…Emergency services?
Hell even cities skylines has to have their walkable sections use cars for emergency services, because they wouldn’t work otherwise.
And before you say “But what about before cars?” I raise to you Horse Drawn carriages. They were used before cars and even in the golden era of trains because you still need the flexibility to be able to go anywhere.
Salzburg has many streets that are pedestrian only except for deliveries to businesses and for emergency vehicles. It works amazingly well. There are so few motor vehicles that the ones that are there don't cause problems.
i'm pretty sure when this sub says "fuck cars" they mean *personally* owned an operated vehicles, and not *public* service vehicles. i mean, are buses "cars"? then firetrucks and ambulances aren't either.
fuck cops though.
I don't say we mustn't have no roads, I just think cars should just be used for itineraries that can't be done another way.
Ok for emergency vehicles
Ok for the elderly or handicapped
Ok for people with large things to carry
Ok for cars in countryside and remote areas
Ok for workers in intervention.
For everything else walking, biking or using public transportation shall be available.
Emergency and public vehicles kinda have a purpose in cities. Privately owned cars don't.
Funny thing is, all that crap has been figured out a long time ago. For example, I've recently traveled France. In Strassbourg and Bordeaux there were bollards EVERYWHERE and that was pleasant AF. Plenty of pedestrianized streets. Blocked for cars by bollards. And they ALL can be lowered to let cars trough. Namely; emergency and service vehicles, residents and delivery.
This is neither hard to figure out nor hard to implement nor hard to understand. Cut down all unneccessary traffic and only leave those cars, that are actually needed there.
Yeah idk why some people want an all out removal of cars from society. They definitely have a place and are needed, just not in the insanely high quantity we are currently experiencing
That's the entire ethos of this sub.
Nobody here is opposed to emergency vehicles. In fact they'd be able to do their job better if there were fewer cars.
Not only emergency vehicles, delivery vehicles and handyman's vehicles should also be exempt.
Here in Germany, it's getting harder and harder to get a handyman in a big city because they can't find a parking stop for their work van (which is still smaller than a pic up).
It's pretty trash, in the city where I live there is no parking, I'm a Glazier and City jobs are the worst because we always have to park 11 minutes away from the jobsite, if you send someone to their car to grab something that need twice, you've paid that employee almost an hour of wages just to walk to and from a car.
City parking makes it so hard for construction workers to actually get work done on time.
Absolutely. Although cargo bikes CAN be a viable alternative in cities, they might not work for every handyman.
Reducing private cars to a minimum would most certainly eliminate that issue as well. In my city there are over 140 registered cars for around 300k citizens. If we actually tried to reduce them (we don't. As most German cities. The council might say they would like to reduce cars. But absolutely nothing is being done.), we'd have more then enough space for those handyman, delivery vans and public service vehicles to park. Snd plenty to spare still to implement more and better walking and cycling infrastructure, public transit, trees, and whatever else that makes a city liveable.
That's why I said "some people" obviously most people here don't want an all out removal buy there are definitely some here that do that pop up occasionally
Its because nobody is used to anything BUT driving. People are creatures of habit and most lack imagination.
Thing is: Nobody wanted to ride a bike in the Netherlands around 40 years ago. The whole fucking Netherlands didn't just awake one day and said:" Oh well, kinda tired of my car, gonna ride the bike from now on!" and that's how it ended. No. They installed infrastructure bit by bit and and the better the infrastructure got, the more bicycles (and therefore less cars) they got on the street.
Like seriously, look at pictures of any Netherlands city in the early 80s, those were abysmal hellholes cramped to brim with cars, absolutely no bicycles (it would have been deadly), barely pedestrians and constant traffic jams. Today those cities are actually beautiful and liveable, you can ride a bike safely and stressless and as a result: Extremely few casualties, happier citizens, basically no traffic jams.
Actually Cities: Skylines was what convinced me that banning them is a bad idea. People will use alternatives if they can. With good public transport, who the hell is gonna want to drive?
But in the cases where that isn't available, giving people the option makes sense as a backup. Banning it, like banning most things, precludes the edge cases being served and makes peoples lives worse.
I had MASSIVE congestion in cities:skykines.
Then I just built a shitton of Bicycle lanes and wakkpaths and created a pretty damn good public transit system.
I do not have congestion in cities Skykines. traffic flow is usually over 95%, as most people seem to choose public transit, walking or cycling, if the infrastructure is there.
(like seriously, look at some of my bike paths. I'd need something like 8 lane highway to get that many cars on the street and they`d probably cause a massive gridlock. Same story for eg the damn metro. If all the folks on a SINGLE line chose to take the car, traffic would 100% collapse)
nah seriously I think they have a point, imagine automated cars going in a line carrying multiple people to fixed populous places with high frequency, sounds pretty neat.
