• themeatbridge
    link
    English
    9
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Isn’t that a bit self-fulfilling, though? If more people rode the bus, then it wouldn’t be all creeps and teens.

    For my part, having lived in Philly where the people on the busses are actually quite pleasant, it was still too inefficient to make it work. A ten minute drive would be over an hour on the bus, and god help you if the bus was running late (I’m kidding, the bus was always running late). That’s a problem that gets worse when there are more riders. As soon as it got too cold to ride a bike, busses would be completely full and unable to take more riders, which meant you’d have to wait for the next one.

    Employers aren’t very understanding about being late. Even if you had a direct route from your house to your job, you’d still need to account for extra time for delays. Taking the bus means you pack on two extra hours onto your commute every day, which even at minimum wage is $3,770 worth of time every year. At a living wage, it’s over $10,000 per year. Even with upkeep and insurance, anybody getting paid enough to live practically needs a car. And that’s if you live and work in the city, which is the ideal situation for public transit. Move to the burbs, and that bus ain’t going where you are.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      62 months ago

      It seems like it would be a self fulfilling prophecy, you are right.

      At the same time, having lived in London for 10 years… This is from today: https://red.artemislena.eu/r/london/comments/1fprfcy/i_cant_even_take_the_bus_in_peace_due_to_sexual/

      The argument that more people taking public transport would somehow fix this makes no sense in a place like London. It’s a gigantic city with public transport permanently bursting at the seams.

      A bus through a dodgy area at midnight won’t feel safe unless it’s policed somehow. I don’t know where the resources for that could possibly come from.