How can we make DC streets bicycle and pedestrian-only?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bottom line is that when commute times are less with public transportation, people will choose public transportation. When commute times are less with cars, people will use cars.

Eh, that depends on the time difference. My commute to work into DC is 25 minutes by car. If I could make that commute in 10 minutes by transit, I'd still take my car because I don't have to share my car with other people, some of whom may be drunk and/or potentially dangerous.

Places like New York and Tokyo are outliers, because transit is so much faster than driving. For most people, potentially shaving a few minutes off of a commute isn't worth it because of the negatives of public transit.

If you prefer a longer commute, that's your choice. However, public policy does not have to enable your choice.

You missed my point.

Given the current state of Metro, you're going to have a tough time getting people out of their cars unless you can significantly shorten their commute. And, for most people commuting into DC, Metro would make their commute longer, not shorter. I mean, I live in north Arlington, and trying to take public transit would double my commute, at least. The calculus for people living even further out is worse.

If the public policy you're pushing doesn't make sense to the majority of people, you'll get huge pushback.

Plenty of people are already out of their cars. And plenty of other people don't even have cars.

Drive if you want to drive. Nobody's stopping you. But there's no reason why the DC government should make it easy for north Arlington residents to drive.

DC needs people to come in from Virginia and Maryland to spend money in the District in order to fill the DC government's tax coffers. You may have noticed that downtown is half-full on a good day, and mostly empty on Mondays and Fridays. This is a major concern for the DC government.

If your plan is to make it less attractive for suburban residents to come into the District by making driving more of a hassle, you're proposing putting the city into a fiscal death spiral.

If only there were ways to get from Virginia and Maryland to DC without driving.

DC needs to prioritize its own residents, not convenient driving in DC for people who don't live in DC.

This is a pretty shitty attitude towards people -- cops, public school teachers, government workers -- who can't afford to live near where they work. Also hard not to notice that the anti-car people are all upper income white people and the people just trying to get to work are disproportionately black and brown.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bottom line is that when commute times are less with public transportation, people will choose public transportation. When commute times are less with cars, people will use cars.

Eh, that depends on the time difference. My commute to work into DC is 25 minutes by car. If I could make that commute in 10 minutes by transit, I'd still take my car because I don't have to share my car with other people, some of whom may be drunk and/or potentially dangerous.

Places like New York and Tokyo are outliers, because transit is so much faster than driving. For most people, potentially shaving a few minutes off of a commute isn't worth it because of the negatives of public transit.

If you prefer a longer commute, that's your choice. However, public policy does not have to enable your choice.

You missed my point.

Given the current state of Metro, you're going to have a tough time getting people out of their cars unless you can significantly shorten their commute. And, for most people commuting into DC, Metro would make their commute longer, not shorter. I mean, I live in north Arlington, and trying to take public transit would double my commute, at least. The calculus for people living even further out is worse.

If the public policy you're pushing doesn't make sense to the majority of people, you'll get huge pushback.

Plenty of people are already out of their cars. And plenty of other people don't even have cars.

Drive if you want to drive. Nobody's stopping you. But there's no reason why the DC government should make it easy for north Arlington residents to drive.

DC needs people to come in from Virginia and Maryland to spend money in the District in order to fill the DC government's tax coffers. You may have noticed that downtown is half-full on a good day, and mostly empty on Mondays and Fridays. This is a major concern for the DC government.

If your plan is to make it less attractive for suburban residents to come into the District by making driving more of a hassle, you're proposing putting the city into a fiscal death spiral.

If only there were ways to get from Virginia and Maryland to DC without driving.

DC needs to prioritize its own residents, not convenient driving in DC for people who don't live in DC.

This is a pretty shitty attitude towards people -- cops, public school teachers, government workers -- who can't afford to live near where they work. Also hard not to notice that the anti-car people are all upper income white people and the people just trying to get to work are disproportionately black and brown.

