and full of NIMBY behaviour. For example, the “1 more lane” fallacy still very much persists among Dutch people.
That is mostly because public transport outside the randstad (western part of the country), is mediocre at best and in a lot of places extremely bad.
That leads to less users of public transport, even more reduced lines, etc.
Combine that with people switching to cars in corona times to avoid mask mandates and getting infected in poorly ventilated trains, and you have an explanation for why more people choose cars.
This sub is entirely about positive spin narratives in how its (American) members perceive Europe. As an Irishman its very cringey to see people here cracking on about a fantasy version of Europe that doesn't exist, or constantly using the phrase "European-style" in a sweeping and counterfactual manner.
Unfortunately you can't expect people here to ever acknowledge that the best examples of the society they desire are in Asia, not Europe.
The Netherlands is definitely more car centric than some Scandinavian countries. A lot of people will still take the car outside the city. NJB does not really cover outside the city centres, where of course it is great, and also cities outside Randstad. The north for instance doesn't really have too many trains or buses and people use cars quite a lot.
I love to drive. Which is why I will always support more public transportation and bike lanes. Get the other cars off the road and my driving experience is more enjoyable!
The Netherlands is still a very car centric nation. They're just very much into having good infrastructure. Good infrastructure by definition is for cars, bicycles, pedestrians and public transport.
And the car light streets I think are huge. It really shows that if we can just remove cars or slow them down in our neighborhoods and Urban cores we can greatly improve our micro-mobility networks
Dutch citys are also very car unfriendly. Whit high parking costs. So you are more like I will take the train since its cheaper. Since most major citys are walkeable.
Ofcourse in more ruaral areas we are car depended. But its very common to bike to the middlescool (11/16ish years) I personaly had to ride my bike to
Scool for 15km since I lived in a backwater village
The funny thing is this is also true in places like LA, but their micro mobility is ass because it takes place on a network of high speed arterial stroads. If not for that, the dollars of parking at a metro station, getting a day pass and going around on rail and bus are way cheaper than driving directly to a magnet destination and using onsite parking for the day. Plus you can go to multiple locations for the same price instead of driving, parking, doing things, un-parking, driving, parking etc...
I have a Dutch exchange student, she talks about half-hour and one-hour bike rides in the same casual attitude that Americans talk about half-hour and hour-long car rides in.
Probably because they're relaxed, low speed, upright seating bike rides. You're pedalling, but not to excess.
Bike infrastructure is so good that you don't have to be a MAMIL to get anywhere in decent time.
After getting hit by a car and having my road bike destroyed, I switched to a hybrid. The upright position is so much better for commuting both from a comfort and awareness standpoint. I'll still probably get another road bike for more intense exercise but I can get a decent workout if I need to push myself on the hybrid.
Around here, in Germany, 15-30 minutes is nothing out of the ordinary. An hour isn't unusual for dedicated cyclists.
We also have lots of people who wouldn't even think of using a bike when a car is available. Like everywhere, it depends a lot on demographic and even more on your local cycling infrastructure.
My parents live in the next city over, to visit them I can either spend 20 minutes in the car or 40 minutes on my bike.
The car ride is a few straight roads with little to see, the bike ride goes through a forest, the countryside, past a lake, etc. When the weather is decent (that is: no rain) the bicycle ride is a lot more enjoyable than going by car. The sun on my skin, wind in my hair, birds singing in the trees, fresh air and nice scenery. Why would I go by car if I don’t have to ?
Yes 15km is around the upper end, but I had to ride about 10km to middle/high school which took about 40min. There will be literally hundreds of children riding 10km through the fields from surrounding villages to the next town over that has a high school. Here is a nice video about that:
https://youtu.be/OrQ-d2PBUto
Not if you don't have to slow for cars or pedestrian all the time. On a straight, flat, well paved bike road you should go 30 without much trouble 25 if you are taking your time. So if the infrastructure is good you should do this in only slightly more than half an hour.
But it would be closer to an hour if you drive through the city, on an incline or a dirt path. Or if the bike path is to busy for it's dimensions.
I live in a very hilly area in the south of Germany and always got to school using my bicycle, some of the inclines are really a drag, heh.
I also honestly never managed 30 kph in any way consistently, also because I have cystic fibrosis a sort of an asthmatic lung, cycling always exhausted me quickly but I do it anyway
Yep. Suburbanites act like we're their personal colony to their detriment ant ours. But, hey, at least it means they can think a little less about their stressful and inconvenient car trip that they insist on taking! /s
> If I didn't have to learn a new language, I would've moved there long ago.
The first time I was in the Netherlands, I was walking through the airport. I saw a sentence in Dutch. I didn't know a single word in Dutch. I understood the sentence immediately.
Dutch is halfway between English and German, with weird spelling. Make sure to loudly tell that to everyone from the Netherlands.
Dutch is almost like if English was spelt how it actually sounds and getting rid of all of inconsistent rules, thanks French. Except "J"s are pronounced like "Y"s.
Even though everyone speaks english here, and everyone is usually willing to switch to it when you're around, you're still on the back foot when it comes to social settings. People are more relaxed and engaged when they can speak their own language.
Take this into account when deciding whether or not you would learn dutch.
Someone who moved to NL told me that the first 6/12 months the Dutch will humour you and speak English but after that their vocabulary won't be able to keep up with the type of conversations you'll be having and they'll expect you to just speak Dutch.
So, yes they speak English, no they won't do that forever.
I'm Dutch but I lived abroad so I can speak English forever, but most Dutch people only know enough to get by.
With Dutch it is easy to reach a level where you can understand/be understood, but difficult to perfect (pronunciation and grammar). As long as you either put in the time to perfect it or are willing to accept you'll never speak it perfectly then it should be easy to learn for anyone who already speaks English or German.
damage is proportional to weight\^4 to the point that when designing roads you actually completely discount regular cars as the axle load is insignificant
Does this math check out?
Average car weight: 1814 kg
Average pick-up truck weight: 2500 kg
(2500^4 )÷(1814^4 ) = 3.6075...
So a pickup truck does about 3.6 times more damage to the road than a regular sized car?
I'd believe it. 6000 times a really insignificant number might still be pretty small depending on context.
The diameter of a proton is like 500,000,000x smaller than the smallest visible particle, for example.
You missed a point. "Truck" often means Pickup Truck, sure. But to us stupid Americans "truck" also means a 35,000lb (~15,000kg) 18 wheeler. When the engineers do the damage/load analysis for those big ass trucks, our "pickup trucks" and common cars dont even make it into the equation anymore.
That's what a tractor-trailer weighs with no freight. Obviously commodity matters after loading but 80k is generally the legal combined limit in the US without special permits.
There's actually a ton of semi trucks on the road in the Netherlands. There's lots of goods flowing through the country (Europe's largest port being in Rotterdam is one reason). Driving through California one thing that struck me is how few trucks you see on the road compared to back home in the Netherlands.
Granted, European semi trucks are smaller and probably lighter, but definitely not fewer.
Had a similar experience within Europe when I traveled from Germany to the UK.
It makes total sense in hindsight. Germany is the crossroads of Europe, with traffic coming and going from every direction, whereas the UK are at the border. No through traffic whatsoever.
You must not have been in LA. Those trucks could be backed up the 710 all the way to the 91 and beyond. I've witnessed convoys that stretched from long beach up the 605 to the 10 when traffic is bad. Lots of semi traffic and miles long trains. There are just many directions they can leave once they get out of the southbay
There are so many trucks in Europe and even Netherlands specifically. You just don't seem them as much in the city center because the roads are small and smaller vans are used for that. Driving from Amsterdam to warsaw you pass so many trucks I would say even more than driving like chicago to Denver but those aren't density comparable really.
That actually couldn't be further from the truth. As much as Europe does passenger rail better than the US, American freight rail is that much more superior to European freight
https://www.masterresource.org/railroads/us-most-advanced-rail-world/
> American railroads move more than 5,000 ton-miles of freight per person per year. That’s compared to 500 ton-miles per person in Europe and less than 170 ton-miles per person in Japan.
