Increasing traffic congestion

[Kane]

According to a report on CNN, "Fifty-six percent [of Americans polled] said they would be willing to pay higher taxes if that would lead to significant improvements in roads and public transportation in their area."

Now, given that 56% of them would object the minute their taxes were actually raised, how should increasing traffic congestion be addressed? [My obvious predicition is that private car ownership and use will continue to increase worldwide.]

To me, it seems the obvious answer is more public transport, but many Americans seem opposed to that on theological grounds. I am also against too much privatisation: a proliferation of toll roads to wealthy areas is not the answer. Also, existing roads were paid for from public monies, and should not be given to corporations to run (for a profit).

How can congestion be limited? Here are some ideas, More/better public transportation, Privatise!, Steep(er) gasoline/petrol tax, Ban/limit cars from cities, Get an XM radio to pass the time, or maybe somthing else.

 

[RandomPhantom700]

I like the idea of improving and increasing public transport, and would be willing to pay higher taxes for it, assuming of course that that's where my money actually goes.

Increasing the price of gas and limiting/banning cars sounds like a discrimination issue waiting to happen; at any rate, as much as they may ***** about it, most people will still pay the gas in order to get where they need to go.

So that's what I think.

 

[Gary Crawford]

I think it would be best if those who dislike congestion move to where there is less congestion,like Kansas,Iowa,Montana,ect.There is plenty of room on this planet to grow.

 

[rmcrobertson]

Ah yes, the dream of endless and unchecked growth.

Entrance ramps and strip malls everywhere, sea to shining. Oh good; let's see if we can't screw up EVERYTHING.

Incidentally, building freeways causes increased trafic jams.

 

[Cruentus]

Ah yes, the dream of endless and unchecked growth.

Entrance ramps and strip malls everywhere, sea to shining. Oh good; let's see if we can't screw up EVERYTHING.

Incidentally, building freeways causes increased trafic jams.

I think we need to build smart, not more. Building smart is the key to less traffic, building more w/o being smart does cause increased traffic jams, longer commutes, etc.

 

[theletch1]

Building smarter is most definetly the way to go. When I-81 was put together the estimation was that only 25% or so of the traffic on the interstate would be truck traffic. It is already up to about 65% truck traffic and more trucks are hitting the road everyday. The larger the population the more goods need to be trucked, the more trucks are needed etc, etc. Plan for rush hour and truck traffic and plan BIG.

 

[Rich Parsons]

I think we need to build smart, not more. Building smart is the key to less traffic, building more w/o being smart does cause increased traffic jams, longer commutes, etc.

Yes, when the engineers design to save money, like building a two lane road and not allowing for a four or five lane in the future wth growth. As well as the left exits on expressways that cause congestion, to save on bridges when they were built, due to low traffic volume. The urban sprawls that build a thousand houses and do not plan for traffic, or other issues like sewers and water, that cost money.

Taxi's and subways seem to work on the east coast were everything is so tight and congested anyways, that they have built up, as well as out to some extent. With just the sprawl efficient and cost effective mass transportation usually is buses, and routes, that support them. So why send a bus route out to a neighborhood that has an average of 2.5 cars per house hold, as it would not be cost effective. Yet, starting somewhere is a good plan, just think of the future.

 

[rmcrobertson]

Sorry, not what I meant. I meant that not only can you NOT build your way out of congestion, building freeways actively causes more congestion.

It's insane. We need to a) cut our population; b) quit building cities that endlessly sprawl in the name of some twisted notion of freedom and the endless frontier; c) ban SUVs, and any other car that gets less than 25 MPG on the highway; d) build public transportation like crazy. It's not going to happen.

I live in SoCal. They DO, "plan big." Guess what the result has been?

 

[Rich Parsons]

Sorry, not what I meant. I meant that not only can you NOT build your way out of congestion, building freeways actively causes more congestion.

It's insane. We need to a) cut our population; b) quit building cities that endlessly sprawl in the name of some twisted notion of freedom and the endless frontier; c) ban SUVs, and any other car that gets less than 25 MPG on the highway; d) build public transportation like crazy. It's not going to happen.

I live in SoCal. They DO, "plan big." Guess what the result has been?

If you build it they will come?

 

[Phoenix44]

Improving public transportation, and making it less costly would help. I also believe improving the job market would help. I would SO prefer not to drive 25 miles to work every day.

