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
[–] 10 points 3 months ago (6 children)

So, basically, you're living in a geographic area that's incompatible with your lifestyle, and it only works with taxpayer subsidies for the roads.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (4 children)

    Nah, lifestyle is well suited to the area.

    We have roads here older than every American country and traditions even older.

    The land and the people are one.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    Then get rid of everything with an internal combustion engine and live like your ancestors did on that land, don't expect modernity to be delivered to you by truck while you live your stupid medieval peasant fantasy

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Yeah we don't have trucks here. Except for a few industrial people so you're not making sense.

    Hands up anyone who thinks my ancestors had public transport?!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 3 months ago

    If you didn't pay for roads, but you wanted public transit, I don't see how that works.

    There's plenty of room to improve cities without having to bemoan that rural people are living wrong. About the only place I could see is making rural people switch over to intra-city transit instead of trying to have the cars wiork to get within a block of any given destination. That's probably about as far I think to inconvenience rural people to meaningfully improve things.

    Mass transit is only efficient if you have a density of people going the same way at the same time. A bus is only better when you have significant occupancy, and that's not going to happen in very low density living.

  • source
  • parent