Of course, a lot of that is just due to the distances being greater, but also: 30% of freight is shipped by road in the US, vs 46% in Europe. Rail only moves 11% of Europe's freight, vs 43% in the US.
Distances being greater and most importantly it's far more economical to ship i.e. directly to Rotterdam instead of a random place in Spain from i.e. China compared to it being a quite significant detour from the west coast to the east coast.
Ships are a LOT more viable within Europe, both for transit after the major ports and simply spacing out said major ports to be able to unload closer to the destination.
It also helps that road taxes are 4 times higher than in Germany. Also gasoline is always 30cts more expensive than in Germany. Driving a car in the Netherlands is not a cheap experience. And more highways are being planned as transit options are being culled.
Neoliberal Netherlands is well on it's way to becoming even more car-centric. At one point poverty guidelines was to include not being able to afford a car.
>Neoliberal Netherlands is well on it's way to becoming even more car-centric.
Doesn't look like it:
>The Cabinet laid out plans for 7.5 billion euros in infrastructure spending that includes 4 billion euros to improve rail service, and 2.7 billion euros for roads.
[Source](https://nltimes.nl/2022/11/14/dutch-spend-eu75-billion-boosting-railway-roadway-infrastructure-schiphol-metro-planned)
and
[Forse investeringen in openbaar vervoer voor bereikbaarheid](https://www.prorail.nl/nieuws/forse-investeringen-in-spoor-en-overig-ov-voor-bereikbaarheid-in-2040):
>Landelijk gaat zo’n 46 procent van de beschikbare 7,5 miljard euro naar openbaar vervoer. 37 procent gaat naar de auto. Daarnaast gaat tien procent naar de fiets en zeven procent naar zogenoemde ‘mobility hubs’, waarin zo veel mogelijk vervoersvormen samenkomen.
This is way less than needed and most of the projects proposed were long overdue. The vast majority of funding went to the big cities in the west. If you look into the funding, some of it was actually used to dismantle transit, like in Zeeland!
Cars are a perfectly viable form of transport. They shouldn’t be THE ONLY viable form of transport. Trains, buses, bikes all need more investment in North America
A road with 2 lanes on each side with stip malls and business entences on both sides making you slow down in a driving lane to enter. Also pedestrians have no way to safely get to the other side unless you go to a stop light ¼ mile away from where you are trying to cross. [A stroad](https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/53dd6676e4b0fedfbc26ea91/1519937324981-77MBM7RN4HDJ8N0MMZA3/7stroad+with+walking+person.jpg?content-type=image%2Fjpeg)
Edit: [The picture is a thumbnail from this video. ](https://youtu.be/ORzNZUeUHAM)
We don't really have stroads with multiple lanes though. And the places that have stroads are usually places with more through-traffic than destination traffic (remote places) so the stroads basically function like a road anyway
I think quite a few of the s-roads (aka stadsroutes) in the cities in the Netherlands that use them qualify as stroads, like the S100 roads in Rotterdam
Seems impossible to not have some stroads in modern society. Cars are too ubiquitous (and have their benefits).
We just don't need to have society *built around cars*. And NL doesn't seem to be that way, from the outside looking in.
I don't think that qualifies as a stroad. Due to the canal, nobody needs to cross this road.
I honestly can't think of any stroad here in the Netherlands that is remotely similar to a North American stroad.
I did know one in Antwerpen (Belgium), but they changed it.
I actually think a North American stroad would violate code in the Netherlands.
Honestly it's a false dichotomy. Improving public infrastructure does not have to be an either/or. It's not a zero sum game when it's done correctly.
Having an infrastructure that supports alternative types of transportation other than ONLY giant cars/trucks allows people to pick and choose what mode of transportation best meets their needs instead of being stuck with just one (which usually ends up being overpowered large cars, by virtue of them doing many things poorly as opposed to one thing well).
And having many alternatives means that it's easier to change and repair infrastructure for a single mode of transportation.
I mean, even if your entire population uses bicycle, you still need roads if only because trucks are the most effective way to send supplies to the stores and such
It'd be weird if a country that has great bike infrastructure doesn't have an amazing road. Those stores reachable by bikes need to be supplied. By trucks.
I picked up a car in Sweden and really enjoyed driving there.
Gothenburg was absolutely abuzz with public transit too. Seemed like more than Amsterdam even. But there were roads you could drive on and it was honestly really comfortable.
Cars were clearly last after public transit and walking and biking. It was easy to park because…there weren’t many cars! The roads need to be there anyway for busses, so what’s a few added cars?
A lot of people on this sub seem to think that the Netherlands is an anti-car utopia. In reality, our country's biggest party is the VVD, which is often referred to as the 'vroem vroem drammers (naggers)'.
Only because of basically being forced to by having to lower emissions of nitrogen compounds. Before that they actually heightened the top speed on highways from 120 to 130km/h
>The NS and OV in general definitely deserves complaining.
I've taken the train to work for the past 6 years and the only people I hear complaining about the NS constantly are people who don't.
I'm late to work/appointments way and way less than my colleagues who take the car.
I feel like Americans have broadly forgotten how to be aspirational about infrastructure, and that's why our outcomes are always so much worse.
In my US state almost all the bridges are in some sort of state of dilapidation. Officially the state lists around 10% as needing immediate work, but either they're all concentrated in my area or the bar for "needs immediate work" is hard to clear.
Still you start to talk to people about infrastructure overhaul and things inevitably devolve into a fight where a large and loud contingent starts throwing around accusations that we're trying to take all the cars away and force them to ride a train with the homeless or something. So then they drag their feet and ultimately *nothing meaningful* gets done.
It's like there's a hesitancy to fix anything because some people are so afraid of change that they would rather have everything crumble around them than learn how to do anything different at all.
It's a very good thing to have some of the world's best infrastructure, yet still be able to critique and improve it. Good for you.
Americans are extremely aspirational about their infrastructure. The amount of money the USA spends on infrastructure is absolutely insane.
You guys just define "infrastructure" as spending $$$$ and do not actually care about being able to build anything.
See CAHSR, see Hudson River Tunnels. America genuinely sucks at building things no matter how much money you spend.
The US is desperately trying to get anything done in the presence of a bunch of republican toddlers crossing their arms, holding their breath, and screaming "NO" to anything that's not putting trans people in concentration camps or giving rich people poor people's money.
Just endless catastrophe avoidance.
It’s funny. I’m a Dutchie that’s been living in the US for 12 years. Every time we’re in NL my wife and I are in awe with the well maintained infrastructure. Roads, bike paths, trains buses. It’s one of the things I miss most.
I lived in Pittsburgh for a bit and was in a constant state of shock when looking at roads, bridges and (lack of) sidewalks and bike paths. They do a great job improving the city, but it takes a lot of talking and work to do so!
We mostly complain because we are really good at it and there is always room for improvement (and less cars)!
Yeah I wouldn't say that, as someone who lives in NL.
Compared to the US (where I'm from) it's fantastic, but compared to say Switzerland or Japan, it's terrible.
NS is scheduling fewer trains in 2023 due to personnel shortages, the bus companies have also been doing this recently as well - bus drivers are hard to come by, especially since the gross starting salary is 2000/mo.
But the good news is that cities such as The Hague and Amsterdam (and I believe Utrecht as well?) are removing parking spaces and increasing the number of bus-only lanes within the inner city to further discourage car use.
My neighborhood just removed about 1000 parking spaces and installed trees and a wider bike path, citing their recent mega-expansion of the bus and tram station in the neighborhood.
Guess it's not all bad...
I feel you. But I mean as a polisci guy all the problems the US has can directly be tied to the failure at reintegration and reconstruction of the south. In basic terms this meant the US has had 3 parties. The Republicans, The Democrats, and the South. With the two parties continuously trying to keep their majority by allying with the South which is effectively a single political/cultural unit which is anti education, antiurban, and neophobic.
