Quote:
Originally Posted by Muji
I hardly think that these maps can be taken as a literal illustration of the comparative advantage of car travel, as the article implies. This would only be true under the assumption that each person travels to every area of his city with equal probability; however, this is almost never true. For any of those maps, I'm sure that most of the red areas are unlikely destinations to begin with. For example, the average Philadelphian is much more likely to be traveling to Center City than to the Northeast or Southwest Philadelphia. The fact that a car will get you somewhere the fastest is meaningless if you wouldn't go there anyway.
|
Agreed.
Analysis of information concerning movement is "viewed from above, down" at a 2 dimensional map where movement is confined to defined space.
The easiest way to get information is through data mining, however, data mining is limited by the availability of research material at what cost, and, by the amount of material that is unavailable to the person data mining, due to user costs, firewalls and passwords.
Cars provide freedom of movement unequaled in human history. For the first and only time in human history masses of people have the freedom to choose where they wish to go in real time ("Do I want to go here, nah!")
Cars (almost always) provide protection from the weather.
Cars provide the maximum transportation freedom for the physically handicapped.
Cars provide many of the elderly with mobility in excess of 100 meters.
Cars provide private places to talk to lovers, friends, children, and, spouses.
Cars provide small groups of people with a shared intimacy. Think vacations with the family.
These truths are undeniable.
The issue, IMO, over the next couple of decades will be that a significant portion of the population of adults will not be able to afford to drive cars. I believe that the PERCENTAGE of the population who will not be able afford to drive a car might double or even triple by 2035.
While that statement sounds threatening, the percent of people who will use cars will still be close to 70% of those who are of age and healthy enough to drive.
Will the new users like having to use public transportation? Most will not like the change, and very likely will be ashamed for months about HAVING to use buses, and steel rail public transportation.
The vast majority of those who have grown up with and around private automobiles will never WANT to stand in a crowded vehicle, smell people they would rather not, and, avoid eye contact.
I just believe that this change in the US transportation mix is inevitable as a result of fundamental changes that continue in the Nation's economy
How soon will related Black Swans hit? How much damage will occur to the economy as a result is anyone's a guess. However, too much information defining debt service risk is being published to believe a serious reduction in the wealth of most people will NOT occur. Such reductions will force people to drive less, or not at all, when the choice is between driving and food. Most people would rather eat well, and, drive less than almost starve and drive cars. (even at $10.00 lb of 95% lean, not driving a car could buy a lot of higher quality hamburger per month.)
I therefore believe that the US really has no choice, but to deal with a weaker economy and become less POV dependent. What we will build will steadily become more efficient, less dramatic, and more Spartan than similar facilities being built outside the US.
Hopefully, we will not have to use a laser transit and straight line demolish after acquiring property via imminent domain. All depends on how long before we react with purpose.
Nothing idealist about it.
Prev
or any member of my family being injured in a car accident (number one cause of death for toddlers)
Linear Mode