From North Arlington, by car? Do tell.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bottom line is that when commute times are less with public transportation, people will choose public transportation. When commute times are less with cars, people will use cars.

Eh, that depends on the time difference. My commute to work into DC is 25 minutes by car. If I could make that commute in 10 minutes by transit, I'd still take my car because I don't have to share my car with other people, some of whom may be drunk and/or potentially dangerous.

Places like New York and Tokyo are outliers, because transit is so much faster than driving. For most people, potentially shaving a few minutes off of a commute isn't worth it because of the negatives of public transit.

If you prefer a longer commute, that's your choice. However, public policy does not have to enable your choice.

You missed my point.

Given the current state of Metro, you're going to have a tough time getting people out of their cars unless you can significantly shorten their commute. And, for most people commuting into DC, Metro would make their commute longer, not shorter. I mean, I live in north Arlington, and trying to take public transit would double my commute, at least. The calculus for people living even further out is worse.

If the public policy you're pushing doesn't make sense to the majority of people, you'll get huge pushback.

Plenty of people are already out of their cars. And plenty of other people don't even have cars.

Drive if you want to drive. Nobody's stopping you. But there's no reason why the DC government should make it easy for north Arlington residents to drive.

DC needs people to come in from Virginia and Maryland to spend money in the District in order to fill the DC government's tax coffers. You may have noticed that downtown is half-full on a good day, and mostly empty on Mondays and Fridays. This is a major concern for the DC government.

If your plan is to make it less attractive for suburban residents to come into the District by making driving more of a hassle, you're proposing putting the city into a fiscal death spiral.

If only there were ways to get from Virginia and Maryland to DC without driving.

DC needs to prioritize its own residents, not convenient driving in DC for people who don't live in DC.

This is a pretty shitty attitude towards people -- cops, public school teachers, government workers -- who can't afford to live near where they work. Also hard not to notice that the anti-car people are all upper income white people and the people just trying to get to work are disproportionately black and brown.

The notion that drivers are disproportionately poorer is stone cold BS. Want a citation? Well here you go:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bottom line is that when commute times are less with public transportation, people will choose public transportation. When commute times are less with cars, people will use cars.

Eh, that depends on the time difference. My commute to work into DC is 25 minutes by car. If I could make that commute in 10 minutes by transit, I'd still take my car because I don't have to share my car with other people, some of whom may be drunk and/or potentially dangerous.

Places like New York and Tokyo are outliers, because transit is so much faster than driving. For most people, potentially shaving a few minutes off of a commute isn't worth it because of the negatives of public transit.

If you prefer a longer commute, that's your choice. However, public policy does not have to enable your choice.

You missed my point.

Given the current state of Metro, you're going to have a tough time getting people out of their cars unless you can significantly shorten their commute. And, for most people commuting into DC, Metro would make their commute longer, not shorter. I mean, I live in north Arlington, and trying to take public transit would double my commute, at least. The calculus for people living even further out is worse.

If the public policy you're pushing doesn't make sense to the majority of people, you'll get huge pushback.

Plenty of people are already out of their cars. And plenty of other people don't even have cars.

Drive if you want to drive. Nobody's stopping you. But there's no reason why the DC government should make it easy for north Arlington residents to drive.

DC needs people to come in from Virginia and Maryland to spend money in the District in order to fill the DC government's tax coffers. You may have noticed that downtown is half-full on a good day, and mostly empty on Mondays and Fridays. This is a major concern for the DC government.

If your plan is to make it less attractive for suburban residents to come into the District by making driving more of a hassle, you're proposing putting the city into a fiscal death spiral.

If only there were ways to get from Virginia and Maryland to DC without driving.

DC needs to prioritize its own residents, not convenient driving in DC for people who don't live in DC.

This is a pretty shitty attitude towards people -- cops, public school teachers, government workers -- who can't afford to live near where they work. Also hard not to notice that the anti-car people are all upper income white people and the people just trying to get to work are disproportionately black and brown.