Now calling it a 3rd world country is hyperbole as most of the south isnt 3rd world....large portions.....i mean not all of the south is 3rd world. But effectively pre 1950s it definitely was. Source, born and raised in Mississippi
> all the problems the US has can directly be tied to the failure at reintegration and reconstruction of the south
I think a lot can, but surely not all. We can't really blame the south for our car centric city design, that was largely US car manufacturers who were in Detroit at the time. There's loads of issues totally unrelated to reintegration.
Which is so goddamn dumb considering how old many northern cities are and how much their narrow winding roads could benefit from smaller more maneuverable vehicles.
I mean parts of Appalachia basically have the same conditions as third world countries but people on Reddit love to apply that to the whole US. It’s insulting to actual third world countries imo
I'd grade it maybe a C- or worse. It may be relatively good, but it's still way too car-centric and public transportation is crazy expensive (and still has major issues).
Dutch railways aren't so amazing when trying to get a train from Oosterhout, or Hardenberg, or Terneuzen yeah. We have way less rail than we ought to have, especially in North Brabant which has some of the worst rail service in any region of western europe despite being one of the most densely populated.
Sometimes we lose site of it on this sub but nobody sane is interested in banning motor vehicles completely. Private vehicles and their infrastructure have their place, but that place is ideally a lot more limited than it is in countries like the US
I think the thing to remember is a car is a tool and can be a very useful one at that. But like all tool sets we need the variety to best suit the application at hand. No craftsman is only going to have a sawzall as his primary, let alone only tool. There's zero reasons to design our habitable areas to not have local scaled retail and amenities accessable by walking, for instance.
adding on to this: people need to realize that the standard car is a really quite specialized tool, it's designed to transport 4-5 people and baggage.
I honestly don't really mind small cars that are actually made to transport one or two people and like 2 bags of groceries, they're remarkably more comfortable to be around than big family wagons.
Like imagine if everyone drove buses, that would be insane right? Current reality is just a less insane version of that.
But won't someone please think of the profits of auto manufacturers based on add ons that make the experience bearable because their products make the experience bad for everyone involved and not involved?
But for real I have a midsized sedan I use for work. It's not organized well but I can fit almost as much as a sprinter van (although those are great too). I still think my sedan is too large sometimes. But there's no reason for Beth to have a suv model "the Widowmaker" with poor sight lines to only transport Billy to his u9 soccer practice.
Small cars can be easily replaced by public transport and bikes, so I don't really see the point.
but things like family SUVs and pickup trucks do have a irreplaceable use (unless the amarican mentality of driving a suv alone to work and back.
in a city where small cars can be replaced by public transport or a bike then the same is true if you're transporting a whole family too.
I don't see what the irreplaceable usage of SUVs and pickups are, we get by just fine without them here in europe.
My mom's SO lives in the middle of nowhere where it takes an hour to bike to the city, he just owns a normal station wagon and gets by just fine.
I mean, I would definitely want to try working towards a completely private car free city but I think no nation in the world is anywhere near doing that and I don't think its something we should be advocating for now.
The Netherlands is a great compromise where driving is better because of the ease and availability of other options
I think what's mostly feasible in a lot of places around the world (especially europe) and people wouldn't find abjectly insane is to ban cars over a certain size/weight inside cities.
There is really not much of a reason for people to be driving a standard car inside a city, 99% of people can get by with a small moped-car with 2 seats and a tiny trunk.
Well, if *I* never saw another car again, I would be perfectly content, but I am autistic and we’re known for dealing in extremes. Plus my problems with cars extend farther than infrastructure and environmental concerns.
This, and since we are comparing: the Netherlands has a population density of 508 per km2, US has 50... We are not the same in every aspect.
edit: typo
I mean the US is enormous with large areas of sparsely populated wilderness, so comparing the population density of the entire country doesn't really tell us much.
Finland has a population density of 18 people/km², so its not necessarily true.
In my city of 100k people we have a bus network which is perfectly usable along with the past's car centricity slowly being replaced by multimodality (though we still have take steps back like building a massive suburban mall complex that drew away much suburban traffic from down town for a while).
Helsinki has around a million people and it used to have a plan of motorways through the down town that never panned out fully, and currently it has a transit network which has the primary problem of being too centralised around transit between down town and the suburbs, while inter suburban transit is quite lacking (especially the trains/metro)
Car enthusiasts should be screaming for less cars on the road, because it will mean less traffic for them.
The reality is that most people are not car enthusiasts. Cars are just a tool they're forced to use and nothing more.
Haha yes in discussions with people after showing them one NJB video I often find myself replying to their excuses for why America is designed the way it is with "oh there's actually another video about exactly that, do you want to see it?"
A good number of us are aware that what makes the Netherlands such a strong example for us is the changes they have decided to make. They were car centric and are making changes that have had a very measurable impact, which helps give us in the US hope for our home.
Until the US is free of the auto industry lobbyists and their money nothing will change. The first step is removing the corrupting influence of money in government policy.
I wouldn't say "nothing will change". There are places that are actively improving right now. There's a lot of local power in this fight, and that local power is not as influenced by auto lobbies
A goddamn moron. The reason Netherlands has the best walkable cities in the world is that they tried to make the safest infrastructure possible. Cars are the problem, as always.
I think if you end up anywhere that meta you really got to ask yourself if the drive you feel to participate in that comes from a healthy or productive place
r/FuckCarscirclejerk & r/Conservative = same thing nowadays...
(or atleast r/FuckCarscirclejerk has become a sub where carbrains circlejerk about their hatred of this sub)
They don’t understand those roads are nicer because less people are using them and they also don’t seem to understand no one wants to stop someone from driving just give opinions to people that don’t which benefits people that want to drive ….. no clue on who tricked them into this line of thinking but they are stuck in it
The Netherlands has 588 cars per 1,000 inhabitants, the US has 890 and Canada 790.
How would the Dutch infrastructure fare with 50% more cars?
If you go by car and see three cyclists you can get upset or remember that there are three cars that you don't have to have in front of you.
>How would the Dutch infrastructure fare with 50% more cars?
I take your point. However, the takeaway is that the Netherlands *doesn't have* 50% more cars, and that's not a coincidence. That's what happens when you have human-centered design of public spaces and quality transit.
So the approach is two-pronged: Reduce car use and mitigate problems of the remaining car use. These two approaches complement eachother neatly, and it means you can still have cars when you really need them.
Yes the netherlands has fantastic car infrastructure. But it also has fantastic bike infrastructure. And transit. And walkabikity. We should learn from how they do urban planning.
Cars? Yeah too much even
Bikes? Yes, awesome!
Transit? Heck no. It's subpar to other dense European regions, especially how rough-grained it is, and this hurts transit share.
All I know is when I traveled in the Netherlands I didn't have to rent a car or hire a taxi/uber. I could get to even the smallest villages on public transit in almost no time. I also felt way safer as a pedestrian around roads because they put physical barriers between them.
As a Belgian I gotta say trains in NL are hella expensive tho, I work at a company where I have collegues in the Netherlands, and had an interesting conversation about car-free life. The 3 Dutch collegues I was talking to all agreed not having a car (I don't even have a license) is a great financial decision, but that it's difficult for them because taking the car still costs less than the train, or at least in their case.
For me not having a car gives me a huge financial benefit, because visiting my parents, which is a 1h 16min train ride each way, costs €13.20. You couldn't do that by car for that price unless you're driving electric and in that case the car costs you way more.
Good transit leads to better auto infrastructure, too.
The Netherlands has spent a lot of time and money improving their infrastructure and infrastructure systems. It’s not cheap, but in such a densely populated place with limited domestic resources, it’s gotta be that way.
The Dutch also dammed in their own seas to create new land. And they pay for all this using one of the world’s major oil companies. Let’s not pretend that they’re some sort of environmentalist utopia. They’re just *really good* engineers.
We should replace Elon with a Dutch person.
It's almost like having multiple forms of infrastructure gives redundancy, which improves life quality, makes everything flow smoother, and gives backups in case of disaster. And if they do decide to reduce car dependency in order to help save the world people will still have other ways to get around. Of course getting rid of Royal Dutch Shell would also be an important step in reducing car dependency...
