Quote:
Originally Posted by plutonicpanda
Okay and I not anti-rail, I am against rail culture/rail dependency. See how that works?
I want a more balanced transportation network and yes that still includes freeways which I believe and support will always make of the largest share of commuting modes-- the automobile. Just because I support that doesn't make me anti-rail and that is the same thing as me accusing you of being anti-car because you support rail. You are holding me to a double standard.
I don't know where you live, but in the United States, infrastructure is paid for with taxes for the most part. PPP's are becoming more prevalent as well. Given that car drivers make up for the majority of commuters, please explain to me who pays for freeways?
|
I'm from Canada.
You want a more balanced transportation network? In the US and Canada, the system is already completely unbalanced towards the automobile, in terms of investment and mode share.
You probably believe freeways will always make the largest share of commuting modes because it's the only true way of getting around in the country where you grew up. But countries where the majority of people actually like to think outside the box and are concerned about socio-environmental issues know this isn't the way it should work, and they're acting on it.
Sure, there will always be people commuting by car and that's fine. Eventually, some car externalities will go away (such as CO2 emissions and air pollution) but that will take a lot of time. In the meantime, we cannot keep encouraging a culture which has contributed so much to global warming and the destruction of natural habitats.
I'm going to stop the argument here because you choose to answer to certain points and leave some others unanswered on purpose (such as the externalities of car culture). Plus, there are things you simply don't (or won't) understand (such as the financing inequality between road and transit infrastructure) so the discussion is going around in circles. I won't waste my time.