• @FireRetardant
    link
    21 year ago

    Public transit is the standard and the normal around the world. People will commute to work in whichever way is fastest and conveneient for them. Many people would rather read a book or browse the web while a train takes them to work over sitting in traffic. The only reason we don’t currently demand it is because many people in Canada have never experienced good transit and walkability so they really don’t know we could be building much better. Your mobility freedom in this country is nearly dependant on a driver’s lisence or access to a car.

    We shouldn’t have to be doing the tax shake down and public revolt steps when we know by the numbers that transit is more energy and carbon effecient. Once those alternatives exist, a carbon tax would be much more effective because now people actually have a choice in their transportation.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      21 year ago

      The carbon tax isn’t a “shakedown” btw, the income is redistributed.

      Are you suggesting there is a city in Canada that doesn’t have some form of public transit? I’m not aware of any large cities like that so I really struggle to understand why you feel the carbon pricing wouldn’t be effective right now.

      • @FireRetardant
        link
        11 year ago

        Having public transit is not the same as having reliable and competitive public transit. The transit has to be reliably competitive in travel time and cost to truly see people shift to using it. If most car commutes in the city are 25 minutes, and the average transit time is 1hr 15 minutes, the transit is not competetive enough to attract riders except those with no other option at all.

        Transit can be improved by extending the network, increasing the frequency, improving the speed (like dedicated bus lanes or light rail lines), and competitive pricing.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          -11 year ago

          All of those improvements do and are happening though, but ridership is used to inform the changes.

          The denser parts of cities do have transit that accomplishes what you’re asking for.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            11 year ago

            Unfortunately a lot of people don’t live in cities at all, let alone the dense parts with the service like you describe. EVs may not be the answer overall, but for many people across the country they’re the only viable first step away from ICE vehicles.

            Right now with affordability the way it is, it feels like we’re getting a lot of stick without much carrot.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              11 year ago

              A lot of people do love in dense areas in cities though. That’s what makes them dense.

              And programs like the carbon pricing makes those places more attractive to build denser housing.

              EVs don’t even need to be the only alternative, if the carbon pricing is encouraging someone to buy a more fuel efficient ICE vehicle, the incentive is still working.

              I still have such a hard time understanding how people are calling the carbon pricing setup a stick, most of us are getting more money back from the program. Yes overall oil prices worldwide have gone up since the program started, but international oil prices aren’t impacted by Canadian carbon pricing policy…

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                01 year ago

                Not everything is black and white. I can agree with the idea of a carbon tax while also acknowledging how it can feel less fair to different people in different areas.