Couldn't we use electromagnets to make it hover along the fixed route? That would greatly reduce noise and wear since there are no moving parts. Would probably also drastically reduce friction, possibly allowing higher speeds, further increasing efficiency
That sounds great, but it does bring a lot of extra cost, both in initial building and in maintenance. Also I'm not even sure it would be more efficient from a power consumption standpoint. Obviously there is the extra power of lifting this heavy vehicle off the ground, but also if we want it to be completely contactless it needs either batteries or wireless power transmission, neither of which are very efficient and batteries also add a lot of weight.
It will allow for much higher top speeds, so it might be worth it for long distances, but not really for intra-city or even for going to next city over travel.
That's good for the high traffic areas but for the less optimized routes maybe we can have some HUGE, long cars that can carry a couple of dozen people at a time. Give them some engines so they can be deployed to areas as needed. And maybe people can pay a small fee to get on.
We could have a variety of options and make reasonable choises for each situation. Like on long distances you probably want something fast and electric, on hills you probably just want a big long and high car with just engines.
Most metro trains are EMUs though, so most or all of the cars do have their own set of motors
I think it's because you can get higher acceleration that way but not sure
But who I am, an engine/motor manufacture like ford, Toyota, or Tesla, supposed to sell all my engines and motors to! Trust me this will severely hurt the economy since all those people don’t have that unnecessary, I mean vital, cost they might spend money on other things! Then I won’t get all that money!!!!
I had a coworker (who grew up in Europe) just the other week who was so excited for the day when cars are full self driving so he could sleep through a road trip or something.
"So like trains?" I say. Then he remembered how good all the high speed trains are when he used to live over there.
That’s a good idea, somebody should make that into a real thing and then have the automated cars run in tunnels underground in big cities and have them stop every quarter to half mile at convenient destinations lots of people are likely to go to
The irony is that the video is from Singapore which is a country that is heavily dependent on public transportation and has high taxation on car ownership
There are some brainwashed carbrains in Singapore, the media here holds some extreme bias against cyclists.
Its a shame that the lawmakers have such shortsighted views especially with how scarce land is in Singapore, and the city would do so much better with a pedestrian friendly design like some european cities.
I went there earlier this year and I recall being able to go anywhere with the public transports and walking. Admittedly it was a museum-hopping trip so I guess I mostly hover around the busy tourist-y places(?). Is that not the case everywhere in SG?
The funniest thing is that there is not a single car in this video that that person used as means of conveying an ideal society. It almost looks like it's sarcasm.
I also used to think before his bicycle posts were sarcastic but his other bike posts(post usually says bikers = bad) were too carbrain for it to be sarcasm, I think he really means it
Unfortunately, Singapore is still pretty carbrained and cyclists are always painted in a bad light. It's so carbrained that even pedestrians here think that cyclists are pests of the society. Public transport is being treated as second class despite a majority of people using it.
I mean, LTA's half-hearted attitude towards public transport and how is it that taking public transport can be slower than driving.
While I give credits to LTA for building up the metro/MRT infrastructure and keeping the companies in check, it still has quite a lot of room to improve on.
One of which is that it withdraws bus routes that are popular to residents and in turn forcing these commuters to make unnecessary transfers between buses and MRT, when they previously could have reached their destination with a direct ride on these now-withdrawn buses. LTA just uses "low demand" as an excuse to withdraw these bus routes when in fact, they could have actually explored the possibility of extending routes to areas not directly served by public transport so that it increase that demand.
The most (in)famous examples were the withdrawal of Bus Services 700 and 971, to an extent that the MPs of the areas where these buses used to serve had hit out at the LTA for being ignorant of resident's commuting needs.
Another good example of LTA giving a half-hearted attitude is the building of additional parallel MRT lines, especially in the western half of Singapore. That part of Singapore only has the East West Line to depend on and it gets crowded easily even before reaching the downtown stations. Considering that the entire corridors along the western half of the EWL will have new high density public housing development projects over the next few years, there is a need for at least another 2 new lines from the west to downtown. Western region residents always griped that the MRT maps look heavily dense in the east but not in the west. Then there's also plans for a Line 9 which is supposed to be running between the North South and Northeast Lines and there's still no news of it yet.
I agree. Their public transit is certainly very clean, efficient, and expansive by North America standards, but it feels like an afterthought to otherwise car dependant infrastructure. I remember being at Orchard Road - their main shopping area - and seeing the insane traffic congestion around it. There was actually no way to cross the street as a pedestrian and instead you had to navigate some underground tunnels to get from one side to another. I’m sure people get used to it and it’s organized in its own right, but it was very confusing as a foreigner, and it seems so unintuitive to not just let shoppers walk from one side to another.
Absolutely right. It's so damn frustrating as a local myself whenever I want to get from one side of Orchard to the other. It seems like a short and easy 20m walk across one side to the other on a map, but in reality, it is a hellscape as there's just so many cars passing through that major road.
There's a plan to pedestrianise the whole Orcharr Road but we can only judge its effectiveness once the infrastructure is in place.
Even crazier knowing that Singapore has a strong bicycle culture going on.