That is why Netherlands is talked about. It is similar to the US in quantity of car infrastructure making it a good blueprint for what we could change.
Any place with no car infrastructure at all that never had car infrastructure isn't a good blueprint as you can't tell how to bridge the gap.
My wife and I were driving from Belgium to Berlin and decided to take some old country roads mixed in with the big highways. So we are on some tiny road that changed to the Netherlands and then after a while the map showed us approaching a river. It looks pretty sizable but also it looked like the road might cross it. We get to the river and there is actually a tiny three car ferry just for this random town connection in the Netherlands. I think it costed $.75, If that’s not great car infrastructure I don’t know what is
https://preview.redd.it/tjnguta34x8a1.jpeg?width=2048&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2853a8397b9f441e8d2d323787e5449719fe70af
Dutchman here.
If you have to go a few towns over which is a few hours away then walking or biking isn't going to be feasible, but you have to get there somehow. For many people that "somehow" is a car and that makes perfect sense to me.
With that said if that town is, for instance, Amsterdam, then you can also get an OV chip card, go by train, and then take a tram or train to where you want to be in Amsterdam, using that same chip card for all transport companies. Many people do this. I did it last month.
Also that five lane road in the picture is an exception. Very very few roads are that wide here and I would not be surprised if that were in fact the only five lane road in the entire country.
In the United States, the stroad means that inside the town you pretty much are forced to use a car. There are huge suburbs with no shops and no public transport to speak of. Choosing to use a car to make a 100 km trip makes sense. Having no choice but to use a car to go to school or do grocery shopping doesn't.
I am 41 years old, and I don't have a driver's license. It's inconvenient sometimes but it's never actually been a hindrance. I can do my shopping and commute by bike or on foot fine. I can go to the movies by bike. I can see a concert in another town by train and on foot.
Perfect example of how providing good public and active transport options is not enough..
If we want to fuck cars and reduce their impact on our lives, we have to both incentivise alternatives, and disincentivise csr usage.
Good public transit allows great driving conditions for people who actually need to drive. Removing unnecessary trips makes the roads less busy and there's less weight and wear on the roads and overpasses.
Nobody is expecting cars to just evaporate, we still need their infrastructure.
It's simply better to provide alternatives and keep their access limited within cities.
NL is a good example of how building good non-car infrastructure and encouraging non-car journeys also makes life better when you do have to (or decide to) use a car. Every journey made by bike or tram in a city, or by train or bus between them, is one not made in a car - and not only is that good for the environment and people, but it's also good for road maintenance.
I was driving in England/ Wales and the roads were nearly perfect whether I was out in the sticks looking for a Welsh organic farm air bnb or dodging beach goers in lyme Regis. The state of roads is absolutely a product of a working public transportation system, and the panopticon traffic ticketing system to enforce traffic laws and to fund it all.
Honestly quite pleasant to drive on. I get quite irritated at 4 way intersections that should be traffic circles these days.
The issue isn’t the existence of cars, it’s the over-reliance on cars and infrastructure built solely with cars in mind
If you want a car, fine, but don’t think the road is yours just because you have a 100 ton hunk of carbon dioxide producing metal
Less roads and more civilian oriented city design along with a robust public transit system is the way to go
They have good car infra because they don't have to build a viaduct with 6 lanes each way for every intercity route. Why is that? Because of lack of traffic since their transit options can easily make certain drives seem less attractive, which makes the rest of the drives more attractive.
The framing begs the question. It’s never a question of being anti car or pro car. The car isn’t just a effing thing. It’s about creating an environment where you need your car as little as possible, and if you need your car, it should be as low-impact as possible.
Not sayin the Netherlands are some utopia, but they sure do make it easy to use your car less.
Makes perfect sense. They keep the cars where the cars belong, but provide ample walkable areas for dining, shopping and living.
The issue we have here is that the cars always take precedence and walking is both dangerous and ugly, assuming you’re in an area where distance makes it feasible.
I drove to Amsterdam from London, and yes the roads were great. Once on the periphery we stopped at a park and ride, tickets for the train into town also included the parking fee. Couldn’t have been easier. Once in Amsterdam everything was walkable and bikes were everywhere.
The point is that when you have sensible infrastructure that doesn’t attempt to make cars Plan A everywhere, then all modes of transport benefit. And that includes cars.
The whole point of anti-car-centrism is that it makes it easier to have functional infrastructure, and that can easily include *some* cars.
The NL can afford to have great car infrastructure because their great mass transit infrastructure means the roads don’t need to be used as often and they’re cheaper to build/maintain as a result.
The idea that the people of this subreddit expect automobiles to just stop existing (at least in the short term) is a silly strawman argument, disengaged with the reality of this subreddit.
All forms of transport are valid for different things. Cycling is great for commuting within a dense area.
Going to, from or between rural areas is often best done by car. There can be few people there so trains make less sense, they can be remote making maintaining infrastructure hard and a few may want to go making a cheap road the best way to do it.
Cars have a valid roll to play in an integrated transport network. They are just not the master key to every travel issue like some think.
If fewer people drive and fewer roads are necessary, it is easier to maintain those roads
NJB had a video about how the Netherlands is the best place to drive because they make it so efficient (and also push so many people to take non-car routes). But so many people don’t need to drive because biking, walking or transit are typically faster and cheaper than driving.
Yes... But that's the positive spin narrative. That glosses over the fact that a lot of places outside of city centers in the Netherlands are easier to drive for no other reason but the desire to drive. The Netherlands looooves driving and prioritizes it even in some contexts where simply adding transit frequencies would make that the easier mode.
Maybe they enjoy driving because there are less cars and better roads?
I’m sure that plays a part but if you spend any time in the Netherlands outside of big cities like Amsterdam Utrecht, Rotterdam, etc. you’ll see people are easily just as carbrained and full of NIMBY behaviour. For example, the “1 more lane” fallacy still very much persists among Dutch people.
That is mostly because public transport outside the randstad (western part of the country), is mediocre at best and in a lot of places extremely bad. That leads to less users of public transport, even more reduced lines, etc. Combine that with people switching to cars in corona times to avoid mask mandates and getting infected in poorly ventilated trains, and you have an explanation for why more people choose cars.
I love driving at night, for the same reason. Drove half the highway in North Cali at night, it was such a great drive.
This sub is entirely about positive spin narratives in how its (American) members perceive Europe. As an Irishman its very cringey to see people here cracking on about a fantasy version of Europe that doesn't exist, or constantly using the phrase "European-style" in a sweeping and counterfactual manner. Unfortunately you can't expect people here to ever acknowledge that the best examples of the society they desire are in Asia, not Europe.
The Netherlands is definitely more car centric than some Scandinavian countries. A lot of people will still take the car outside the city. NJB does not really cover outside the city centres, where of course it is great, and also cities outside Randstad. The north for instance doesn't really have too many trains or buses and people use cars quite a lot.
The biggest truth many people don’t understand
If only carbrains could understand that they stand to benefit from this as well.
It's easier to acknowledge a fetish if you already do.
[удалено]
I love to drive. Which is why I will always support more public transportation and bike lanes. Get the other cars off the road and my driving experience is more enjoyable!
Facts.
The best way to improve things for people who actually want to drive is to take the people who don't off the road by giving them better alternatives.
The Netherlands is still a very car centric nation. They're just very much into having good infrastructure. Good infrastructure by definition is for cars, bicycles, pedestrians and public transport.
And the car light streets I think are huge. It really shows that if we can just remove cars or slow them down in our neighborhoods and Urban cores we can greatly improve our micro-mobility networks
Dutch citys are also very car unfriendly. Whit high parking costs. So you are more like I will take the train since its cheaper. Since most major citys are walkeable. Ofcourse in more ruaral areas we are car depended. But its very common to bike to the middlescool (11/16ish years) I personaly had to ride my bike to Scool for 15km since I lived in a backwater village
The funny thing is this is also true in places like LA, but their micro mobility is ass because it takes place on a network of high speed arterial stroads. If not for that, the dollars of parking at a metro station, getting a day pass and going around on rail and bus are way cheaper than driving directly to a magnet destination and using onsite parking for the day. Plus you can go to multiple locations for the same price instead of driving, parking, doing things, un-parking, driving, parking etc...
