Public transportation is expensive to run let alone set up. The cheapest option of course would be buses but they don't really help all that much since they get stuck in traffic too.

[–] thatsTheCatch 1 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Public transport is actually fairly cheap compared to building, extending, and maintaining car-centric infrastructure

[–] TagMeInSkipIGotThis 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

And even if the bus is in the same traffic as the cars, there's 40 people in the bus that would otherwise be say minimum 20 cars, so even bussing (probably the worst form of public transport) acts as congestion reduction, even if its not as nice for the patrons as a train, lite rail, trolley or other separated medium would be.

[–] BalpeenHammer 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

When was the last time you were on a bus and it had 40 people in it?

[–] TagMeInSkipIGotThis 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I used to live in Wellington; 40 people on a bus wasn't uncommon in rush hour when the whole aisle was full of standing passengers. I think I read somewhere once that the newer double checkers they have can do upwards of 70+ if its chock with standing folks.

[–] BalpeenHammer 1 points 8 months ago

I have never ridden the bus in Wellington so maybe that's the exception. When was this?

[–] BalpeenHammer 1 points 8 months ago

That's a false comparison. The comparison isn't "build more public transport or build more buildings". It's build more public transport or don't build more public transport.