Because a bus that serves a town of 500 people will come once an hour, at most. Also, many people can’t walk far to/from the one bus stop. Busses do not solve a problem in small towns, because there is no traffic and plenty of parking.
It seems that you’re all only thinking about servicing just the small town itself, and not a larger bus line that services multiple smaller towns to get them to a larger city area and back, or to each other.
The usefulness is not in traversing the rural town. It’s to get the fuck out of one.
A bus line was added semi-recently near me that would go from a town of 100k to a town of 650k. I thought that would be useful for getting me to go to the larger city a little more often for events. However, that doesn’t do anything to get rid of my car. From what I remember, it didn’t even drop off somewhere good, so you’re stuck taking an Uber after that.
If I want to go see a concert right now I can drive 18 minutes, or I can take a bus for over an hour and walk a mile.
To eliminate my car I need reliable and frequent mass transit that goes everywhere I need to go 99% of the time. For the 1% I could rent a car or try to bum a ride with someone else going. I think I’d only be willing to rent a car in this fashion twice per year… and it has to be easy to get to the car rental place via mass transit. Last time I rented a car locally I had to take an Uber.
Without that, I still have my car, and that car is easier, faster, and often cheaper than the alternative… especially if I place a modest value on my time.
There is also the question of what to do on the other side when you get to the other city. If a train or car both take 6 hours (which is a situation I’m in if I want to get to a city of 2.5m), then it’s a question of what I’m doing when I get there. Can I get off the train, hop on the rail line and get to where I need to go, or do I need to go somewhere which isn’t serviced? In which case do I rent a car, or just drive my own car 6 hours instead of paying for a car rental and a train ticket?
There are also people who live in those rural towns that don’t want to leave, or just need to get around to go to the store, take their kids to soccer practice, etc. My sister would have to walk over a mile down the side of a highway (with semi-trucks flying by at 60mph) to get to a town of fewer than 600 people, where the bus would likely be. Then that bus would take her to a city with a population of 20k where she does her shopping. No bus currently exists, but it’s a 20 minute drive, if we use my bus as an estimate we can say it might take an hour… but probably more, but because of the lower population and more out of the way stops. So from having the idea to go shopping it might take her what 2 hours to get to the store, maybe more if she has to wait for the bus… and on the way home she has to walk down that highway with all her grocery bags for a mile? With a car it takes her 20 minutes.
Don’t get me wrong. I love visiting other countries with good transit systems. When I was in London there was a grocery store between the Underground and my AirBnb, it was super nice. In Japan I went all over the place in Tokyo without ever thinking about a car. That just isn’t a reality in the US and it would take decades and trillions of dollars, along with migrations of a lot of people, to make that happen. Even if cities like Chicago it still kind of sucks. I’ve used the rails in Chicago a fair bit, and I prefer them to Chicago traffic, but the hub and spoke can only take you so far.
The larger city area will often be hundreds of miles away with not enough population in between to have more than one or two people at most in any given bus even stopping at multiple small towns. Mass transit it great in cities, but it desperately needs population density to be efficient.
The larger city area will often be hundreds of miles away
How large is large? How are people getting goods at all living hundreds of miles away from a population center? It doesn’t have to be a giant metropolitan like LA or NYC.
Gosh, I think you’d have to be in the REAL middle of nowhere to be even 100 miles from a population center. Maybe out west in either of the Dakotas or Wyoming or something, but I imagine even then it’s quite rare and represents a fraction of a percentage point of the population. “Never let perfect be the enemy of good”
How large is large? How are people getting goods at all living hundreds of miles away from a population center?
Usually you consolidate all your errands into one trip every week or two where you buy everything you need at the larger town of a few tens of thousands of people.
My grandmother lived in rural Kansas, and her town had a grocery store and a gas station. Anything else was a 3 hour drive to buy.
Ironically, in some ways it’s actually a lot better place to live now than it was back then purely because of ecommerce, but the jobs issue is even worse now that it was back then, because all the farm work is now controlled by megacorps instead of individual families.
The final mile is always the killer. And the greater the number of destinations, the more complex and impractical a mass transit system becomes. This is the fly in the ointment that nobody ever seems to want to address directly.