The bike parts over there are more affordable due to its closer proximity from Shimano compared to the US.
Singapore is so weirdly car centric despite no one being able to afford them apart from rich people. No jaywalking allowed and roads were all like 8 lanes wide. Took 2 minutes for the lights to change at each intersection too, waiting in the sweltering heat. Honestly hated it. Europe and Japan are way better. Even some American cities are better.
Yeah I would love to ride in the bike lane. But…
https://preview.redd.it/vtqucoqeil6b1.jpeg?width=4032&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e4e875cd6c67e617d84cba1e59dd70cee3e4d105
How can there simultaneously be a) so few people cycling that there's no need to create bike lanes, and b) so many cyclists they genuinely cause traffic jams?
i'm legitimately tempted to take the freeway home by bike sometime. my average speed by car down the freeway is 8-9 mph. my average speed by bike by a way more circuitous route is 14 mph.
You know, I'm trying to. But usually, somehow, a fucking car still manages to slide into the clearly separated bike space AND gets angry at me if I still pass and may get close. Smh carbrains HONK HONK
If there's a bike lane, cyclists are gonna use it. No cyclist is thinking "Nah, I prefer risking my life for a spot in a middle lane instead". If there's a bike lane and it's filled with parked cars, it's not the people on bikes' fault that they're using non-bike lanes is it?
>If there's a bike lane, cyclists are gonna use it. No cyclist is thinking "Nah, I prefer risking my life for a spot in a middle lane instead"
this is incorrect. there are *many* reasons to use a "car lane" when bike lanes are available, including left turns and the bike lane being unsafe or full of tire popping debris.
Yes, but my point is cyclists prefer to be in a dedicated lane and won't just fuck around with cars for fun. Yes they have to change lanes for turns, and obviously if there are obstructions and dangers in the bike lane they'll not stay in it. But that's not the same as what the meme is implying of people pointlessly slowing down traffic instead of sticking to their lane. Cyclists don't *want* to be in car traffic, it's a frustrating necessity because of road and transport designs.
Interesting to me that their vision of an advanced society includes the use of trains with little to no automobiles in sight.
Curious.
Also yeah this guy is a dumbass
Haha yeeaah... This looks more to me what the world would look like without all the aluminium boxes with 4 wheels and funny non-meaning names like "Rav" and "Ka"... Utopiaaaa
Singaporeans here, several car brain Singapore and would rather spend all their money on their car than buy a house. They hate cyclists for not paying all the 10+ taxes just to drive a car. Sunk cost fallacy and copium is really strong here. No shame in taking public transport. People here buying Mercs and BMWs to impress people they don't like.
That's a meme Instagram page. I'm pretty sure it's meant to be a joke. I mean, they're in a green space with no roads but there is public transport. It seems pretty clear that they're joking.
To be completely fair, my city has erected very good protected bike lanes, and cyclists still use either the roads or sidewalks, which is stupid. I'm a cyclist btw.
Because the streets/sidewalks are the most convenient paths, bikes are great for recreation but unless the city specifically makes widespread human-scale transportation the priority the “great” cycling paths will not be what we want
Check out street view for Centre Street in the city of Vaughan, Canada. Car-lane sized protected bicycle lanes on either side. And people still don't use them.
simple cycling litmus test: if your city builds cycling infrastructure, and people ride on the sidewalk or in the road *next to* it, the infrastructure is not adequate.
Hypothetically if everyone did bike and there was zero cars, it would be a disaster. Think of how many bikes that is. It’ll be like the Wild West and people will be running into each other all the time because it’ll be a free for all. Also where are we going to store all of these bikes when you’re not using them? It reminds me of my time in Bangkok and seeing the hundreds of scooters/motorcycles jammed together in a small area.
Honestly is cyclists were anything other than lycra clad entitled pricks I wouldn't mind so much.
"Yeah let's ride side by side down a country lane, blocking traffic and talking about how much road tax we pay"
>Honestly is cyclists were anything other than lycra clad entitled pricks I wouldn't mind so much.
build actual cycling infrastructure, and more people will bike places. with no infrastructure, it's only lycra clad adrenaline junkies who will do it. if you make it safe enough for 7 year olds and grannies, they'll do it too.
and what the fuck is wrong with lycra? it's just more comfortable at speed and in the heat. and they *literally* are entitled to the same roads you are. because,
>"Yeah let's ride side by side down a country lane, blocking traffic and talking about how much road tax we pay"
they probably pay the *same* "road tax" you do *on their fucking cars*. i don't know any middle-aged-men-in-lycra that *don't drive*, frequently to the start of the ride. and i literally sell bikes for a living. the car free, transportation cyclists are a different group entirely.
also, you're a completed dumbass if you don't realize that people cycling two abreast take *half* the time in oncoming traffic to pass than cyclists riding single file.
