[ SECRET POST #5888 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5888 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.




















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 41 secrets from Secret Submission Post #843.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: Fuck Elon Musk with a cactus

[(Anonymous)]

Why not?

Re: Fuck Elon Musk with a cactus

[(Anonymous)]

i think public transport is really great in situations where you can easily get to it and the area is safe. it works really well in large cities, european cities and densely populated areas. it does not work that well in suburban and rural areas or in dangerous areas where you can't travel by foot to the public transport station.

the thing about america is that it's large. if you don't live in a city, there's a lot of land between your home and your worksite, like 25+ miles of distance. public transport is not set up for that. and to install that level of public transport would cost trillions. it would also tear into the natural landscape (or what's left of it).

i think its definitely worth looking into for certain situations but we need a government that's going to invest in it and maintain it. they do a bad enough job maintaining existing public transport systems, roads and infrastructure, especially in poor areas.

i do hate elon musk tho and i think we can do much better than tesla/electric cars. i'd love to see a solar powered vehicle.

Re: Fuck Elon Musk with a cactus

[(Anonymous)]

No, transit doesn't work well for rural communities. But most Americans don't live in rural communities - American population is about 55% suburban, 30% urban, 15% rural.

And with suburban communities.... well, I think there absolutely are a lot of things that transit can accomplish in suburbs, even as it is. For instance, moving commuters from suburban areas into an urban core for weekdays is something that transit actually can do a very good job at, even with very far-flung sprawling residential suburbs. And even if not every suburban commuter can ride a train or bus in, it still takes cars off the road. That means less congestion for people who do drive, and less pollution. And far-flung residential sprawl isn't the only kind of suburban development - "suburbs" also includes denser, older suburban development in closer to the urban core, and those suburbs are *definitely* serviceable by transit. I'm also not sure I agree with the point about tearing into the natural landscape - it's not like road construction is environmentally friendly, particularly, and again driving is a lot more polluting than transit.

And even then, that's just thinking within the bounds of the existing structure of American metropolitan areas. There's also a lot we could do to change the way that suburbs work that would make it even easier for transit to be useful - for instance, thinking of suburbs more as satellite cities around transit hubs, with business and retail opportunities more distributed throughout the region instead of being so centralized. I mean, those kinds of changes make sense anyway - there are a lot of jobs where there really isn't any reason for people to drive into an office in the urban core every single day in the first place. And we can also do things to allow more people to live in the urban core rather than the suburbs in the first place if we want to.

Re: Fuck Elon Musk with a cactus

[(Anonymous)]

That 15% you want to ignore is still around 50 million people. I'm not saying you can't make long term plans for the country while ignoring a segment of it that's roughly the size of Spain, but it's dumb.

Re: Fuck Elon Musk with a cactus

[(Anonymous)]

A, they can just... keep living in rural areas? No one's suggesting that we tear up every rural highway

B, what's the level at which we're allowed to make changes in America to where 85% of the population isn't a sufficiently big chunk of the country to make improving their lives a worthwhile endeavor? Does it need to benefit 95% of the population? 99%?

Re: Fuck Elon Musk with a cactus

[(Anonymous)]

The rest of the thread has already covered why your "this benefits 85% of society!!" claim was bullshit even if you want to ignore the country's worth of people that you don't think are worth the effort. But keep beating that horse too.

Re: Fuck Elon Musk with a cactus

[(Anonymous)]

The rest of the thread has already covered why your "this benefits 85% of society!!" claim was bullshit

no it hasn't

even if you want to ignore the country's worth of people that you don't think are worth the effort.

????? i don't think they're not worth the effort. i agree with everyone else that emphasizing public transit over driving probably doesn't make sense in rural areas. so we should not emphasize it in rural areas, but we should emphasize it as much as possible in urban and suburban areas, in line with an overall goal of shifting as many journeys as possible from individual vehicle transport to public transport

for pete's sake

Re: Fuck Elon Musk with a cactus

[(Anonymous)]

ayrt (i'm from the uk)

most of the uk is simply not set up for public transport; sure, it's decent enough in london (which is why journalists constantly insist it's the greatest thing since sliced bread - because they're all based in london) but outside of the major cities (and even within most of them) it's a joke

take a route i used to do fairly often; hunstanton (small seaside town where i lived) to kings lynn (where everything worth paying attention to was; entertainment, employment, etc) in norfolk - a sixteen mile trip. the bus takes three times as long as driving because in order to make it a financially viable service - and to provide the service - it has to be a route for everyone and everywhere in between as well. increasing the service frequency (two per hour each way), speed and time range (7am to 10pm - if you need to get a bus for an early shift at the hospital then tough shit buddy) inevitably costs money, and they're struggling to maintain viability as it is

and that's just a short sixteen mile fifty minute journey; try going any further than that and it only gets worse (a museum trip from hunstanton to norwich by public transport, for instance, is a bus and two trains, taking three hours for a journey of forty-five miles (by road) and costing an absolute fortune)

this isn't a one-off; this situation recurs all over the country. there's constant talk of "why don't we have japanese-style bullet trains running the length of the uk", and the big reason is that a viable service in the uk can't make enough money running point to point over the distance that makes high speed worth it (look at the shambles that is hs2); everything has to stop everywhere to be a one-size-fits-all solution

factor in industrial action (some part of the train crew is always on strike), arbitrary delays due to (among other things) chavs stealing metals, covid, and the fact that you've still got to get from each end to your start and destination? doesn't matter how much money you throw at it, public transport will never be able to supplant private (especially if you happen to be carrying something bigger than a breadbox)