Add healthcare workers, most of the staff line hospital cleaning, transporters, nursing assistants, etc. for DC hospitals live in the city. Significant amount of nurses. I work for a DC hospital and very, very few live in DC

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bottom line is that when commute times are less with public transportation, people will choose public transportation. When commute times are less with cars, people will use cars.

Eh, that depends on the time difference. My commute to work into DC is 25 minutes by car. If I could make that commute in 10 minutes by transit, I'd still take my car because I don't have to share my car with other people, some of whom may be drunk and/or potentially dangerous.

Places like New York and Tokyo are outliers, because transit is so much faster than driving. For most people, potentially shaving a few minutes off of a commute isn't worth it because of the negatives of public transit.

If you prefer a longer commute, that's your choice. However, public policy does not have to enable your choice.

You missed my point.

Given the current state of Metro, you're going to have a tough time getting people out of their cars unless you can significantly shorten their commute. And, for most people commuting into DC, Metro would make their commute longer, not shorter. I mean, I live in north Arlington, and trying to take public transit would double my commute, at least. The calculus for people living even further out is worse.

If the public policy you're pushing doesn't make sense to the majority of people, you'll get huge pushback.

Plenty of people are already out of their cars. And plenty of other people don't even have cars.

Drive if you want to drive. Nobody's stopping you. But there's no reason why the DC government should make it easy for north Arlington residents to drive.

DC needs people to come in from Virginia and Maryland to spend money in the District in order to fill the DC government's tax coffers. You may have noticed that downtown is half-full on a good day, and mostly empty on Mondays and Fridays. This is a major concern for the DC government.

If your plan is to make it less attractive for suburban residents to come into the District by making driving more of a hassle, you're proposing putting the city into a fiscal death spiral.

If only there were ways to get from Virginia and Maryland to DC without driving.

DC needs to prioritize its own residents, not convenient driving in DC for people who don't live in DC.

This is a pretty shitty attitude towards people -- cops, public school teachers, government workers -- who can't afford to live near where they work. Also hard not to notice that the anti-car people are all upper income white people and the people just trying to get to work are disproportionately black and brown.

Add healthcare workers, most of the staff line hospital cleaning, transporters, nursing assistants, etc. for DC hospitals live in the city. Significant amount of nurses. I work for a DC hospital and very, very few live in DC

*Meant to say live OUTSIDE the city.

[Anonymous]

Check out these observations (proś and cons) of the proposed NYC car ban:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gyKAr1Om9iY

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bottom line is that when commute times are less with public transportation, people will choose public transportation. When commute times are less with cars, people will use cars.

Eh, that depends on the time difference. My commute to work into DC is 25 minutes by car. If I could make that commute in 10 minutes by transit, I'd still take my car because I don't have to share my car with other people, some of whom may be drunk and/or potentially dangerous.

Places like New York and Tokyo are outliers, because transit is so much faster than driving. For most people, potentially shaving a few minutes off of a commute isn't worth it because of the negatives of public transit.

If you prefer a longer commute, that's your choice. However, public policy does not have to enable your choice.

You missed my point.

Given the current state of Metro, you're going to have a tough time getting people out of their cars unless you can significantly shorten their commute. And, for most people commuting into DC, Metro would make their commute longer, not shorter. I mean, I live in north Arlington, and trying to take public transit would double my commute, at least. The calculus for people living even further out is worse.

If the public policy you're pushing doesn't make sense to the majority of people, you'll get huge pushback.

Plenty of people are already out of their cars. And plenty of other people don't even have cars.

Drive if you want to drive. Nobody's stopping you. But there's no reason why the DC government should make it easy for north Arlington residents to drive.

DC needs people to come in from Virginia and Maryland to spend money in the District in order to fill the DC government's tax coffers. You may have noticed that downtown is half-full on a good day, and mostly empty on Mondays and Fridays. This is a major concern for the DC government.

If your plan is to make it less attractive for suburban residents to come into the District by making driving more of a hassle, you're proposing putting the city into a fiscal death spiral.

