Safe Streets Rebel’s protest comes after automatic vehicles were blamed for incidents including crashing into a bus and running over a dog. City officials in June said…

  • GladiusB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    1 year ago

    The problem is no one will use them. Busses are full of homeless people and people that NEED to use them than they want to. I was a bus driver for many years. They don’t stop where everyone wants to go and it’s a necessity to most instead of an integrated way of life. The entire American culture would need to change.

      • GladiusB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        For sure. However do you change something that is mostly government subsidized and everyone that manages the systems are happy with the operations?

        • Spzi@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          everyone that manages the systems are happy with the operations?

          Is that the case? I suppose most car drivers are not happy with sitting in traffic jams. Better public transport would help.

    • howrar@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t know how it is in the US, but i can tell you that public transit is pretty good here in my city. A self-driving taxi would still be the ideal experience for sure, but taking a bus isn’t that much worse, and it’s definitely better than driving myself.

    • Spzi@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Busses are full of homeless people and people that NEED to use them than they want to.

      I heard this is the case in the United States. In Europe, as far as I can tell, it’s more common that people from all backgrounds take public transit, including ‘higher’ class people. Of course exceptions and reasons exist.

    • xSPYXEx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      That literally just proves that we do in fact need more busses. More vehicles would allow for a wider coverage with more frequent and well organized stops.

      • GladiusB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I like your idea, but implementing it is a bigger issue than you may realize. The transit systems in San Francisco are based on counties. Therefore it is a completely different governing body for each way out of the city proper.

        But coverage does not change the usage. That is several millions if not billions to reroute a busline to go to a different area. If only 10 people get on every two hours then another bus in a more populated area is more financially sound. We can sit and say more buses are the answer, but people being willing to get on to the bus is a part of the equation. I don’t see how you are going to eliminate 2 extra hours out of everyone’s commute and make them buy into it.