Bit too absolutist imo, people with mobility issues exist, i’d say most cars don’t belong in cities, and it would be solved by good design, traffic restrictions etc.
when I was a kid almost all kids took the bus and walked to school, now I live opposite of an elementary school in a “socialist block” in middle europe and in the morning there is a huge line of cars dropping off kids, the school literally has a roundabout in front of it’s entrance to make it easier, it’s awful design, not to mention there is literally a bus stop on the other side of the school.
There is 0 reason for kids to be driven to school.
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.
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
Mobility issues are the first dog whistle of car pros, and the first point to be dissected entirely.
Handicapped people have tools they use to navigate an office floor, and they use those same tools to cross from their apartment to the corner store. Building pedestrian-friendly cities and encouraging low-speed transport like bikes and trams helps them too.
Many handicap users also can’t drive cars, meaning public transit options suited to their common routes are a godsend. Advocates of bikes often encourage having that whole setup, so people can pick between walking, biking, or trains as needed.
Bit too absolutist imo, people with mobility issues exist, i’d say most cars don’t belong in cities, and it would be solved by good design, traffic restrictions etc.
when I was a kid almost all kids took the bus and walked to school, now I live opposite of an elementary school in a “socialist block” in middle europe and in the morning there is a huge line of cars dropping off kids, the school literally has a roundabout in front of it’s entrance to make it easier, it’s awful design, not to mention there is literally a bus stop on the other side of the school.
There is 0 reason for kids to be driven to school.
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.
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
Mobility issues are the first dog whistle of car pros, and the first point to be dissected entirely.
Handicapped people have tools they use to navigate an office floor, and they use those same tools to cross from their apartment to the corner store. Building pedestrian-friendly cities and encouraging low-speed transport like bikes and trams helps them too.
Many handicap users also can’t drive cars, meaning public transit options suited to their common routes are a godsend. Advocates of bikes often encourage having that whole setup, so people can pick between walking, biking, or trains as needed.