Image transcript:

Calvin (from Calvin & Hobbes) sitting at a lemonade stand, smiling, with a sign that reads, “Trains and micromobility are inevitably the future of urban transportation, whether society wants it or not. CHANGE MY MIND.”

  • Beliriel@lemmy.worldEnglish
    42·
    1 year ago

    What needs to happen first is fuel price needs to be so high that people are incentivized to

    a) switch to public transit no matter how shitty it is because they just can’t afford a car anymore
    b) start public transit companies because there is money to be made and the oil lobbies don’t have enough money anymore to lobby effectively

    My guess is before 2050 nobody will really get anything done because the oil lobby is just too powerful. Would be great though.

    • Olgratin_Magmatoe@startrek.websiteEnglish
      5·
      1 year ago

      What needs to happen first is fuel price needs to be so high that people are incentivized to

      Absolutely. The fossil fuel industry recieves billions upon billions of dollars in subsidies every year. Why in the actual fuck are we still paying for something that is actively killing us? It makes no sense. All of the subsidies to fossil fuels needs to be re-routed towards public transportation and green energy.

    • triplenadir@lemmygrad.mlEnglish
      2·
      1 year ago

      making consumables more expensive just makes them cheaper for the rich. poor people in areas with inadequate public transit will largely just keep driving and become poorer (maybe some of them will switch to the inadequate public transit, then they’ll be even poorer, and it likely won’t improve the transit systems either).

      tax the rich in proportion to their wealth., spend it on better public interest transport infrastructure

      • Beliriel@lemmy.worldEnglish
        11·
        1 year ago

        Those markets can’t run on the rich alone. And yeah it will make rural poor people poorer. That’s actually also the goal. Urban sprawl should be stopped. Why do people need to build houses and villages out in bumfuck nowhere and then complain when amenities and authorties are shitty out there? These people should imo be forced to make a hard decision because if they can’t afford gas anymore they will move closer to a city since the move is more affordable than paying for gas. Hence prevention of sprawl and reducing of gas use. The only people that can stay are the ones that a) are rich and b) require it for their work (e.g. farmers) or c) ones that can work locally without driving around.

        • triplenadir@lemmygrad.mlEnglish
          1·
          1 year ago

          I totally agree that urban sprawl sucks, and should be stopped. a much more direct and fair way to do this would be to remove zoning restrictions that only allow building single family homes (instead of any higher-density housing) in most urban parts of north america, and remove minimum parking requirements for businesses – and hope that the cultural shift propagates to other places where these car-dependent designs have taken hold.

          secondly, calling people needing transport a “market” seems like part of the same faulty thinking where public services need to turn a profit. taxing the rich could absolutely pay for a lot more public transport: before the Beeching cuts in the 1960s, the UK had around twice as many passenger railway lines – this was also at a time when the top rate of income tax there was 83%, as opposed to 45% now.

          lastly, maybe think about who rich people exploited in order to get their (your?) money before proposing policies that explicitly aim to make poor people poorer, while letting the rich continue to live where they (you?) please