Re:Californians may tax the rich more to subsidise electric ...
by BlargMcLarg on Tuesday October 18, 2022 @01:00PM
(#33250501)
>The problem for us seems to be cultural, we consider public transit to be a form a welfare rather than actual public infrastructure.
This is true practically everywhere bar a few select cities and megapolises. Doubly so if you have to get on at a stop which is dirty, dark and crowded. General exceptions include lack of parking and knowing you'll drink at the venue.
The Dutch ain't doing it because Utrecht Central looks swell with all the cigarette butts everywhere.
Re:Californians may tax the rich more to subsidise electric ...
by CalRobert on Tuesday October 18, 2022 @02:48PM
(#33252078)
In what sense? Utrecht Centraal was splendid last time I was there, and Utrecht in general was fantastic.
Re:Californians may tax the rich more to subsidise electric ...
by BlargMcLarg on Wednesday October 19, 2022 @06:44AM
(#33260175)
Look at the ground near the bus stations next time. I can't make it any more obvious than that.
And anytime we do build a mixed use development, we make sure that it's marked as "trendy" and "hip", as to not give the impression that this should be a normal mode of development. Anytime a development like this goes up, property prices around the development are out of reach to working class families and that even further drives the point home that this is not a normal mode of development, rather a playground for the wealthy (and you're going to need a car to get there if you don't live in the million dollar townhomes around the corner).
When these mixed use developments do go up, American's are amazed by the walkability and livability. News outlets do puff pieces on these new developments and everyone is happy about it, then when it's time to do more development around the city we go back to the old ways of segregating everything to the nth degree.
[1]: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0intLFzLaudFG-xAvUEO-A