 

[MA-Caver]

Well, after reading all of that... my only question is.. how come you guys aren't the politicians sitting up on the (Captial) hills? Probably because you're not like what John Lennon sang...(Fool on the Hill).
Politicians, city engineers/planners go and build/plan aribtrarily without giving real thought and consideration to what the public wants/needs. Oh sure they have their little open city council meetings, they poll the voters, they go out and listen to the voters and bla bla bla BLA BLA :barf: . Who are they really listening to? The guys who are taking bribes from private contractors at the DOT, and so forth... (the list is endless).
So who's fault is it? :idunno:
OURS. :xtrmshock Yeah, because we talk about it but don't actually vote these S.O.B's out of office when they're not getting their jobs done. (Politicians voice: oh but it takes time to get things done...Me: what, FOUR years and that's not enough time??? Oh excuse me I forgot to tell you the Rolls Royce dealer called said that they were able to order the deluxe leather seat edition for your new car...just hope you can make the payments huh? )
They don't fire the city engineers who spend thousands of dollars on useless and prolonged city "surveys" and studies and planning and organization and all of that. Because after all of that studying... we still got congestion and problems and so on.
Me thinks they're waiting for the checks to clear is all.

There is going to be :EG: corruption where-ever there is power, but "We the people" have the ability to control it as guaranteed by the same document that puts these idjits in office in the first place, the same document(s) that allows discussions like these to go on without censorship.
We need to start VOTING smarter for our respective cities and our country.

 

[Nightingale]

I use public transportation daily, and have for the last several years.

Metrolink is a great option... no sitting in traffic, cuts my commute time in half, and I get to do something relaxing like read a newspaper.

In about 5 weeks, I'll be quitting work to start law school. I live five minutes from the school, and will be taking surface streets and won't be clogging up the freeways.

Life's too short to sit in traffic!

 

[Phoenix44]

Well, after reading all of that... my only question is.. how come you guys aren't the politicians sitting up on the (Captial) hills?

Because we're not rich and we're not corrupt. And with all the events I've been reading about, I've come to the conclusion that THAT is what it takes.

 

[RandomPhantom700]

In about 5 weeks, I'll be quitting work to start law school. I live five minutes from the school, and will be taking surface streets and won't be clogging up the freeways.

Greetings, fellow new law student. I, unfortunately, don't live as close to the law school, and will have to drive.

 

[RandomPhantom700]

It's insane. We need to a) cut our population...

Got two question on this. First: by what means? Second, which particular group of our population, if any, would you deem needed to cut?

 

[Spud]

<>Couple of observations from an engineer working in highway transportation:

If you build it, they will come; is pretty much a truth. Extra lanes and capacity are a short-term fix that generally results in more user trips gobbling up the extra capacity in short order.

<>The engineers aren’t the ones calling the shots. The technical people can generate piles of reports showing the construction, right of way, maintenance and user costs (public stuck in non-flowing traffic), but the selection of alternatives and prioritizing of projects is generally left to elected officials or political appointees.

Our society has embraced the auto as a means of social mobility and what was once a luxury is now a necessity. As a kid, I went to little league games on my bike, walked to school and rode my bike to friends. Now kids have soccer leagues across town, and are dropped off to friends and school in an auto. As an adult, I have two martial arts schools within walking distance of my home, but have chosen to drive 20 minutes each way to train at another dojo.

My preferred solution is $6/gallon gas - then people will prioritize their car trips and consider returning to alternative transportation. [font=&quot]
[/font]

 

[Nightingale]

the other problem is that it's perceived as not safe to just let kids roam all over the neighborhood anymore. Mom and dad want to see them safely to their destination.

 

[MA-Caver]

Got two question on this. First: by what means? Second, which particular group of our population, if any, would you deem needed to cut?

Well, we could follow the suggestion of William Shakespeare but that would not be beneficial to you now would it. :uhyeah: (just kidding)
Cutting the population is NOT the answer. We're going to populate whether it's good or bad no matter what. Besides we cut the population down well enough already... called Wars, and pretty soon it's going to be from chemical and biological wars if we don't stop what we're doing. :angry: Those will trim our world population pretty good.
Can you imagine the world's population if we didn't have any wars at all. I mean think about all the "survivors" and think about the number of children they "would've" had and then think of the number of children they would've had. Talk about congestion. :uhyeah:

 

[rmcrobertson]

We do not have to endlessly crank out kids, since (among other things) poverty and educational level correlate very highly with family size. We do not have to build endless, mindless shopping malls and highways and housing developments and Taco Bells and all the rest of the crap. We choose to, collectively. And market forces drive it all.

We could junk the big cars, pay the taxes we should be paying, educate people decently, do something about the ridiculous fantasy that if you just accumulate enough worthless stuff--including cars--you'll be happy.

We could, in ther words, grow up.

As far as I'm concerned, the endless freeway construction is just a bigger, uglier, more-dangerous version of little boys playing with Tonka trucks in a sand-box.

 

[Tgace]

Heck worked for the Chinese right??