Highway spending increased by 90% in 2021. This is one of many reasons why car traffic is growing faster than population growth.

  • copd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Why are the cars spaced but the walking humans not?

    • BlackDragon@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      2 months ago

      Uh, they’re not? The cars are in fact much closer to one another than they could possibly be while moving at speed. They would only get this close to one another during a traffic jam. On the other hand, the walkers are entirely capable of moving in exactly the way they are pictured.

      • copd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        I understand your argument but there is a clear bias here. Unless youre in an exceptionally denly populated area, people dont travel this close to one another. Most leave at least 1-2 humans gap between eachother, especially if there are wheelchairs, kids and prams involved.

        Thats all my argument was, the cars are spaced out per lane (albiet bumper to bumper) but the side to side space is not consistent with the walkers. You could fit cars in between the cars with how they are spaced in that pic. I live in a victorian town where the roads force you to drive wingmirror to wingmirror

        Im on the fuckcars space here, trust me I agree cars need to be phased out/down but thats no excuse for bias in data

        • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          That and the fact that cars have a much bigger distance radius. So everything can be spaced out more.

          15 minute walkable cities are cool. But lets not pretend like you can’t drive 2 towns over in 15 minutes by car to reach what you need.

          Fuck cars, but that isn’t really an argument.

          • copd@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            I completely agree, i live in a city where i can get everything within 15-20min walk. But unfortunately there are about 50-100 people within 25m of my living room at all times and i would rather have some space

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      If you’ve ever tried to drive a car you’ll discover that you need to keep a relatively large distance between other cars, particularly when moving at high speeds in order to avoid crashes.

      By contrast, when you’re moving through a crowd, you can get practically on top of someone else without risk of bodily harm.

      • Wogi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Not me. I wear a Colin Furze style carrot slicer belt at all times. Watch a motherfucker try to ope right by me. Bitch gonna get cut.

      • copd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I understand your argument but there is a clear bias here. Unless youre in an exceptionally denly populated area, people dont travel this close to one another. Most leave at least 1-2 humans gap between eachother, especially if there are wheelchairs, kids and prams involved.

        Thats all my argument was, the cars are spaced out per lane (albiet bumper to bumper) but the side to side space is not consistent with the walkers. You could fit cars in between the cars with how they are spaced in that pic. I live in a victorian town where the roads force you to drive wingmirror to wingmirror

        Im on the fuckcars space here, trust me I agree cars need to be phased out/down but thats no excuse for bias in data

    • Nurgus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      The cars and walkers are both as close as they can safely be while moving?

    • ysjet@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      Not sure where you drive, but those cars aren’t spaced at all- they’re very close to bumper-to-bumper, which you can only do at extremely low speeds that unrealistic for travel. Meanwhile, the people that are bundled together ARE actually capable of moving like that, though the average american (who has a larger ‘personal bubble’ that other cultures) would probably not like it.

      Moreover, the car example could actually be worse than it appears- because they’re taking up all lanes of a road, so you’re assuming they’re coming AND going, which none of the other examples are assuming. If you did it properly, the line of cars would be two wide and twice as deep!

      • copd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        I understand your argument but there is a clear bias here. Unless youre in an exceptionally denly populated area, people dont travel this close to one another. Most leave at least 1-2 humans gap between eachother, especially if there are wheelchairs, kids and prams involved.

        Thats all my argument was, the cars are spaced out per lane (albiet bumper to bumper) but the side to side space is not consistent with the walkers. You could fit cars in between the cars with how they are spaced in that pic. I live in a victorian town where the roads force you to drive wingmirror to wingmirror

        Im on the fuckcars space here, trust me I agree cars need to be phased out/down but thats no excuse for bias in data

        • Ledivin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I understand your argument but there is a clear bias here.

          Welcome to fuckcars. Nobody is here to have an honest or productive discussion, this place only exists to let people vent.

          • copd@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Yeah tbh it’s a problem of mine, I expect too much from the average user.

            thanks for grounding me

    • joonazan@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      The car/bus comparison is useful, the others aren’t because they travel at different speeds.

      Probably walking can still move more people than cars. If walking is 5 kph and driving is 50, people need to take 10x less space to break even. They probably do, as cars need to keep distance.

      • Ephera@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Well, it’s still a useful comparison for cities. Good traffic planning brings people into the city center via rail and buses, and then they make sure the city center is walkable.

        That way, they can fit the most people into the city center, without it turning into a massive traffic jam.