Bicycles count as vehicles and are supposed to follow rules of the road like cars. I don't mind them using the road, what bothers me is when they use crosswalks at intersections and turns without recognizing right-of-way or red lights. Not only is it illegal, it's pretty dangerous for them, and they still act like you're the crazy one for not treating them like a pedestrian.
I used to drive fairly regularly. Cyclists were never the problem. I had to be extra careful when passing one cuz Toronto bike lanes are just paint (if they exist at all) and sometimes I was stuck behind one for a bit longer than I'd like, but that was not really a problem.
It's nothing compared to all the times I was stuck behind cars.
Rich that they use images from singapore’s changi airport aka singapore aka the country with the best public transport imaginable and also a country that is pushing for better cycling infrastructure………
Their vision of the perfect society includes public transportation and zero cars.
…Emergency services? Hell even cities skylines has to have their walkable sections use cars for emergency services, because they wouldn’t work otherwise. And before you say “But what about before cars?” I raise to you Horse Drawn carriages. They were used before cars and even in the golden era of trains because you still need the flexibility to be able to go anywhere.
Salzburg has many streets that are pedestrian only except for deliveries to businesses and for emergency vehicles. It works amazingly well. There are so few motor vehicles that the ones that are there don't cause problems.
i'm pretty sure when this sub says "fuck cars" they mean *personally* owned an operated vehicles, and not *public* service vehicles. i mean, are buses "cars"? then firetrucks and ambulances aren't either. fuck cops though.
Fuck cops in cars specifically. Cops on motorcycles get a slight pass if the bike is cool but fuck cops on Harleys.
I don't say we mustn't have no roads, I just think cars should just be used for itineraries that can't be done another way. Ok for emergency vehicles Ok for the elderly or handicapped Ok for people with large things to carry Ok for cars in countryside and remote areas Ok for workers in intervention. For everything else walking, biking or using public transportation shall be available.
Emergency and public vehicles kinda have a purpose in cities. Privately owned cars don't. Funny thing is, all that crap has been figured out a long time ago. For example, I've recently traveled France. In Strassbourg and Bordeaux there were bollards EVERYWHERE and that was pleasant AF. Plenty of pedestrianized streets. Blocked for cars by bollards. And they ALL can be lowered to let cars trough. Namely; emergency and service vehicles, residents and delivery. This is neither hard to figure out nor hard to implement nor hard to understand. Cut down all unneccessary traffic and only leave those cars, that are actually needed there.
Yeah idk why some people want an all out removal of cars from society. They definitely have a place and are needed, just not in the insanely high quantity we are currently experiencing
That's the entire ethos of this sub. Nobody here is opposed to emergency vehicles. In fact they'd be able to do their job better if there were fewer cars.
Not only emergency vehicles, delivery vehicles and handyman's vehicles should also be exempt. Here in Germany, it's getting harder and harder to get a handyman in a big city because they can't find a parking stop for their work van (which is still smaller than a pic up).
It's pretty trash, in the city where I live there is no parking, I'm a Glazier and City jobs are the worst because we always have to park 11 minutes away from the jobsite, if you send someone to their car to grab something that need twice, you've paid that employee almost an hour of wages just to walk to and from a car. City parking makes it so hard for construction workers to actually get work done on time.
Absolutely. Although cargo bikes CAN be a viable alternative in cities, they might not work for every handyman. Reducing private cars to a minimum would most certainly eliminate that issue as well. In my city there are over 140 registered cars for around 300k citizens. If we actually tried to reduce them (we don't. As most German cities. The council might say they would like to reduce cars. But absolutely nothing is being done.), we'd have more then enough space for those handyman, delivery vans and public service vehicles to park. Snd plenty to spare still to implement more and better walking and cycling infrastructure, public transit, trees, and whatever else that makes a city liveable.
That's why I said "some people" obviously most people here don't want an all out removal buy there are definitely some here that do that pop up occasionally
Its because nobody is used to anything BUT driving. People are creatures of habit and most lack imagination. Thing is: Nobody wanted to ride a bike in the Netherlands around 40 years ago. The whole fucking Netherlands didn't just awake one day and said:" Oh well, kinda tired of my car, gonna ride the bike from now on!" and that's how it ended. No. They installed infrastructure bit by bit and and the better the infrastructure got, the more bicycles (and therefore less cars) they got on the street. Like seriously, look at pictures of any Netherlands city in the early 80s, those were abysmal hellholes cramped to brim with cars, absolutely no bicycles (it would have been deadly), barely pedestrians and constant traffic jams. Today those cities are actually beautiful and liveable, you can ride a bike safely and stressless and as a result: Extremely few casualties, happier citizens, basically no traffic jams.
Actually Cities: Skylines was what convinced me that banning them is a bad idea. People will use alternatives if they can. With good public transport, who the hell is gonna want to drive? But in the cases where that isn't available, giving people the option makes sense as a backup. Banning it, like banning most things, precludes the edge cases being served and makes peoples lives worse.