If only there were ways to get from Virginia and Maryland to DC without driving.

DC needs to prioritize its own residents, not convenient driving in DC for people who don't live in DC.

This is a pretty shitty attitude towards people -- cops, public school teachers, government workers -- who can't afford to live near where they work. Also hard not to notice that the anti-car people are all upper income white people and the people just trying to get to work are disproportionately black and brown.

The notion that drivers are disproportionately poorer is stone cold BS. Want a citation? Well here you go:

You think lower income folks are going car free because public transportation is easier and faster? Beg to disagree. It's another way lower income folks who live outside the city core are at a disadvantage.



"While “car-free” implies a positive decision to live without a car, the lack of reliable transportation alternatives in these areas means the absence of a car can compound other hardships, potentially lengthening residents’ commutes and reducing access to grocery stores and other amenities."

https://www.dcpolicycenter.org/publications/easiest-live-car-free-d-c/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bottom line is that when commute times are less with public transportation, people will choose public transportation. When commute times are less with cars, people will use cars.

Eh, that depends on the time difference. My commute to work into DC is 25 minutes by car. If I could make that commute in 10 minutes by transit, I'd still take my car because I don't have to share my car with other people, some of whom may be drunk and/or potentially dangerous.

Places like New York and Tokyo are outliers, because transit is so much faster than driving. For most people, potentially shaving a few minutes off of a commute isn't worth it because of the negatives of public transit.

If you prefer a longer commute, that's your choice. However, public policy does not have to enable your choice.

You missed my point.

Given the current state of Metro, you're going to have a tough time getting people out of their cars unless you can significantly shorten their commute. And, for most people commuting into DC, Metro would make their commute longer, not shorter. I mean, I live in north Arlington, and trying to take public transit would double my commute, at least. The calculus for people living even further out is worse.

If the public policy you're pushing doesn't make sense to the majority of people, you'll get huge pushback.

Plenty of people are already out of their cars. And plenty of other people don't even have cars.

Drive if you want to drive. Nobody's stopping you. But there's no reason why the DC government should make it easy for north Arlington residents to drive.

DC needs people to come in from Virginia and Maryland to spend money in the District in order to fill the DC government's tax coffers. You may have noticed that downtown is half-full on a good day, and mostly empty on Mondays and Fridays. This is a major concern for the DC government.

If your plan is to make it less attractive for suburban residents to come into the District by making driving more of a hassle, you're proposing putting the city into a fiscal death spiral.

If only there were ways to get from Virginia and Maryland to DC without driving.

DC needs to prioritize its own residents, not convenient driving in DC for people who don't live in DC.

This is a pretty shitty attitude towards people -- cops, public school teachers, government workers -- who can't afford to live near where they work. Also hard not to notice that the anti-car people are all upper income white people and the people just trying to get to work are disproportionately black and brown.

The notion that drivers are disproportionately poorer is stone cold BS. Want a citation? Well here you go:

You think lower income folks are going car free because public transportation is easier and faster? Beg to disagree. It's another way lower income folks who live outside the city core are at a disadvantage.



"While “car-free” implies a positive decision to live without a car, the lack of reliable transportation alternatives in these areas means the absence of a car can compound other hardships, potentially lengthening residents’ commutes and reducing access to grocery stores and other amenities."

https://www.dcpolicycenter.org/publications/easiest-live-car-free-d-c/

And it's also true that public transportation can't be improved. What are they going to do, run more buses and trains??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bottom line is that when commute times are less with public transportation, people will choose public transportation. When commute times are less with cars, people will use cars.

Eh, that depends on the time difference. My commute to work into DC is 25 minutes by car. If I could make that commute in 10 minutes by transit, I'd still take my car because I don't have to share my car with other people, some of whom may be drunk and/or potentially dangerous.

Places like New York and Tokyo are outliers, because transit is so much faster than driving. For most people, potentially shaving a few minutes off of a commute isn't worth it because of the negatives of public transit.

