Nobody is saying you can’t have a car as a person not living in a city, we are talking about how cities don’t need to be filled with cars if cities were filled with decent public infrastructure.
And if you don’t live in a city and don’t plan on going to a city why does it even concern you if cars get banned from cities?
And if you don’t live in a city and don’t plan on going to a city why does it even concern you if cars get banned from cities?
Because mayor cities are not an entity that live in a isolated system.
I may not need to go to the city every day, but maybe I need to go every now and then. If you ban cars in a city, I am hit too the moment I could need to go to the city for whatever reason (parents, medics, whatever)
What they are usually doing though, it is not banning the cars from the cities but simply banning the car from outside entering the city, without improving the public transportation system (sometimes making it worse).
So we agree banning cars from.cities is good when the public infrastructure is put in place. Also it’s not like all cars have to be banned fully, make a toll for cars to enter or limit where they can go.
So we agree banning cars from.cities is good when the public infrastructure is put in place.
No, we do not agree. A ban is stupid even when there is a decent public infrastructure.
What is needed is to have a public transportation system so good that people do not want to use the car.
Also it’s not like all cars have to be banned fully, make a toll for cars to enter or limit where they can go.
Here they did it.
There are just two results: the problem just moved to the suburbs since the public transportation still cannot replace the private cars and people just changed their habits so they enter the city before the toll’s time start and exit after the toll’s time end.
Both for a number of reasons but principally because if you need to move around outside rush hours the car is still the best choice, time wyse.
Nobody is saying you can’t have a car as a person not living in a city, we are talking about how cities don’t need to be filled with cars if cities were filled with decent public infrastructure.
And if you don’t live in a city and don’t plan on going to a city why does it even concern you if cars get banned from cities?
Because mayor cities are not an entity that live in a isolated system.
I may not need to go to the city every day, but maybe I need to go every now and then. If you ban cars in a city, I am hit too the moment I could need to go to the city for whatever reason (parents, medics, whatever)
What they are usually doing though, it is not banning the cars from the cities but simply banning the car from outside entering the city, without improving the public transportation system (sometimes making it worse).
So we agree banning cars from.cities is good when the public infrastructure is put in place. Also it’s not like all cars have to be banned fully, make a toll for cars to enter or limit where they can go.
No, we do not agree. A ban is stupid even when there is a decent public infrastructure.
What is needed is to have a public transportation system so good that people do not want to use the car.
Here they did it.
There are just two results: the problem just moved to the suburbs since the public transportation still cannot replace the private cars and people just changed their habits so they enter the city before the toll’s time start and exit after the toll’s time end.
Both for a number of reasons but principally because if you need to move around outside rush hours the car is still the best choice, time wyse.