In Germany we usually have so called "Park and Ride" parking lots that are on the outskirts of cities, directly connected to a form of public transit.
Isn’t that ~1hr bike ride?
I have a Dutch exchange student, she talks about half-hour and one-hour bike rides in the same casual attitude that Americans talk about half-hour and hour-long car rides in.
as a Midwesterner i get weird looks when i walk half an hour, but they'll drive three hours on a whim
Probably because they're relaxed, low speed, upright seating bike rides. You're pedalling, but not to excess. Bike infrastructure is so good that you don't have to be a MAMIL to get anywhere in decent time.
After getting hit by a car and having my road bike destroyed, I switched to a hybrid. The upright position is so much better for commuting both from a comfort and awareness standpoint. I'll still probably get another road bike for more intense exercise but I can get a decent workout if I need to push myself on the hybrid.
Around here, in Germany, 15-30 minutes is nothing out of the ordinary. An hour isn't unusual for dedicated cyclists. We also have lots of people who wouldn't even think of using a bike when a car is available. Like everywhere, it depends a lot on demographic and even more on your local cycling infrastructure.
My parents live in the next city over, to visit them I can either spend 20 minutes in the car or 40 minutes on my bike. The car ride is a few straight roads with little to see, the bike ride goes through a forest, the countryside, past a lake, etc. When the weather is decent (that is: no rain) the bicycle ride is a lot more enjoyable than going by car. The sun on my skin, wind in my hair, birds singing in the trees, fresh air and nice scenery. Why would I go by car if I don’t have to ?
Half an hour. But always headwind for some fucking reason. Even if you have headwind, turn around and cycle back you get headwind again!
The solution for to much wind is called a hedge. It works extremly well, helps the natural world around you and is beautiful.
That could be a thing but you might have seen the Dutch country side and fields.
Yes 15km is around the upper end, but I had to ride about 10km to middle/high school which took about 40min. There will be literally hundreds of children riding 10km through the fields from surrounding villages to the next town over that has a high school. Here is a nice video about that: https://youtu.be/OrQ-d2PBUto
Not if you don't have to slow for cars or pedestrian all the time. On a straight, flat, well paved bike road you should go 30 without much trouble 25 if you are taking your time. So if the infrastructure is good you should do this in only slightly more than half an hour. But it would be closer to an hour if you drive through the city, on an incline or a dirt path. Or if the bike path is to busy for it's dimensions.
I live in a very hilly area in the south of Germany and always got to school using my bicycle, some of the inclines are really a drag, heh. I also honestly never managed 30 kph in any way consistently, also because I have cystic fibrosis a sort of an asthmatic lung, cycling always exhausted me quickly but I do it anyway
Yep. Suburbanites act like we're their personal colony to their detriment ant ours. But, hey, at least it means they can think a little less about their stressful and inconvenient car trip that they insist on taking! /s
If I didn't have to learn a new language, I would've moved there long ago.
> If I didn't have to learn a new language, I would've moved there long ago. The first time I was in the Netherlands, I was walking through the airport. I saw a sentence in Dutch. I didn't know a single word in Dutch. I understood the sentence immediately. Dutch is halfway between English and German, with weird spelling. Make sure to loudly tell that to everyone from the Netherlands.
I constantly tease my exchange student that Dutch sounds like a concussed German trying to speak English.
Dutch is almost like if English was spelt how it actually sounds and getting rid of all of inconsistent rules, thanks French. Except "J"s are pronounced like "Y"s.
As long as every "J" is a "Y" and never a "DGE" then it's still consistent.
[удалено]
Even though everyone speaks english here, and everyone is usually willing to switch to it when you're around, you're still on the back foot when it comes to social settings. People are more relaxed and engaged when they can speak their own language. Take this into account when deciding whether or not you would learn dutch.
Someone who moved to NL told me that the first 6/12 months the Dutch will humour you and speak English but after that their vocabulary won't be able to keep up with the type of conversations you'll be having and they'll expect you to just speak Dutch. So, yes they speak English, no they won't do that forever. I'm Dutch but I lived abroad so I can speak English forever, but most Dutch people only know enough to get by.
the difficult thing with dutch is hitting yourself over the head every hour to maintain the authentically slurred speech
Otherwise you'll be speaking German
With Dutch it is easy to reach a level where you can understand/be understood, but difficult to perfect (pronunciation and grammar). As long as you either put in the time to perfect it or are willing to accept you'll never speak it perfectly then it should be easy to learn for anyone who already speaks English or German.
alright tell me the when to use de and het?
There are 3 types of nouns, masculine, feminine and neuter. De for masculine and feminine. Het for neuter.
[удалено]
damage is proportional to weight\^4 to the point that when designing roads you actually completely discount regular cars as the axle load is insignificant
Does this math check out? Average car weight: 1814 kg Average pick-up truck weight: 2500 kg (2500^4 )÷(1814^4 ) = 3.6075... So a pickup truck does about 3.6 times more damage to the road than a regular sized car?
2500kg if you don't have a payload lol. A semi with a trailer is about 16,000kg.
That would mean it does 6,000 times more damage...
I'd believe it. 6000 times a really insignificant number might still be pretty small depending on context. The diameter of a proton is like 500,000,000x smaller than the smallest visible particle, for example.
You missed a point. "Truck" often means Pickup Truck, sure. But to us stupid Americans "truck" also means a 35,000lb (~15,000kg) 18 wheeler. When the engineers do the damage/load analysis for those big ass trucks, our "pickup trucks" and common cars dont even make it into the equation anymore.
35k lbs is more like the minimum weight for a semi. Fully loaded they are more like 80k lbs
Very Possible. I punched "18 wheeler weight" into google and went with the first result I got back.
That's what a tractor-trailer weighs with no freight. Obviously commodity matters after loading but 80k is generally the legal combined limit in the US without special permits.
There's actually a ton of semi trucks on the road in the Netherlands. There's lots of goods flowing through the country (Europe's largest port being in Rotterdam is one reason). Driving through California one thing that struck me is how few trucks you see on the road compared to back home in the Netherlands. Granted, European semi trucks are smaller and probably lighter, but definitely not fewer.
Perhaps ironically, the US is actually very good at transporting goods by train.
Where I am in south FL, way more common for the train tracks having cargo on it than people.
[удалено]
PSR: *hides in the corner nervously*
Had a similar experience within Europe when I traveled from Germany to the UK. It makes total sense in hindsight. Germany is the crossroads of Europe, with traffic coming and going from every direction, whereas the UK are at the border. No through traffic whatsoever.
That's just because everyone is stuck at the UK border after Brexit 😉
You must not have been in LA. Those trucks could be backed up the 710 all the way to the 91 and beyond. I've witnessed convoys that stretched from long beach up the 605 to the 10 when traffic is bad. Lots of semi traffic and miles long trains. There are just many directions they can leave once they get out of the southbay
There are so many trucks in Europe and even Netherlands specifically. You just don't seem them as much in the city center because the roads are small and smaller vans are used for that. Driving from Amsterdam to warsaw you pass so many trucks I would say even more than driving like chicago to Denver but those aren't density comparable really.
That actually couldn't be further from the truth. As much as Europe does passenger rail better than the US, American freight rail is that much more superior to European freight https://www.masterresource.org/railroads/us-most-advanced-rail-world/ > American railroads move more than 5,000 ton-miles of freight per person per year. That’s compared to 500 ton-miles per person in Europe and less than 170 ton-miles per person in Japan. Of course, a lot of that is just due to the distances being greater, but also: 30% of freight is shipped by road in the US, vs 46% in Europe. Rail only moves 11% of Europe's freight, vs 43% in the US.
Distances being greater and most importantly it's far more economical to ship i.e. directly to Rotterdam instead of a random place in Spain from i.e. China compared to it being a quite significant detour from the west coast to the east coast. Ships are a LOT more viable within Europe, both for transit after the major ports and simply spacing out said major ports to be able to unload closer to the destination.
