But why must the people undergo that financial crunch when we know by the numbers that transit is just more effecient economically and environmentally? Its just kicking the can of car dependancy down the road with greenwashing and small improvements along the way.
Sounds like it’s time to start building infrastructure for public transit so that 2035 doesn’t hit like a lead brick. Except of course this will last all of about five seconds after the first Con government gets voted in.
And? The people who don’t live there need cars. It’s the people (a.k.a. vast majority) who live in cities that should have the public transit infrastructure.
I’m baffled why this needs to be explained to you.
Because your whole argument ignores reality. Any politician who makes some drastic change will get voted out and someone who will undo any made progress will be voted in.
Countries in Europe didn’t magically flick a switch and get good public transit. Their whole societies have been shaped since pre-world war 2 to where their populace is on board. Incremental change for 70 odd years was needed. They also didn’t have their whole train network get bought and destroyed in the 40s and 50s.
Your opinions are valid and stupid at the same time. Nobody is going to argue that public transit is bad, it’s just completely unfeasible in a lot of places without a lot of incremental change first. Nothing of this scale happens without buy in from the larger population.
But why must the people undergo that financial crunch when we know by the numbers that transit is just more effecient economically and environmentally? Its just kicking the can of car dependancy down the road with greenwashing and small improvements along the way.
Much of the country does not have access to any meaningful public transit.
Sounds like it’s time to start building infrastructure for public transit so that 2035 doesn’t hit like a lead brick. Except of course this will last all of about five seconds after the first Con government gets voted in.
Not everyone lives in metropolis areas.
And? The people who don’t live there need cars. It’s the people (a.k.a. vast majority) who live in cities that should have the public transit infrastructure.
I’m baffled why this needs to be explained to you.
Because your whole argument ignores reality. Any politician who makes some drastic change will get voted out and someone who will undo any made progress will be voted in.
Countries in Europe didn’t magically flick a switch and get good public transit. Their whole societies have been shaped since pre-world war 2 to where their populace is on board. Incremental change for 70 odd years was needed. They also didn’t have their whole train network get bought and destroyed in the 40s and 50s.
Your opinions are valid and stupid at the same time. Nobody is going to argue that public transit is bad, it’s just completely unfeasible in a lot of places without a lot of incremental change first. Nothing of this scale happens without buy in from the larger population.