CombatWombatEsq@lemmy.world to Fuck Cars@lemmy.worldEnglish · 9 months agoIt’s time to ban ‘right-on-red’www.fastcompany.comexternal-linkmessage-square226fedilinkarrow-up1320arrow-down1160
arrow-up1160arrow-down1external-linkIt’s time to ban ‘right-on-red’www.fastcompany.comCombatWombatEsq@lemmy.world to Fuck Cars@lemmy.worldEnglish · 9 months agomessage-square226fedilink
minus-squareAA5B@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up15arrow-down7·9 months agoPersonally I do think that’s the real reason behind right on red: saving money for towns who don’t want to invest in more complicated traffic lights. Trading increased injuries for saving a little money
minus-squarejerkfacelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up10arrow-down1·9 months agoIt costs nothing to make people wait for a green.
minus-squareduffman@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2arrow-down5·9 months agoYou just listed the cost. Time. Another is reduced thouroughput/increased traffic.
minus-squarejerkfacelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up6·edit-29 months agoDude. Fucking context: saving money for towns who don’t want to invest in more complicated traffic lights
minus-squareFredthefishlord@lemmy.blahaj.zonelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·9 months agoIt’ll cost them the election, that’s what
Personally I do think that’s the real reason behind right on red: saving money for towns who don’t want to invest in more complicated traffic lights. Trading increased injuries for saving a little money
It costs nothing to make people wait for a green.
You just listed the cost. Time. Another is reduced thouroughput/increased traffic.
Dude. Fucking context:
It’ll cost them the election, that’s what