If you prefer a longer commute, that's your choice. However, public policy does not have to enable your choice.

You missed my point.

Given the current state of Metro, you're going to have a tough time getting people out of their cars unless you can significantly shorten their commute. And, for most people commuting into DC, Metro would make their commute longer, not shorter. I mean, I live in north Arlington, and trying to take public transit would double my commute, at least. The calculus for people living even further out is worse.

If the public policy you're pushing doesn't make sense to the majority of people, you'll get huge pushback.

Plenty of people are already out of their cars. And plenty of other people don't even have cars.

Drive if you want to drive. Nobody's stopping you. But there's no reason why the DC government should make it easy for north Arlington residents to drive.

DC needs people to come in from Virginia and Maryland to spend money in the District in order to fill the DC government's tax coffers. You may have noticed that downtown is half-full on a good day, and mostly empty on Mondays and Fridays. This is a major concern for the DC government.

If your plan is to make it less attractive for suburban residents to come into the District by making driving more of a hassle, you're proposing putting the city into a fiscal death spiral.

If only there were ways to get from Virginia and Maryland to DC without driving.

DC needs to prioritize its own residents, not convenient driving in DC for people who don't live in DC.

This is a pretty shitty attitude towards people -- cops, public school teachers, government workers -- who can't afford to live near where they work. Also hard not to notice that the anti-car people are all upper income white people and the people just trying to get to work are disproportionately black and brown.

The notion that drivers are disproportionately poorer is stone cold BS. Want a citation? Well here you go:

You think lower income folks are going car free because public transportation is easier and faster? Beg to disagree. It's another way lower income folks who live outside the city core are at a disadvantage.



"While “car-free” implies a positive decision to live without a car, the lack of reliable transportation alternatives in these areas means the absence of a car can compound other hardships, potentially lengthening residents’ commutes and reducing access to grocery stores and other amenities."

https://www.dcpolicycenter.org/publications/easiest-live-car-free-d-c/

And it's also true that public transportation can't be improved. What are they going to do, run more buses and trains??

Yep. If you give a whit about the working poor - or just about anything other than protecting your own car dependent lifestyle - you advocate for improved public transportation. Auto addiction is a dead end road.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bottom line is that when commute times are less with public transportation, people will choose public transportation. When commute times are less with cars, people will use cars.

Eh, that depends on the time difference. My commute to work into DC is 25 minutes by car. If I could make that commute in 10 minutes by transit, I'd still take my car because I don't have to share my car with other people, some of whom may be drunk and/or potentially dangerous.

Places like New York and Tokyo are outliers, because transit is so much faster than driving. For most people, potentially shaving a few minutes off of a commute isn't worth it because of the negatives of public transit.

If you prefer a longer commute, that's your choice. However, public policy does not have to enable your choice.

You missed my point.

Given the current state of Metro, you're going to have a tough time getting people out of their cars unless you can significantly shorten their commute. And, for most people commuting into DC, Metro would make their commute longer, not shorter. I mean, I live in north Arlington, and trying to take public transit would double my commute, at least. The calculus for people living even further out is worse.

If the public policy you're pushing doesn't make sense to the majority of people, you'll get huge pushback.

Plenty of people are already out of their cars. And plenty of other people don't even have cars.

Drive if you want to drive. Nobody's stopping you. But there's no reason why the DC government should make it easy for north Arlington residents to drive.

DC needs people to come in from Virginia and Maryland to spend money in the District in order to fill the DC government's tax coffers. You may have noticed that downtown is half-full on a good day, and mostly empty on Mondays and Fridays. This is a major concern for the DC government.

If your plan is to make it less attractive for suburban residents to come into the District by making driving more of a hassle, you're proposing putting the city into a fiscal death spiral.

If only there were ways to get from Virginia and Maryland to DC without driving.

DC needs to prioritize its own residents, not convenient driving in DC for people who don't live in DC.