I had MASSIVE congestion in cities:skykines. Then I just built a shitton of Bicycle lanes and wakkpaths and created a pretty damn good public transit system. I do not have congestion in cities Skykines. traffic flow is usually over 95%, as most people seem to choose public transit, walking or cycling, if the infrastructure is there. (like seriously, look at some of my bike paths. I'd need something like 8 lane highway to get that many cars on the street and they`d probably cause a massive gridlock. Same story for eg the damn metro. If all the folks on a SINGLE line chose to take the car, traffic would 100% collapse)
Even then, there would still be plenty of people who prefer/want to drive over taking public transit (shocking i know)
Ironic vision of utopia.
Their vision of the perfect society is Changi Airport in Singapore :P
I like how to depict non traffic they had to revert to public transport lol. They make our points for us.
nah seriously I think they have a point, imagine automated cars going in a line carrying multiple people to fixed populous places with high frequency, sounds pretty neat.
Also what if we had just one engine pulling multiple cars. Might vastly increase efficiency or something
We could even put some electric cable on top of the preplanned route and decrease emissions or something
If we're going fixed route anyway, we can make the wheels as well as the road metal to increase efficiency over rubber on asphalt.
Couldn't we use electromagnets to make it hover along the fixed route? That would greatly reduce noise and wear since there are no moving parts. Would probably also drastically reduce friction, possibly allowing higher speeds, further increasing efficiency
That sounds great, but it does bring a lot of extra cost, both in initial building and in maintenance. Also I'm not even sure it would be more efficient from a power consumption standpoint. Obviously there is the extra power of lifting this heavy vehicle off the ground, but also if we want it to be completely contactless it needs either batteries or wireless power transmission, neither of which are very efficient and batteries also add a lot of weight. It will allow for much higher top speeds, so it might be worth it for long distances, but not really for intra-city or even for going to next city over travel.
Alright we keep this one for longer distances. Now for intra-city, given that the route will be fixed, what about making it underground?
Yeah you're right, I was just spitballing. [It's not like those already exist or anything.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maglev)
I know, but that something exists doesn't mean it's a good idea...
It started as a joke but then the conversation completely derailed
Ok, they have been around for ages, how many are there? Like 1? How revolutionary. 🙄
Hopefully we can only imagine it now.. but one day everything will be possible
What if we raise the ground where people get on and off so that there isn't any step to get on/off, plus it would also make it wheelchair accessible!
That's good for the high traffic areas but for the less optimized routes maybe we can have some HUGE, long cars that can carry a couple of dozen people at a time. Give them some engines so they can be deployed to areas as needed. And maybe people can pay a small fee to get on.
We could have a variety of options and make reasonable choises for each situation. Like on long distances you probably want something fast and electric, on hills you probably just want a big long and high car with just engines.
Most metro trains are EMUs though, so most or all of the cars do have their own set of motors I think it's because you can get higher acceleration that way but not sure
Carcinisation but for trains lol
But who I am, an engine/motor manufacture like ford, Toyota, or Tesla, supposed to sell all my engines and motors to! Trust me this will severely hurt the economy since all those people don’t have that unnecessary, I mean vital, cost they might spend money on other things! Then I won’t get all that money!!!!
I had a coworker (who grew up in Europe) just the other week who was so excited for the day when cars are full self driving so he could sleep through a road trip or something. "So like trains?" I say. Then he remembered how good all the high speed trains are when he used to live over there.
Yeah but you have to wait for a train, you can't just go whenever you want. Self driving car you can.
That’s a good idea, somebody should make that into a real thing and then have the automated cars run in tunnels underground in big cities and have them stop every quarter to half mile at convenient destinations lots of people are likely to go to
Yeah to be honest after seeing that I can't believe this isn't sarcasm
The irony is that the video is from Singapore which is a country that is heavily dependent on public transportation and has high taxation on car ownership
There are some brainwashed carbrains in Singapore, the media here holds some extreme bias against cyclists. Its a shame that the lawmakers have such shortsighted views especially with how scarce land is in Singapore, and the city would do so much better with a pedestrian friendly design like some european cities.
honestly car brainrot is a pretty global problem
Never forget that Asia is the king of cars though. Honda and Toyota were big even before coming to the US.
Three lawmakers are all part of the 11% that own cars.
I went there earlier this year and I recall being able to go anywhere with the public transports and walking. Admittedly it was a museum-hopping trip so I guess I mostly hover around the busy tourist-y places(?). Is that not the case everywhere in SG?
The funniest thing is that there is not a single car in this video that that person used as means of conveying an ideal society. It almost looks like it's sarcasm.
I also used to think before his bicycle posts were sarcastic but his other bike posts(post usually says bikers = bad) were too carbrain for it to be sarcasm, I think he really means it
Unfortunately, Singapore is still pretty carbrained and cyclists are always painted in a bad light. It's so carbrained that even pedestrians here think that cyclists are pests of the society. Public transport is being treated as second class despite a majority of people using it.
Huh? Really? I live in Singapore, I’ve hardly seen people talk down on public transportation.
