Chat Forum
Car/Bus/Bike poster
-
Posted 7 months ago #
-
Not sure of the point of it really...
Why is it zoomed in on the cars pic? what if there was 5 people in each car? and only 1 person on the bus cos it's too expensive?
Posted 7 months ago # -
You can get 5 people in a car = 12 cars??
Posted 7 months ago # -
I'd say 2 per car was high for most journeys, especially urban commutes. Agree that busses are way to expensive, though. I suppose if more poeple used them the price could come down and they could offer more useful services but its a catch 22.
Posted 7 months ago # -
You can get 5 people in a car. But a quick look through the windscreens of 95% of cars in rush hour traffic suggests we rarely do. One person, one car is closer to the mark. And rush hour buses are generally heaving.
Good poster, I like it.
Posted 7 months ago # -
Zoomed in factor is the first thing everyone I know has noticed so far - obviously looks like they're trying to make it look worse, rather than just letting it speak for itself.
Posted 7 months ago # -
You can get 5 people on a bike = 12 bikes?
How long before HOV cycle lanes in thatLondon?
Seriously though, car, bus or bike, how many of the journeys could have been done on foot? I know quite a few of mine can when I use a bike.
Posted 7 months ago # -
More often than not, if there is more than one person in the car it's most likely sprogs and or spouse .... which can also mean double the journeys (drop off, drive back, drive back, pick up).
Posted 7 months ago # -
There is a MUCH better version of this at: http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/wiki/Highway_robbery
Posted 7 months ago # -
Agree, much better.
I reckon the real question is how much is it costing us to provide facilities for cars in our cities. The hidden extra tax to provide space for cars.
Look at a photo from the 50s and there was hardly a car to be seen in suburban streets, yet people still managed to get around. Of course much has changed since then, most facilities have been centralised and small local schools etc phased out. A bit hard to turn back time.
But why do cars have to have the best bits of our city centres?
Posted 7 months ago # -
But why do cars have to have the best bits of our city centres?
Agreed. I think it's a travesty how much our built environment has been turned over to the car.
Posted 7 months ago # -
It all started to go down hill when people started to think they were too good for buses.
Posted 7 months ago # -
Wasn't the problem more to do with buses getting too scummy for people?
Posted 7 months ago # -
Wasnt it thatcher who said if you get to 30m and havent got a car, youre a failure, now im just past that age and i want a bus.
Posted 7 months ago # -
Wasn't the problem more to do with buses getting too scummy for people?
Buses round here (Sheffield) are pretty good to be fair. Low floor, comfy seats, quiet. The new ones even have Wifi.
Posted 7 months ago # -
The new ones even have Wifi.
Ah, that must justify charging 6quid for a 3 mile journey.
Posted 7 months ago # -
From the GrahamS link
We are told that congestion is due to bus lanes, cyclists, pedestrians and lorries taking up the roadI've never heard that!
Posted 7 months ago # -
Wasn't congestion down to the fact we have not yet replaced all roads and streets with 6-lane hyperways?
I'm all for the bus/bike principle, but there is no way I'm getting that close to fellow cycle commuters - frikkin erratic! At least the cars are usually stationary
Posted 7 months ago # -
Ah, that must justify charging 6quid for a 3 mile journey.
I don't know what a single journey costs. I just get a day rider for £3.70 and use the buses and trams to my hearts' content.
But mostly I ride the bike.
Posted 7 months ago # -
> We are told that congestion is due to bus lanes, cyclists, pedestrians and lorries taking up the road
I've never heard that!
I need to introduce you to my father-in-law then
Posted 7 months ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