This is a pretty shitty attitude towards people -- cops, public school teachers, government workers -- who can't afford to live near where they work. Also hard not to notice that the anti-car people are all upper income white people and the people just trying to get to work are disproportionately black and brown.

Add healthcare workers, most of the staff line hospital cleaning, transporters, nursing assistants, etc. for DC hospitals live in the city. Significant amount of nurses. I work for a DC hospital and very, very few live in DC

The reason that these people can’t afford to live in DC has a lot to do with zoning ordinances upheld by the same cruddy NIMBYs that oppose infrastructure improvements that would allow these people to get to work in ways other than driving.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bottom line is that when commute times are less with public transportation, people will choose public transportation. When commute times are less with cars, people will use cars.

Eh, that depends on the time difference. My commute to work into DC is 25 minutes by car. If I could make that commute in 10 minutes by transit, I'd still take my car because I don't have to share my car with other people, some of whom may be drunk and/or potentially dangerous.

Places like New York and Tokyo are outliers, because transit is so much faster than driving. For most people, potentially shaving a few minutes off of a commute isn't worth it because of the negatives of public transit.

If you prefer a longer commute, that's your choice. However, public policy does not have to enable your choice.

You missed my point.

Given the current state of Metro, you're going to have a tough time getting people out of their cars unless you can significantly shorten their commute. And, for most people commuting into DC, Metro would make their commute longer, not shorter. I mean, I live in north Arlington, and trying to take public transit would double my commute, at least. The calculus for people living even further out is worse.

If the public policy you're pushing doesn't make sense to the majority of people, you'll get huge pushback.

Plenty of people are already out of their cars. And plenty of other people don't even have cars.

Drive if you want to drive. Nobody's stopping you. But there's no reason why the DC government should make it easy for north Arlington residents to drive.

DC needs people to come in from Virginia and Maryland to spend money in the District in order to fill the DC government's tax coffers. You may have noticed that downtown is half-full on a good day, and mostly empty on Mondays and Fridays. This is a major concern for the DC government.

If your plan is to make it less attractive for suburban residents to come into the District by making driving more of a hassle, you're proposing putting the city into a fiscal death spiral.

If only there were ways to get from Virginia and Maryland to DC without driving.

DC needs to prioritize its own residents, not convenient driving in DC for people who don't live in DC.

This is a pretty shitty attitude towards people -- cops, public school teachers, government workers -- who can't afford to live near where they work. Also hard not to notice that the anti-car people are all upper income white people and the people just trying to get to work are disproportionately black and brown.

It’s also interesting that these people also probably claim to be YIMBYs but are really NIMBYs when push comes to shove.

[Anonymous]

Scientific proofs that those who complain about jerk cyclists are revealing much more about themselves than they intend: https://jalopnik.com/study-finds-cyclists-are-better-people-than-drivers-1850964103

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bottom line is that when commute times are less with public transportation, people will choose public transportation. When commute times are less with cars, people will use cars.

Eh, that depends on the time difference. My commute to work into DC is 25 minutes by car. If I could make that commute in 10 minutes by transit, I'd still take my car because I don't have to share my car with other people, some of whom may be drunk and/or potentially dangerous.

Places like New York and Tokyo are outliers, because transit is so much faster than driving. For most people, potentially shaving a few minutes off of a commute isn't worth it because of the negatives of public transit.

If you prefer a longer commute, that's your choice. However, public policy does not have to enable your choice.

You missed my point.

Given the current state of Metro, you're going to have a tough time getting people out of their cars unless you can significantly shorten their commute. And, for most people commuting into DC, Metro would make their commute longer, not shorter. I mean, I live in north Arlington, and trying to take public transit would double my commute, at least. The calculus for people living even further out is worse.

If the public policy you're pushing doesn't make sense to the majority of people, you'll get huge pushback.

Plenty of people are already out of their cars. And plenty of other people don't even have cars.