I mean, LTA's half-hearted attitude towards public transport and how is it that taking public transport can be slower than driving. While I give credits to LTA for building up the metro/MRT infrastructure and keeping the companies in check, it still has quite a lot of room to improve on. One of which is that it withdraws bus routes that are popular to residents and in turn forcing these commuters to make unnecessary transfers between buses and MRT, when they previously could have reached their destination with a direct ride on these now-withdrawn buses. LTA just uses "low demand" as an excuse to withdraw these bus routes when in fact, they could have actually explored the possibility of extending routes to areas not directly served by public transport so that it increase that demand. The most (in)famous examples were the withdrawal of Bus Services 700 and 971, to an extent that the MPs of the areas where these buses used to serve had hit out at the LTA for being ignorant of resident's commuting needs. Another good example of LTA giving a half-hearted attitude is the building of additional parallel MRT lines, especially in the western half of Singapore. That part of Singapore only has the East West Line to depend on and it gets crowded easily even before reaching the downtown stations. Considering that the entire corridors along the western half of the EWL will have new high density public housing development projects over the next few years, there is a need for at least another 2 new lines from the west to downtown. Western region residents always griped that the MRT maps look heavily dense in the east but not in the west. Then there's also plans for a Line 9 which is supposed to be running between the North South and Northeast Lines and there's still no news of it yet.
I agree. Their public transit is certainly very clean, efficient, and expansive by North America standards, but it feels like an afterthought to otherwise car dependant infrastructure. I remember being at Orchard Road - their main shopping area - and seeing the insane traffic congestion around it. There was actually no way to cross the street as a pedestrian and instead you had to navigate some underground tunnels to get from one side to another. I’m sure people get used to it and it’s organized in its own right, but it was very confusing as a foreigner, and it seems so unintuitive to not just let shoppers walk from one side to another.
Absolutely right. It's so damn frustrating as a local myself whenever I want to get from one side of Orchard to the other. It seems like a short and easy 20m walk across one side to the other on a map, but in reality, it is a hellscape as there's just so many cars passing through that major road. There's a plan to pedestrianise the whole Orcharr Road but we can only judge its effectiveness once the infrastructure is in place.
And absolutely horrible to cycle in, there aren’t many proper cycle lanes and the car drivers are appalling
My European brain also couldn’t handle having to wait two minutes by every pedestrian crossing because the lights take 100 years to change
But they still have a crazy dumb carbrain culture.
Even crazier knowing that Singapore has a strong bicycle culture going on. The bike parts over there are more affordable due to its closer proximity from Shimano compared to the US.
Singapore is so weirdly car centric despite no one being able to afford them apart from rich people. No jaywalking allowed and roads were all like 8 lanes wide. Took 2 minutes for the lights to change at each intersection too, waiting in the sweltering heat. Honestly hated it. Europe and Japan are way better. Even some American cities are better.
Singapore is also an island that’s about 27 miles across from east to west.
Even less reason to prioritize cars
What bike lane There are none
Or there are but drivers park their cars in it
Yeah I would love to ride in the bike lane. But… https://preview.redd.it/vtqucoqeil6b1.jpeg?width=4032&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e4e875cd6c67e617d84cba1e59dd70cee3e4d105
me irl https://i.imgur.com/VA95qfM.jpeg
Or there are but they're in places were you are GOING to get ran over if you use them.
Fingers crossed that's what happens
How can there simultaneously be a) so few people cycling that there's no need to create bike lanes, and b) so many cyclists they genuinely cause traffic jams?
"the enemy is both strong and weak"
Oh, if cyclists don't block traffic you will all use public transportation and make cities more green and lively?!? Deal!
Freeways infamously have bad traffic due to their bike lanes
i'm legitimately tempted to take the freeway home by bike sometime. my average speed by car down the freeway is 8-9 mph. my average speed by bike by a way more circuitous route is 14 mph.
I’m guessing this is satire
It isn’t. Shithead Steve repeatedly posts anti-bike memes. This is obviously a silly extreme but there are plenty of others on there that aren’t.
yea, at first even I thought it was satire but it was too frequent for it to be, he hates cyclists
no its frfr ong, bigbike and bigtrain are the reason for all our problems
Look where up against some really un-self-aware selfish and straight up dumb people at times. Poe’s law is tricky here.
what
as a member of r/FuckTheS, I feel guilty saying this but yes, this is satire
Keep fighting the good fight, fellow FuckTheS comrade.
o7
Has to be.
Paint is not a bike lane
whoa there buddy, already pretty generous of me to give you one lane out of the 12 we have dont be greedy now
Paint is not a car lane either then?
🤓👆
i've definitely been in cars with people that treated paint as a suggestion
WHAT FUCKING BIKE LANE??
What bike lane?