Yes, a car is inefficient in terms of number of ass cheeks moved per square footage taken up. However, every single one of those cars can (and probably is) delivering its occupant to a different destination, and in most cases practically directly to it. A train cannot do this. A bus cannot do this. Trains are excellent at moving a large number of people from a relatively small high concentration geographical area to another single location with a high demand destination nearby. A bus is decent at moving a moderate number of people along a predefined corridor, provided the passengers do not have particularly specific requirements of when they leave or arrive. But the more stops you add for the bus or train, the slower and slower it gets. If you compensate for this by adding more routes, the number of connections a passenger must make to get from one specific destination to another makes the amount of time taken pretty much totally nonviable once you reach 4 or 5.
Single or limited destination mass transit methods can never be a total replacement for individual transportation. However, that individual transportation doesn’t necessarily need to be a car. Bicycles, scooters, and motorcycles are more space efficient per number of passengers, especially if only 1 or 2 passengers need to travel at a time (see also: Southeast Asia).
All of these methods need to coexist to create a functional and balanced transit system. There is no silver bullet, and the issue is much more complex than a single smarmy bar graph.
Putting in even a single stop at a rural town could easily add 30 minutes each way to the route. Probably more, getting from a hub city to these rural towns is a good amount of driving with not much of anything between. A bus that stops at a rural 500 person town once every hour or so isn’t moving enough people to be more efficient than cars. Now you want to do that for every town surrounding a hub city? The economy of scale simply doesn’t exist for rural areas. Even suburbs stretch that a bit.
So basically, they would drive to a bus station, just to get on a bus? How often do you expect them to need to into the city? And they already have a car at this point, why would they get on a bus?
So basically, they would drive to a bus station, just to get on a bus?
Are you for real with this? Have you even ever seen a functioning bus line like this before? No. That’s not basically it at all.
You have a couple stops in the small town direct from the hub/city to pick up and ferry people to the larger area. From there they can walk/take another bus or other form of transport like a train. It’s similar to light rail, but with roads and busses instead of tracks and trains.
how often do you expect people to need to go into the city?
It’d be a lot easier for some people to find jobs who can’t afford their own car if they could actually get to the city where the jobs are. So every day.
Well, yeah. If you have your own car, then there is no reason to use a bus. The only reason to use a bus is if you don’t have a car, like you got multiple DUIs or you just totaled your car, but even then you would probably just get a taxi or uber.
Your town underinvested in transit because everyone has a car, and they sprawled the architecture because everyone has a car. People got by in rural areas with trains just fine before cars were invented
I would love a better bus or LR in my town, but that shit ain’t happening in my life time.
The bus comes every hour, if that, and doesn’t really go to many places.
If I went full public transit, I’d have to schedule the county transportation via state health insurance and schedule the whole week in advance just to even get to a bus stop…and that’s if I even have medicaid.
I try not to drive as much as possible, make my errands all at once, or while en route to and from work. Me and partner car pool. We have one hybrid vehicle.
The other people round here LOVE their coal rollers.
Why don’t you join the transit movement and push for light rail in your town? You could make some persuasive arguments to the local government. Strong transit systems lead to higher GDP and more tax revenue
I don’t mean to be a doomer…but that would probably just be me yelling at clouds to a bunch of out of touch backwoods gangsters. However its worth a look into what is going on in my area. Also worth noting we do have a bus line for commuting into NYC once a day real early AM. So it’s not all doom and gloom I suppose.
![[image] Cars are an incredibly inefficient way to move people](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/a55ce0e0-9740-4207-9d5f-64bc68231a3d.jpeg){kind=link}
Because a bus that serves a town of 500 people will come once an hour, at most. Also, many people can’t walk far to/from the one bus stop. Busses do not solve a problem in small towns, because there is no traffic and plenty of parking.
Switzerland has rail that serves small towns and it’s pretty frequent: https://youtu.be/muPcHs-E4qc
@KevonLooney@lemm.ee, @Blamemeta@lemmy.world, @bob_wiley@lemmy.world
It seems that you’re all only thinking about servicing just the small town itself, and not a larger bus line that services multiple smaller towns to get them to a larger city area and back, or to each other.
The usefulness is not in traversing the rural town. It’s to get the fuck out of one.
A bus line was added semi-recently near me that would go from a town of 100k to a town of 650k. I thought that would be useful for getting me to go to the larger city a little more often for events. However, that doesn’t do anything to get rid of my car. From what I remember, it didn’t even drop off somewhere good, so you’re stuck taking an Uber after that.
If I want to go see a concert right now I can drive 18 minutes, or I can take a bus for over an hour and walk a mile.