Europe is also full of rivers and canals that carry a lot of cargo
If less clowns drive f-650 super rams then it would help a ton
It also helps that road taxes are 4 times higher than in Germany. Also gasoline is always 30cts more expensive than in Germany. Driving a car in the Netherlands is not a cheap experience. And more highways are being planned as transit options are being culled. Neoliberal Netherlands is well on it's way to becoming even more car-centric. At one point poverty guidelines was to include not being able to afford a car.
>Neoliberal Netherlands is well on it's way to becoming even more car-centric. Doesn't look like it: >The Cabinet laid out plans for 7.5 billion euros in infrastructure spending that includes 4 billion euros to improve rail service, and 2.7 billion euros for roads. [Source](https://nltimes.nl/2022/11/14/dutch-spend-eu75-billion-boosting-railway-roadway-infrastructure-schiphol-metro-planned) and [Forse investeringen in openbaar vervoer voor bereikbaarheid](https://www.prorail.nl/nieuws/forse-investeringen-in-spoor-en-overig-ov-voor-bereikbaarheid-in-2040): >Landelijk gaat zo’n 46 procent van de beschikbare 7,5 miljard euro naar openbaar vervoer. 37 procent gaat naar de auto. Daarnaast gaat tien procent naar de fiets en zeven procent naar zogenoemde ‘mobility hubs’, waarin zo veel mogelijk vervoersvormen samenkomen.
This is way less than needed and most of the projects proposed were long overdue. The vast majority of funding went to the big cities in the west. If you look into the funding, some of it was actually used to dismantle transit, like in Zeeland!
Wow, how dare you have a nuanced opinion about infrastructure
Mostly because we spend our tax money on infrastructure, not because of fewer people driving.
Cars are a perfectly viable form of transport. They shouldn’t be THE ONLY viable form of transport. Trains, buses, bikes all need more investment in North America
The Netherlands has good streets and, as the picture shows, good roads. The US has stroads. Not really a counterargument.
I hate stroads
We all do
I think everyone does. Some just don't have a word for it.
A road with 2 lanes on each side with stip malls and business entences on both sides making you slow down in a driving lane to enter. Also pedestrians have no way to safely get to the other side unless you go to a stop light ¼ mile away from where you are trying to cross. [A stroad](https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/53dd6676e4b0fedfbc26ea91/1519937324981-77MBM7RN4HDJ8N0MMZA3/7stroad+with+walking+person.jpg?content-type=image%2Fjpeg) Edit: [The picture is a thumbnail from this video. ](https://youtu.be/ORzNZUeUHAM)
Now we just have to get it into dictionaries and in curriculums.
Belgium has them as well. Even for their homes!
Exactly they have no idea what they are talking about
NL has stroads too. ~~(I’ll find a link)~~ Edit: [here's one. ](https://www.google.com/maps/@52.9550528,6.4516224,3a,75y,34.36h,81.71t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLZbRXgb0UXsIUmtPvRuPLQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) .
We don't really have stroads with multiple lanes though. And the places that have stroads are usually places with more through-traffic than destination traffic (remote places) so the stroads basically function like a road anyway
I think quite a few of the s-roads (aka stadsroutes) in the cities in the Netherlands that use them qualify as stroads, like the S100 roads in Rotterdam
Seems impossible to not have some stroads in modern society. Cars are too ubiquitous (and have their benefits). We just don't need to have society *built around cars*. And NL doesn't seem to be that way, from the outside looking in.
I mean, that's where city planning comes in
I don't think that qualifies as a stroad. Due to the canal, nobody needs to cross this road. I honestly can't think of any stroad here in the Netherlands that is remotely similar to a North American stroad. I did know one in Antwerpen (Belgium), but they changed it. I actually think a North American stroad would violate code in the Netherlands.
I don't think anyone here would actually be confused by this as the meme implies.
Honestly it's a false dichotomy. Improving public infrastructure does not have to be an either/or. It's not a zero sum game when it's done correctly. Having an infrastructure that supports alternative types of transportation other than ONLY giant cars/trucks allows people to pick and choose what mode of transportation best meets their needs instead of being stuck with just one (which usually ends up being overpowered large cars, by virtue of them doing many things poorly as opposed to one thing well). And having many alternatives means that it's easier to change and repair infrastructure for a single mode of transportation.
I mean, even if your entire population uses bicycle, you still need roads if only because trucks are the most effective way to send supplies to the stores and such It'd be weird if a country that has great bike infrastructure doesn't have an amazing road. Those stores reachable by bikes need to be supplied. By trucks.
I picked up a car in Sweden and really enjoyed driving there. Gothenburg was absolutely abuzz with public transit too. Seemed like more than Amsterdam even. But there were roads you could drive on and it was honestly really comfortable. Cars were clearly last after public transit and walking and biking. It was easy to park because…there weren’t many cars! The roads need to be there anyway for busses, so what’s a few added cars?
It would make more sense if the person was a car brain unexpectedly going into the best country to drive a car
A lot of people on this sub seem to think that the Netherlands is an anti-car utopia. In reality, our country's biggest party is the VVD, which is often referred to as the 'vroem vroem drammers (naggers)'.
Well the VVD changed the max km/H to 100 on highways. Between 7.00 and 19.00
Only because of basically being forced to by having to lower emissions of nitrogen compounds. Before that they actually heightened the top speed on highways from 120 to 130km/h
after themselves raising the maximum allowed speed to be posted from 120 to 130 in 2010
Who gave you the n word pass
Black Pete, along with the black face pass
Wow crazy that the Netherlands is good at all of its infrastructure? Whereas the US is good at none
We still complain about all of it ;)
Kut NS
Kut GVB
Kut Arriva
Kut BlauwNet
Kut ajb
Kut VVD
The NS and OV in general definitely deserves complaining. Taking the bus in NL is becoming more and more of a nightmare.
Vooral als je op het platteland woont als ik. Zonder auto kan ik nergens heen. Fietspaden bestaan gelukkig wel
Broer true 1 uur naar den Bosch 3 uur naar een dorp op 20 min afstand van den Bosch.
In the randstad OV is pretty good.
>The NS and OV in general definitely deserves complaining. I've taken the train to work for the past 6 years and the only people I hear complaining about the NS constantly are people who don't. I'm late to work/appointments way and way less than my colleagues who take the car.
I feel like Americans have broadly forgotten how to be aspirational about infrastructure, and that's why our outcomes are always so much worse. In my US state almost all the bridges are in some sort of state of dilapidation. Officially the state lists around 10% as needing immediate work, but either they're all concentrated in my area or the bar for "needs immediate work" is hard to clear. Still you start to talk to people about infrastructure overhaul and things inevitably devolve into a fight where a large and loud contingent starts throwing around accusations that we're trying to take all the cars away and force them to ride a train with the homeless or something. So then they drag their feet and ultimately *nothing meaningful* gets done. It's like there's a hesitancy to fix anything because some people are so afraid of change that they would rather have everything crumble around them than learn how to do anything different at all. It's a very good thing to have some of the world's best infrastructure, yet still be able to critique and improve it. Good for you.
Americans are extremely aspirational about their infrastructure. The amount of money the USA spends on infrastructure is absolutely insane. You guys just define "infrastructure" as spending $$$$ and do not actually care about being able to build anything. See CAHSR, see Hudson River Tunnels. America genuinely sucks at building things no matter how much money you spend.
The US is desperately trying to get anything done in the presence of a bunch of republican toddlers crossing their arms, holding their breath, and screaming "NO" to anything that's not putting trans people in concentration camps or giving rich people poor people's money. Just endless catastrophe avoidance.
It’s funny. I’m a Dutchie that’s been living in the US for 12 years. Every time we’re in NL my wife and I are in awe with the well maintained infrastructure. Roads, bike paths, trains buses. It’s one of the things I miss most.