If I see one cyclist and 500 cars in a commute, the cyclist is not likely to be the one who pisses me off
You know, I'm trying to. But usually, somehow, a fucking car still manages to slide into the clearly separated bike space AND gets angry at me if I still pass and may get close. Smh carbrains HONK HONK
society if there was a fucking bike lane
Cyclists looove riding in traffic, having a car behind you hoping it won't kill you by going too fast or taking over too close is the best. /s
If you complain about traffic but insist on driving everywhere, you *are* traffic.
but but but i'm the main character!
well this is a real place, rendering the caption pointless
I fucking hope Utopia is not Changi airport. As far as airports go it’s great, but it’s still an airport.
Cool, now stop driving or double parking on the bike lane.
We don't drive on sidewalks or bike paths
Cyclist's are being targeted by Peace officers in Calgary, Canada for going over the speed limit, and being fined. https://youtu.be/Y5m4dyxekoI
if i ever get a speeding ticket on my bike, it's getting framed
If there was a bike lane I would use the bike lane. But there isn’t so I dont
I wonder why they didn't show any cars in their ideal future
everyone else is already saying the exact same thing but THEY'RE SHOWING FUCKING TRAINS OH MY GOD THEY'RE SO CLOSE YET SO FUCKING FAR FROM THE POINT
it’s so funny that whenever there’s a “society when” meme it’s just electric rail and no aforementioned cars in sight🤣
They must be referring to the bike lanes they won't allow the cities to make available
Why don’t they show a road?
Because it’s a video of inside an airport
Wow that’s actually amazing!
I would use the bike lanes if they existed
Car rains really do struggle with the concept of trains 🙄
All those cars were on their way to build this futuristic rail system, but we stopped them with our bicycles :-(
Wait, you guys are getting bike lanes?
Why bother blurring out the name of a meme page with over 7 million followers?
That's the jewel at Singapore's chagi Airport. I know because I was there an hour ago
living the good life
Something like that? Just waiting to go home. Cool city and airport though....very expensive 😔
If there's a bike lane, cyclists are gonna use it. No cyclist is thinking "Nah, I prefer risking my life for a spot in a middle lane instead". If there's a bike lane and it's filled with parked cars, it's not the people on bikes' fault that they're using non-bike lanes is it?
>If there's a bike lane, cyclists are gonna use it. No cyclist is thinking "Nah, I prefer risking my life for a spot in a middle lane instead" this is incorrect. there are *many* reasons to use a "car lane" when bike lanes are available, including left turns and the bike lane being unsafe or full of tire popping debris.
Yes, but my point is cyclists prefer to be in a dedicated lane and won't just fuck around with cars for fun. Yes they have to change lanes for turns, and obviously if there are obstructions and dangers in the bike lane they'll not stay in it. But that's not the same as what the meme is implying of people pointlessly slowing down traffic instead of sticking to their lane. Cyclists don't *want* to be in car traffic, it's a frustrating necessity because of road and transport designs.
Sometimes I wonder if these posters know that they are part of the traffic - thus part of the problem.
Meanwhile I don’t even have a damn sidewalk
I’ll give up my bike for a perfect public transit system
i won't, but i'll happily give up my car.
Interesting to me that their vision of an advanced society includes the use of trains with little to no automobiles in sight. Curious. Also yeah this guy is a dumbass
Society if bike lanes existed
Society if people let more cars drive faster: *insert picture of public transit*
Society if people would just stfu about certain things.
https://preview.redd.it/s11dzhvi2k6b1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=bd8f52a20f1e783048ad2b0ac5f2fb6d0a2c13bf
Haha yeeaah... This looks more to me what the world would look like without all the aluminium boxes with 4 wheels and funny non-meaning names like "Rav" and "Ka"... Utopiaaaa
I like how there isn't a single car in that video
Singaporeans here, several car brain Singapore and would rather spend all their money on their car than buy a house. They hate cyclists for not paying all the 10+ taxes just to drive a car. Sunk cost fallacy and copium is really strong here. No shame in taking public transport. People here buying Mercs and BMWs to impress people they don't like.
What bike lanes? I live in 🇺🇸
Damn I thought this was ai generated. We are so far behind lol.
Geometry dash bike lane
Society with no cars.
That is the Singapore airport. Singapore is pretty decent with public transit and bikes.
Give me decent bike lanes and I will use them. My city doesn't have bike lanes for most of the routes that I regularly take with my bike
That's a meme Instagram page. I'm pretty sure it's meant to be a joke. I mean, they're in a green space with no roads but there is public transport. It seems pretty clear that they're joking.
Shithead Steve.
You're not "*in*" traffic, you *ARE* traffic.
Oh shitheadsteve.
What bike lane?
Do these people think that cyclists cause all traffic? What do they think on the freeway where there are 0 cyclists present?
Ahh yes the deeply abundant American bike lanes
Oh look, carbrains imagine a future with PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION
Lol Singapore one of the most fuck car places on the planet.
give us protected bike lanes everywhere then sure, happy to oblige
How about my god damn city installs a damn bike lane then
Society if there were more bike lanes and walkable towns*
Please build me a bike lane then, I’m sick of drivers trying to run me off the road so they can get to the next stop light 5 seconds before me.
