• pineapple@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 days ago

    With you first point i disagree. I think public transport is often just fine or even preferable for people with mobility issues. If they are wheelchair bound then they cannot drive. And public transport has come a long way in terms of supporting disabled people such as most trains trams buses from were I come from now support wheelchair access.

    Although I would be interested if there are any examples were taking public transport is infeasible or unhelpful to specific situations.

    • domdanial@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      Wheelchair bound people absolutely can drive, there are a lot of retrofit vehicles that support a wheelchair and have alternative controls.

      Maybe not ideal, but in some parts of the US not having a car is a real problem.

      • cmhe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Why would wheelchair bound people have to pay so much more to get car they can use, when they can pay the same price as everyone else for a ticket to ride with public transportation?

        Also there are blind and other handicapped people that can easily ride public transport on their own, but would have to rely on others to ride with their own car.

        Public transport is especially useful for the handicapped and elderly compared to personal cars.

        • Lv_InSaNe_vL@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          why would they buy a car when they can pay the same price for public transport

          They answered that

          In some parts of the US not having a car would be a real problem

          And truthfully, for a not insignificant part of the country, it won’t be. Population densities just wouldn’t support it.

          • Malfeasant@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            why would they buy a car when they can pay the same price for public transport

            They answered that

            Basically, because they have no choice. More public transportation is choice.

            • Lv_InSaNe_vL@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              Yes it’s definitely 100% a reasonable choice for people who don’t even technically live in cities. Absolutely

              • LovesTha🥧@floss.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 day ago

                @Lv_InSaNe_vL @Malfeasant I’m happy to limit the ‘no personal cars’ to areas that are 1/4 acre blocks and below. (Remembering that a 1/4 acre block gets back a substantial amount of useful land when you delete the driveway, so blocks all become ‘bigger’ in such a system)

                Places that are substantially less dense than that do benefit from cars. But that isn’t that large a % of people, while it is a very large % of the land mass.

    • faythofdragons@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      My local public transit only commes by five times a day, and if the bus is already full, they’ll not let the wheelchair user on. Ostensibly they’ll send a van to pick them up, but those don’t adhere to a schedule and can take hours to arrive.

      Transit around here is so bad that I’ve had multiple jobs tell me I’m not eligible for hire if I rely on the bus.

      • LovesTha🥧@floss.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        2 days ago

        @faythofdragons @pineapple shitty PT is not the goal. Yes there are PT systems that are shit, that doesn’t mean good PT is worse than good individual car ownership (something I’ve never heard of), it just means shitty PT need to be less shitty.

        • faythofdragons@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          Shitty public transit is the goal around here though. Its being run by fucking NIMBYs that don’t like that the bus that goes to my town also services a reservation, and just whine whine whine that the fully packed bus is too expensive and should be cut.

            • faythofdragons@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 day ago

              Western Washington, surprisingly enough. I thought the area had fantastic transit before I moved, but outside the cities it sucks. I’m currently waiting for a taxi because my MRI finished after the last bus home. It’s only 5:30pm.

    • kameecoding@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Sure no problem, let’s say you live in a village that’s next to a small town and then you are sent to an appointment to another doctor that’s only found in a nearby city, doing all that stuff is a lot of travelling, exhausting

      • loonsun@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Let’s say you live on the moon and need to reach earth for the funeral of your Aunt who rules the underground city of Uthrangon.

        You are discussing edge cases. Urban planning should consider edge cases but not base the code design of a city after them.

        • Lv_InSaNe_vL@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          I disagree. I think disability access should be one of the most important things considered when designing public spaces.

          Its something that I (an American) honestly took for granted until I spent some time in Europe. I’m fortunate to be completely physically and mentally (for this conversation lol) capable, but I have friends who are not. But going around Europe, especially outside of big cities, it was shocking to see how many buildings aren’t wheelchair accessible, how roads crossings aren’t designed for people with vision impairments, how little braille there was, bathrooms without mobility bars, and countless other little things.

          And the argument I heard a lot was either “but they’re old buildings” or “it’ll cost too much money” and honestly those are some BS answers.

          Idk the US does a lot wrong, but the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) really does seem to be the global standard. And it’s an incredibly good thing.

        • kameecoding@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          I am not discussing edge cases I provided the example asked for, I agree with James May that cars in cities suck and we should plan cities better and reduce their numbers as much as possible, I just dislike the absolutist nature of the headline it’s the exact type of headline that opposers of good urban planning will point to when accusing people of wanting to taker freedum and their cars