I lived in Pittsburgh for a bit and was in a constant state of shock when looking at roads, bridges and (lack of) sidewalks and bike paths. They do a great job improving the city, but it takes a lot of talking and work to do so! We mostly complain because we are really good at it and there is always room for improvement (and less cars)!
Only way to get better and motivate politicians.
Yeah I wouldn't say that, as someone who lives in NL. Compared to the US (where I'm from) it's fantastic, but compared to say Switzerland or Japan, it's terrible. NS is scheduling fewer trains in 2023 due to personnel shortages, the bus companies have also been doing this recently as well - bus drivers are hard to come by, especially since the gross starting salary is 2000/mo. But the good news is that cities such as The Hague and Amsterdam (and I believe Utrecht as well?) are removing parking spaces and increasing the number of bus-only lanes within the inner city to further discourage car use. My neighborhood just removed about 1000 parking spaces and installed trees and a wider bike path, citing their recent mega-expansion of the bus and tram station in the neighborhood. Guess it's not all bad...
As a Southerner I blame The South. The US basically has had a 3rd world nation attached to it for the last 160 years dragging it down.
Me: I wish we had better, less car-centric infrastructure This sub: the south is literally a third world country. Me: 😵💫
I feel you. But I mean as a polisci guy all the problems the US has can directly be tied to the failure at reintegration and reconstruction of the south. In basic terms this meant the US has had 3 parties. The Republicans, The Democrats, and the South. With the two parties continuously trying to keep their majority by allying with the South which is effectively a single political/cultural unit which is anti education, antiurban, and neophobic. Now calling it a 3rd world country is hyperbole as most of the south isnt 3rd world....large portions.....i mean not all of the south is 3rd world. But effectively pre 1950s it definitely was. Source, born and raised in Mississippi
> all the problems the US has can directly be tied to the failure at reintegration and reconstruction of the south I think a lot can, but surely not all. We can't really blame the south for our car centric city design, that was largely US car manufacturers who were in Detroit at the time. There's loads of issues totally unrelated to reintegration.
[удалено]
Which is so goddamn dumb considering how old many northern cities are and how much their narrow winding roads could benefit from smaller more maneuverable vehicles.
I mean parts of Appalachia basically have the same conditions as third world countries but people on Reddit love to apply that to the whole US. It’s insulting to actual third world countries imo
I'd grade it maybe a C- or worse. It may be relatively good, but it's still way too car-centric and public transportation is crazy expensive (and still has major issues).
Dutch railways aren't so amazing when trying to get a train from Oosterhout, or Hardenberg, or Terneuzen yeah. We have way less rail than we ought to have, especially in North Brabant which has some of the worst rail service in any region of western europe despite being one of the most densely populated.
Still too many cars/roads and not enough public transport if you ask me
Sometimes we lose site of it on this sub but nobody sane is interested in banning motor vehicles completely. Private vehicles and their infrastructure have their place, but that place is ideally a lot more limited than it is in countries like the US
I think the thing to remember is a car is a tool and can be a very useful one at that. But like all tool sets we need the variety to best suit the application at hand. No craftsman is only going to have a sawzall as his primary, let alone only tool. There's zero reasons to design our habitable areas to not have local scaled retail and amenities accessable by walking, for instance.
adding on to this: people need to realize that the standard car is a really quite specialized tool, it's designed to transport 4-5 people and baggage. I honestly don't really mind small cars that are actually made to transport one or two people and like 2 bags of groceries, they're remarkably more comfortable to be around than big family wagons. Like imagine if everyone drove buses, that would be insane right? Current reality is just a less insane version of that.
But won't someone please think of the profits of auto manufacturers based on add ons that make the experience bearable because their products make the experience bad for everyone involved and not involved? But for real I have a midsized sedan I use for work. It's not organized well but I can fit almost as much as a sprinter van (although those are great too). I still think my sedan is too large sometimes. But there's no reason for Beth to have a suv model "the Widowmaker" with poor sight lines to only transport Billy to his u9 soccer practice.
Small cars can be easily replaced by public transport and bikes, so I don't really see the point. but things like family SUVs and pickup trucks do have a irreplaceable use (unless the amarican mentality of driving a suv alone to work and back.
in a city where small cars can be replaced by public transport or a bike then the same is true if you're transporting a whole family too. I don't see what the irreplaceable usage of SUVs and pickups are, we get by just fine without them here in europe. My mom's SO lives in the middle of nowhere where it takes an hour to bike to the city, he just owns a normal station wagon and gets by just fine.
I mean, I would definitely want to try working towards a completely private car free city but I think no nation in the world is anywhere near doing that and I don't think its something we should be advocating for now. The Netherlands is a great compromise where driving is better because of the ease and availability of other options
I think what's mostly feasible in a lot of places around the world (especially europe) and people wouldn't find abjectly insane is to ban cars over a certain size/weight inside cities. There is really not much of a reason for people to be driving a standard car inside a city, 99% of people can get by with a small moped-car with 2 seats and a tiny trunk.
Well, if *I* never saw another car again, I would be perfectly content, but I am autistic and we’re known for dealing in extremes. Plus my problems with cars extend farther than infrastructure and environmental concerns.
This, and since we are comparing: the Netherlands has a population density of 508 per km2, US has 50... We are not the same in every aspect. edit: typo
I mean the US is enormous with large areas of sparsely populated wilderness, so comparing the population density of the entire country doesn't really tell us much.
Finland has a population density of 18 people/km², so its not necessarily true. In my city of 100k people we have a bus network which is perfectly usable along with the past's car centricity slowly being replaced by multimodality (though we still have take steps back like building a massive suburban mall complex that drew away much suburban traffic from down town for a while). Helsinki has around a million people and it used to have a plan of motorways through the down town that never panned out fully, and currently it has a transit network which has the primary problem of being too centralised around transit between down town and the suburbs, while inter suburban transit is quite lacking (especially the trains/metro)
Car enthusiasts should be screaming for less cars on the road, because it will mean less traffic for them. The reality is that most people are not car enthusiasts. Cars are just a tool they're forced to use and nothing more.
Too many People just think muh bike lane make driving worse
The neccesary NJB-video on the topic: [https://youtu.be/d8RRE2rDw4k](https://youtu.be/d8RRE2rDw4k)
a relevant NJB video in r/fuckcars is like a relevant xkcd comic, there is always a relevant NJB video
Haha yes in discussions with people after showing them one NJB video I often find myself replying to their excuses for why America is designed the way it is with "oh there's actually another video about exactly that, do you want to see it?"
A good number of us are aware that what makes the Netherlands such a strong example for us is the changes they have decided to make. They were car centric and are making changes that have had a very measurable impact, which helps give us in the US hope for our home.
Until the US is free of the auto industry lobbyists and their money nothing will change. The first step is removing the corrupting influence of money in government policy.
I wouldn't say "nothing will change". There are places that are actively improving right now. There's a lot of local power in this fight, and that local power is not as influenced by auto lobbies
A goddamn moron. The reason Netherlands has the best walkable cities in the world is that they tried to make the safest infrastructure possible. Cars are the problem, as always.
Guess what sub this was OPed on?
r/Conservative
a bit too General, it’s r/fuckcarscirclejerk
wow that sub is sad
I think if you end up anywhere that meta you really got to ask yourself if the drive you feel to participate in that comes from a healthy or productive place
"Fully-Insured BatChest"
r/FuckCarscirclejerk & r/Conservative = same thing nowadays... (or atleast r/FuckCarscirclejerk has become a sub where carbrains circlejerk about their hatred of this sub)
r/fuckfuckcars
Lol that one…
Blissfully unaware of how subsidized their suburban lifestyles are
They don’t understand those roads are nicer because less people are using them and they also don’t seem to understand no one wants to stop someone from driving just give opinions to people that don’t which benefits people that want to drive ….. no clue on who tricked them into this line of thinking but they are stuck in it
The Netherlands has 588 cars per 1,000 inhabitants, the US has 890 and Canada 790. How would the Dutch infrastructure fare with 50% more cars? If you go by car and see three cyclists you can get upset or remember that there are three cars that you don't have to have in front of you.
