this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2026
57 points (90.1% liked)

Fuck Cars

16356 readers
293 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

No. No you do not. You need to force your local governments to campaign for better public transport and infrastructure.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] OwOarchist@pawb.social 6 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Even within a city, bus travel is usually much slower than a car. Because you have to wait to get on the bus, and then the bus is making many stops along the way to load and unload. And it probably also isn't going directly to where you need to go and probably doesn't stop directly in front of where you live, so you need to add walking/bike riding to the beginning and end of the trip.

I'm a big proponent of bus travel, but let's not kid ourselves here -- choosing the bus can easily make a 30 minute car ride into a 2 hour bus ride overall.

[–] Jiral@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

That's because you compare both in a car oriented setting. In a public transit oriented setting you won't be faster by car.

Are you also saying that walking and cycling in a city is impossible and cuicidal because you judge it also based on a car oriented city?

A city designed for PT can be much more compact. A city designed for cars has to be much more bloated. What you are faster by car you have to drive further.

[–] kkj@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)
  • Walking can take you nearly anywhere, but it's slow
  • Biking can take you somewhat fewer places and is faster
  • Driving further restricts your access and improves speed
  • Buses restrict your access again, but without improving speed. They have other benefits, but if your only concerns are versatility and speed, they aren't in the natural progression.
  • Trains, however, can be a lot faster than cars, at the usual cost of going fewer places.

The solution, as it often is, is to use more trains. Also, walking and bike tunnels. Weather is often a reason why I don't walk or bike.

[–] Jiral@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

The solution is a cohesive well integrated system, of a mix of modes (local/ mid range/ rapid backbone) in a city that is optimised for public transit, cycling and walking. Buses have their place in that, so do trams, light rail and heavy metro and heavy rail.