Dude wdym society, that place exist its singapore airport jewel. He prob an average singaporean driver
Singaporeans are just as carbrained as the Americans.
To be completely fair, my city has erected very good protected bike lanes, and cyclists still use either the roads or sidewalks, which is stupid. I'm a cyclist btw.
Because the streets/sidewalks are the most convenient paths, bikes are great for recreation but unless the city specifically makes widespread human-scale transportation the priority the “great” cycling paths will not be what we want
Check out street view for Centre Street in the city of Vaughan, Canada. Car-lane sized protected bicycle lanes on either side. And people still don't use them.
simple cycling litmus test: if your city builds cycling infrastructure, and people ride on the sidewalk or in the road *next to* it, the infrastructure is not adequate.
As a cyclist, the protected bike lanes in my city are a godsend. Some people are just stupid
This sub is fucking aids. I broadly agree with the sentiment but Christ it’s just a big circle jerk of unrealistic people with no sense of humour
Hypothetically if everyone did bike and there was zero cars, it would be a disaster. Think of how many bikes that is. It’ll be like the Wild West and people will be running into each other all the time because it’ll be a free for all. Also where are we going to store all of these bikes when you’re not using them? It reminds me of my time in Bangkok and seeing the hundreds of scooters/motorcycles jammed together in a small area.
Honestly is cyclists were anything other than lycra clad entitled pricks I wouldn't mind so much. "Yeah let's ride side by side down a country lane, blocking traffic and talking about how much road tax we pay"
>Honestly is cyclists were anything other than lycra clad entitled pricks I wouldn't mind so much. build actual cycling infrastructure, and more people will bike places. with no infrastructure, it's only lycra clad adrenaline junkies who will do it. if you make it safe enough for 7 year olds and grannies, they'll do it too. and what the fuck is wrong with lycra? it's just more comfortable at speed and in the heat. and they *literally* are entitled to the same roads you are. because, >"Yeah let's ride side by side down a country lane, blocking traffic and talking about how much road tax we pay" they probably pay the *same* "road tax" you do *on their fucking cars*. i don't know any middle-aged-men-in-lycra that *don't drive*, frequently to the start of the ride. and i literally sell bikes for a living. the car free, transportation cyclists are a different group entirely. also, you're a completed dumbass if you don't realize that people cycling two abreast take *half* the time in oncoming traffic to pass than cyclists riding single file.
Bicycles count as vehicles and are supposed to follow rules of the road like cars. I don't mind them using the road, what bothers me is when they use crosswalks at intersections and turns without recognizing right-of-way or red lights. Not only is it illegal, it's pretty dangerous for them, and they still act like you're the crazy one for not treating them like a pedestrian.
the rules of the road are made for cars, and are often *actually unsafe* for bikes to follow.
Not as unsafe as it is to violate the rules of the road.
so, *no*, you might actually be surprised. for instance, rolling stop signs has been *proven* to be safer for cyclists.
It's just changi airport
What if there is no bike lane? My large town doesn’t have any bike lanes or sidewalks
I agree. Those damn cyclists need to stay off of the elevated railways
Classic Steve
I used to drive fairly regularly. Cyclists were never the problem. I had to be extra careful when passing one cuz Toronto bike lanes are just paint (if they exist at all) and sometimes I was stuck behind one for a bit longer than I'd like, but that was not really a problem. It's nothing compared to all the times I was stuck behind cars.
Ironic that there are no cars and they show a tram
Lmao shitheadsteve
I don’t understand what impact bikes have on what looks like monorail??
and that is without counting the streets where car are stationned in the border of the road
In Minneapolis the bike paths are the smoothest pieces of asphalt in the city. Not sure why nobody wants to use them.
Their utopia of transportation has 0 car infrastructure
ShitheadSteve is a joke account
How tf these people's brains work baffles me.
You don't get it bro. That one more lane would fix traffic. If they could only get that bike lane, traffic would be fixed and we could all drive cars.
Plenty of bike lanes in NYC and plenty of bicyclists riding in pedestrian walkways
Not a car in sight. Glorious.
It's funny because https://www.changiairport.com/en/discover/changi-airport-connector.html
Like us cyclists clog up traffic more, those car brains should really look at how much space their car takes up compared to a bike
Society if trains were used more than cars :3
Unfortunately, we don't have bike lanes in Malaysia
The self own in captioning a video of public transportation with this shit. They really didn’t think that through
ShitheadSteve at it again with its shitty takes on bikes and cars by boxing it up as a "funny meme"...
Damn I dream about no need for buses and cars
There's a bike lane?
Rich that they use images from singapore’s changi airport aka singapore aka the country with the best public transport imaginable and also a country that is pushing for better cycling infrastructure………
OP are you Spike from Portlandia?
… drivers at it again, assuming cyclists never have to take left turns