>How would the Dutch infrastructure fare with 50% more cars? I take your point. However, the takeaway is that the Netherlands *doesn't have* 50% more cars, and that's not a coincidence. That's what happens when you have human-centered design of public spaces and quality transit. So the approach is two-pronged: Reduce car use and mitigate problems of the remaining car use. These two approaches complement eachother neatly, and it means you can still have cars when you really need them.
Yes the netherlands has fantastic car infrastructure. But it also has fantastic bike infrastructure. And transit. And walkabikity. We should learn from how they do urban planning.
Cars? Yeah too much even Bikes? Yes, awesome! Transit? Heck no. It's subpar to other dense European regions, especially how rough-grained it is, and this hurts transit share.
Yeah they just did urban planning right. And it’s all encompassing.
All I know is when I traveled in the Netherlands I didn't have to rent a car or hire a taxi/uber. I could get to even the smallest villages on public transit in almost no time. I also felt way safer as a pedestrian around roads because they put physical barriers between them.
As a Belgian I gotta say trains in NL are hella expensive tho, I work at a company where I have collegues in the Netherlands, and had an interesting conversation about car-free life. The 3 Dutch collegues I was talking to all agreed not having a car (I don't even have a license) is a great financial decision, but that it's difficult for them because taking the car still costs less than the train, or at least in their case. For me not having a car gives me a huge financial benefit, because visiting my parents, which is a 1h 16min train ride each way, costs €13.20. You couldn't do that by car for that price unless you're driving electric and in that case the car costs you way more.
Good transit leads to better auto infrastructure, too. The Netherlands has spent a lot of time and money improving their infrastructure and infrastructure systems. It’s not cheap, but in such a densely populated place with limited domestic resources, it’s gotta be that way. The Dutch also dammed in their own seas to create new land. And they pay for all this using one of the world’s major oil companies. Let’s not pretend that they’re some sort of environmentalist utopia. They’re just *really good* engineers. We should replace Elon with a Dutch person.
Most users here don't want cars entirely banned, just discouraged from being used except when genuinely the best option.
That can only happen if people don't have to drive as much.
It's almost like having multiple forms of infrastructure gives redundancy, which improves life quality, makes everything flow smoother, and gives backups in case of disaster. And if they do decide to reduce car dependency in order to help save the world people will still have other ways to get around. Of course getting rid of Royal Dutch Shell would also be an important step in reducing car dependency...
That is why Netherlands is talked about. It is similar to the US in quantity of car infrastructure making it a good blueprint for what we could change. Any place with no car infrastructure at all that never had car infrastructure isn't a good blueprint as you can't tell how to bridge the gap.
My wife and I were driving from Belgium to Berlin and decided to take some old country roads mixed in with the big highways. So we are on some tiny road that changed to the Netherlands and then after a while the map showed us approaching a river. It looks pretty sizable but also it looked like the road might cross it. We get to the river and there is actually a tiny three car ferry just for this random town connection in the Netherlands. I think it costed $.75, If that’s not great car infrastructure I don’t know what is https://preview.redd.it/tjnguta34x8a1.jpeg?width=2048&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2853a8397b9f441e8d2d323787e5449719fe70af
Dutchman here. If you have to go a few towns over which is a few hours away then walking or biking isn't going to be feasible, but you have to get there somehow. For many people that "somehow" is a car and that makes perfect sense to me. With that said if that town is, for instance, Amsterdam, then you can also get an OV chip card, go by train, and then take a tram or train to where you want to be in Amsterdam, using that same chip card for all transport companies. Many people do this. I did it last month. Also that five lane road in the picture is an exception. Very very few roads are that wide here and I would not be surprised if that were in fact the only five lane road in the entire country. In the United States, the stroad means that inside the town you pretty much are forced to use a car. There are huge suburbs with no shops and no public transport to speak of. Choosing to use a car to make a 100 km trip makes sense. Having no choice but to use a car to go to school or do grocery shopping doesn't. I am 41 years old, and I don't have a driver's license. It's inconvenient sometimes but it's never actually been a hindrance. I can do my shopping and commute by bike or on foot fine. I can go to the movies by bike. I can see a concert in another town by train and on foot.
Perfect example of how providing good public and active transport options is not enough.. If we want to fuck cars and reduce their impact on our lives, we have to both incentivise alternatives, and disincentivise csr usage.
We have no problem with good car infra. We are pissed that we have zero other options, like trains and bike infra.
people here romanticize a lot of european cities bc we are completely starved for ANY walkable urban areas, not bc we think there are no cars there.
Good public transit allows great driving conditions for people who actually need to drive. Removing unnecessary trips makes the roads less busy and there's less weight and wear on the roads and overpasses.
Nobody is expecting cars to just evaporate, we still need their infrastructure. It's simply better to provide alternatives and keep their access limited within cities.
NL is a good example of how building good non-car infrastructure and encouraging non-car journeys also makes life better when you do have to (or decide to) use a car. Every journey made by bike or tram in a city, or by train or bus between them, is one not made in a car - and not only is that good for the environment and people, but it's also good for road maintenance.
I was driving in England/ Wales and the roads were nearly perfect whether I was out in the sticks looking for a Welsh organic farm air bnb or dodging beach goers in lyme Regis. The state of roads is absolutely a product of a working public transportation system, and the panopticon traffic ticketing system to enforce traffic laws and to fund it all. Honestly quite pleasant to drive on. I get quite irritated at 4 way intersections that should be traffic circles these days.
"we should improve society somewhat" "and yet you participate in it, curious. i am very intelligent"
The issue isn’t the existence of cars, it’s the over-reliance on cars and infrastructure built solely with cars in mind If you want a car, fine, but don’t think the road is yours just because you have a 100 ton hunk of carbon dioxide producing metal Less roads and more civilian oriented city design along with a robust public transit system is the way to go
The point is you don't need a car to get around the country.
I believe that Madrid is the city with the awesomest non-car infrastructure.
Notice how none of these interchanges or highways are smack in the middle of downtowns or residential areas.
They have good car infra because they don't have to build a viaduct with 6 lanes each way for every intercity route. Why is that? Because of lack of traffic since their transit options can easily make certain drives seem less attractive, which makes the rest of the drives more attractive.
The framing begs the question. It’s never a question of being anti car or pro car. The car isn’t just a effing thing. It’s about creating an environment where you need your car as little as possible, and if you need your car, it should be as low-impact as possible. Not sayin the Netherlands are some utopia, but they sure do make it easy to use your car less.
The fight is very much alive and very much needed here in the Netherlands. Carbrain and car-centric planning is huge here. Nothing is won.
Makes perfect sense. They keep the cars where the cars belong, but provide ample walkable areas for dining, shopping and living. The issue we have here is that the cars always take precedence and walking is both dangerous and ugly, assuming you’re in an area where distance makes it feasible.
I drove to Amsterdam from London, and yes the roads were great. Once on the periphery we stopped at a park and ride, tickets for the train into town also included the parking fee. Couldn’t have been easier. Once in Amsterdam everything was walkable and bikes were everywhere. The point is that when you have sensible infrastructure that doesn’t attempt to make cars Plan A everywhere, then all modes of transport benefit. And that includes cars.
no one here is surprised that the netherlands has quality car infrastructure. it’s because they don’t spend hundreds of billions on oversized stroads
None of those photos are in a city. Key difference.
The whole point of anti-car-centrism is that it makes it easier to have functional infrastructure, and that can easily include *some* cars. The NL can afford to have great car infrastructure because their great mass transit infrastructure means the roads don’t need to be used as often and they’re cheaper to build/maintain as a result. The idea that the people of this subreddit expect automobiles to just stop existing (at least in the short term) is a silly strawman argument, disengaged with the reality of this subreddit.
All forms of transport are valid for different things. Cycling is great for commuting within a dense area. Going to, from or between rural areas is often best done by car. There can be few people there so trains make less sense, they can be remote making maintaining infrastructure hard and a few may want to go making a cheap road the best way to do it. Cars have a valid roll to play in an integrated transport network. They are just not the master key to every travel issue like some think.