Drive if you want to drive. Nobody's stopping you. But there's no reason why the DC government should make it easy for north Arlington residents to drive.

DC needs people to come in from Virginia and Maryland to spend money in the District in order to fill the DC government's tax coffers. You may have noticed that downtown is half-full on a good day, and mostly empty on Mondays and Fridays. This is a major concern for the DC government.

If your plan is to make it less attractive for suburban residents to come into the District by making driving more of a hassle, you're proposing putting the city into a fiscal death spiral.

If only there were ways to get from Virginia and Maryland to DC without driving.

DC needs to prioritize its own residents, not convenient driving in DC for people who don't live in DC.

This is a pretty shitty attitude towards people -- cops, public school teachers, government workers -- who can't afford to live near where they work. Also hard not to notice that the anti-car people are all upper income white people and the people just trying to get to work are disproportionately black and brown.

It’s also interesting that these people also probably claim to be YIMBYs but are really NIMBYs when push comes to shove.

I hate to break it to you, but you are not making a lot of sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Scientific proofs that those who complain about jerk cyclists are revealing much more about themselves than they intend: https://jalopnik.com/study-finds-cyclists-are-better-people-than-drivers-1850964103

“Cyclists think very highly of themselves” is not exactly breaking news.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bottom line is that when commute times are less with public transportation, people will choose public transportation. When commute times are less with cars, people will use cars.

Eh, that depends on the time difference. My commute to work into DC is 25 minutes by car. If I could make that commute in 10 minutes by transit, I'd still take my car because I don't have to share my car with other people, some of whom may be drunk and/or potentially dangerous.

Places like New York and Tokyo are outliers, because transit is so much faster than driving. For most people, potentially shaving a few minutes off of a commute isn't worth it because of the negatives of public transit.

If you prefer a longer commute, that's your choice. However, public policy does not have to enable your choice.

You missed my point.

Given the current state of Metro, you're going to have a tough time getting people out of their cars unless you can significantly shorten their commute. And, for most people commuting into DC, Metro would make their commute longer, not shorter. I mean, I live in north Arlington, and trying to take public transit would double my commute, at least. The calculus for people living even further out is worse.

If the public policy you're pushing doesn't make sense to the majority of people, you'll get huge pushback.

Plenty of people are already out of their cars. And plenty of other people don't even have cars.

Drive if you want to drive. Nobody's stopping you. But there's no reason why the DC government should make it easy for north Arlington residents to drive.

DC needs people to come in from Virginia and Maryland to spend money in the District in order to fill the DC government's tax coffers. You may have noticed that downtown is half-full on a good day, and mostly empty on Mondays and Fridays. This is a major concern for the DC government.

If your plan is to make it less attractive for suburban residents to come into the District by making driving more of a hassle, you're proposing putting the city into a fiscal death spiral.

If only there were ways to get from Virginia and Maryland to DC without driving.

DC needs to prioritize its own residents, not convenient driving in DC for people who don't live in DC.

This is a pretty shitty attitude towards people -- cops, public school teachers, government workers -- who can't afford to live near where they work. Also hard not to notice that the anti-car people are all upper income white people and the people just trying to get to work are disproportionately black and brown.

It’s also interesting that these people also probably claim to be YIMBYs but are really NIMBYs when push comes to shove.

I hate to break it to you, but you are not making a lot of sense.

The attitude that my neighborhood is for me and that others are not welcome is a classic suburban NIMBY attitude animates the whole “ban cars” thing.

Because guess what? Everyone in the suburbs wants to ban everyone else’s cars from coming through their neighborhood too. Most suburban neighborhoods were even designed that way, with cul de sacs and winding roads.

So, while you think you are being all urban and edgy. The only thing you’re actually doing is taking the suburban values that you grew up with (“people from outside my neighborhood don’t belong here) and have transposed them to your current life in the city.

Once your kids are of school age, you’ll probably pretend to have some agonizing reflection on moving to the suburbs. But you will in the end.