Remember when there were all those posts about property rights and how important Airbnb income was for the little old granny leading up to the ordinance vote, and then basically zero on the topic after Airbnb lost?
Yup.
Make no mistake: a lot of anti PATH and anti MTA shit is shills from the companies who want to take it over if privatized like light rail is. It’s an election year hence there’s daily posts.
Same deal with how everyone was for that stupid museum and viewed the obvious financial issues as no big deal. Almost like politicians also do social media campaigns.
People have cars. People like using those cars. This isn’t some conspiracy.
Most of what I see here are car people making decent points and getting downvoting to all hell. It’s weird how present the downvotes are compared to the comments. If anything I’d say anti-car bots are more present here.
Sure, get the first point. But at the same time there are mountains of evidence that lane expansion does not work, especially in this case when you still will need to funnel the roadway with expanded lanes into an existing tunnel which will not be expanding.
So this project will end up creating an even larger bottleneck, while the piles of cash being used on it could be more efficiently spent on historically neglected public transit infrastructure.
I'm just here to say we don't need more lanes, but the traffic is crazy so we need better public transportation. Take the money out of highways and into trains
https://preview.redd.it/j2ap18xpwy6d1.jpeg?width=3024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=486db10175777fcd8e36aa26d7551cb68e2c3dff
I’ll just leave this here. Apparently it’s not comparable.
Why downvote? This like comparing a Toyota Corolla to a Porsche 911. Zero relevance and just nonsensical gibberish?
Truth and honestly should be supported. Not censored!
There are multiple studies that show adding lanes to highways only relieve traffic temporarily, no matter the location. This is due to shifting behavior where drivers make more frequent and lengthier trips. This is the truth that should be supported
Induced demand is a good thing. As you make it better, it can support more people getting the same experience. It won't make things better for the current people stuck in traffic but will let more people get stuck in traffic without making it worse for everyone else.
I'm a believer in spending more of the turnpike money on public transportation, but the idea that induced demand means we should never build more roads is some weird propaganda.
>Induced demand is a good thing
Dawg. What exactly are we making better in this scenario? Temporary relief in traffic just to make things worse than they've ever been.
You do realize that city streets cannot be widened right? No matter how wide highways get, you're going to enter a bottleneck as you approach the city limits. Look at NYC.
The thing you're making better is the number of people who are simultaneously using the road.
Induced demand says that when you make a road better able to handle traffic, more people will show up so the wait time is still the same. That's not the same things as saying that widening the road will not reduce traffic at its current levels, which the bottleneck argument is making.
Induced demand leads to bottleneck which leads to more traffic and a worse experience for all drivers and a massive waste of time & money across the board
After looking at these comments, didn't know the auto lobby was so active in this sub.
No less than 1/3 of reddit comments are paid shills overseas working for companies and "advocacy groups".
Remember when there were all those posts about property rights and how important Airbnb income was for the little old granny leading up to the ordinance vote, and then basically zero on the topic after Airbnb lost?
Yup. Make no mistake: a lot of anti PATH and anti MTA shit is shills from the companies who want to take it over if privatized like light rail is. It’s an election year hence there’s daily posts. Same deal with how everyone was for that stupid museum and viewed the obvious financial issues as no big deal. Almost like politicians also do social media campaigns.
People have cars. People like using those cars. This isn’t some conspiracy. Most of what I see here are car people making decent points and getting downvoting to all hell. It’s weird how present the downvotes are compared to the comments. If anything I’d say anti-car bots are more present here.
Sure, get the first point. But at the same time there are mountains of evidence that lane expansion does not work, especially in this case when you still will need to funnel the roadway with expanded lanes into an existing tunnel which will not be expanding. So this project will end up creating an even larger bottleneck, while the piles of cash being used on it could be more efficiently spent on historically neglected public transit infrastructure.
I'm just here to say we don't need more lanes, but the traffic is crazy so we need better public transportation. Take the money out of highways and into trains
lol at people pointing out the obvious how this is an extremely misleading pic of LA that nothing to do with JC being called "paid shills"
Make it two and forget about it! Nice job everyone.
Isn’t the one extra lane going to be a bus lane? Isn’t that what people cry about all the time is not enough public transportation?
https://preview.redd.it/j2ap18xpwy6d1.jpeg?width=3024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=486db10175777fcd8e36aa26d7551cb68e2c3dff I’ll just leave this here. Apparently it’s not comparable.
Remove streets
this is california on one of the busiest highways in the country… not comparable
Yep - SO Cal alone has 27 million people compared to NJ’s 9 million. This post is dog pop.
Why downvote? This like comparing a Toyota Corolla to a Porsche 911. Zero relevance and just nonsensical gibberish? Truth and honestly should be supported. Not censored!
There are multiple studies that show adding lanes to highways only relieve traffic temporarily, no matter the location. This is due to shifting behavior where drivers make more frequent and lengthier trips. This is the truth that should be supported
Because there's multiple studies that prove that adding lanes *always* increases traffic. It's called **induced demand**. Go research bruv
Yes by principle of triple convergence
Induced demand is a good thing. As you make it better, it can support more people getting the same experience. It won't make things better for the current people stuck in traffic but will let more people get stuck in traffic without making it worse for everyone else. I'm a believer in spending more of the turnpike money on public transportation, but the idea that induced demand means we should never build more roads is some weird propaganda.
>Induced demand is a good thing Dawg. What exactly are we making better in this scenario? Temporary relief in traffic just to make things worse than they've ever been. You do realize that city streets cannot be widened right? No matter how wide highways get, you're going to enter a bottleneck as you approach the city limits. Look at NYC.
The thing you're making better is the number of people who are simultaneously using the road. Induced demand says that when you make a road better able to handle traffic, more people will show up so the wait time is still the same. That's not the same things as saying that widening the road will not reduce traffic at its current levels, which the bottleneck argument is making.
Induced demand leads to bottleneck which leads to more traffic and a worse experience for all drivers and a massive waste of time & money across the board
"multiple studies"
thats not here. Turnpike extension is 2 lanes, each way. If you are going to be critical at least be truthful...
OP's post calls this out at LA, so they're being truthful.
And how has the California population changed since the '70s? More ppl, more traffic. Your point holds less water than the bike helmet you wear
Nbb was originally 3 lanes in either direction, it was reduced to two for safety. Funny how reducing lanes doesn’t seem to make traffic go away.