To eliminate my car I need reliable and frequent mass transit that goes everywhere I need to go 99% of the time. For the 1% I could rent a car or try to bum a ride with someone else going. I think I’d only be willing to rent a car in this fashion twice per year… and it has to be easy to get to the car rental place via mass transit. Last time I rented a car locally I had to take an Uber.
Without that, I still have my car, and that car is easier, faster, and often cheaper than the alternative… especially if I place a modest value on my time.
There is also the question of what to do on the other side when you get to the other city. If a train or car both take 6 hours (which is a situation I’m in if I want to get to a city of 2.5m), then it’s a question of what I’m doing when I get there. Can I get off the train, hop on the rail line and get to where I need to go, or do I need to go somewhere which isn’t serviced? In which case do I rent a car, or just drive my own car 6 hours instead of paying for a car rental and a train ticket?
There are also people who live in those rural towns that don’t want to leave, or just need to get around to go to the store, take their kids to soccer practice, etc. My sister would have to walk over a mile down the side of a highway (with semi-trucks flying by at 60mph) to get to a town of fewer than 600 people, where the bus would likely be. Then that bus would take her to a city with a population of 20k where she does her shopping. No bus currently exists, but it’s a 20 minute drive, if we use my bus as an estimate we can say it might take an hour… but probably more, but because of the lower population and more out of the way stops. So from having the idea to go shopping it might take her what 2 hours to get to the store, maybe more if she has to wait for the bus… and on the way home she has to walk down that highway with all her grocery bags for a mile? With a car it takes her 20 minutes.
Don’t get me wrong. I love visiting other countries with good transit systems. When I was in London there was a grocery store between the Underground and my AirBnb, it was super nice. In Japan I went all over the place in Tokyo without ever thinking about a car. That just isn’t a reality in the US and it would take decades and trillions of dollars, along with migrations of a lot of people, to make that happen. Even if cities like Chicago it still kind of sucks. I’ve used the rails in Chicago a fair bit, and I prefer them to Chicago traffic, but the hub and spoke can only take you so far.
The larger city area will often be hundreds of miles away with not enough population in between to have more than one or two people at most in any given bus even stopping at multiple small towns. Mass transit it great in cities, but it desperately needs population density to be efficient.
How large is large? How are people getting goods at all living hundreds of miles away from a population center? It doesn’t have to be a giant metropolitan like LA or NYC.
The same idea @DrAnthony@lemmy.world is putting into words better.
Gosh, I think you’d have to be in the REAL middle of nowhere to be even 100 miles from a population center. Maybe out west in either of the Dakotas or Wyoming or something, but I imagine even then it’s quite rare and represents a fraction of a percentage point of the population. “Never let perfect be the enemy of good”
Usually you consolidate all your errands into one trip every week or two where you buy everything you need at the larger town of a few tens of thousands of people.
My grandmother lived in rural Kansas, and her town had a grocery store and a gas station. Anything else was a 3 hour drive to buy.
That’s…not a place I’d want to spend my life at
Ironically, in some ways it’s actually a lot better place to live now than it was back then purely because of ecommerce, but the jobs issue is even worse now that it was back then, because all the farm work is now controlled by megacorps instead of individual families.
The final mile is always the killer. And the greater the number of destinations, the more complex and impractical a mass transit system becomes. This is the fly in the ointment that nobody ever seems to want to address directly.
Yes, a car is inefficient in terms of number of ass cheeks moved per square footage taken up. However, every single one of those cars can (and probably is) delivering its occupant to a different destination, and in most cases practically directly to it. A train cannot do this. A bus cannot do this. Trains are excellent at moving a large number of people from a relatively small high concentration geographical area to another single location with a high demand destination nearby. A bus is decent at moving a moderate number of people along a predefined corridor, provided the passengers do not have particularly specific requirements of when they leave or arrive. But the more stops you add for the bus or train, the slower and slower it gets. If you compensate for this by adding more routes, the number of connections a passenger must make to get from one specific destination to another makes the amount of time taken pretty much totally nonviable once you reach 4 or 5.
Single or limited destination mass transit methods can never be a total replacement for individual transportation. However, that individual transportation doesn’t necessarily need to be a car. Bicycles, scooters, and motorcycles are more space efficient per number of passengers, especially if only 1 or 2 passengers need to travel at a time (see also: Southeast Asia).
All of these methods need to coexist to create a functional and balanced transit system. There is no silver bullet, and the issue is much more complex than a single smarmy bar graph.
Putting in even a single stop at a rural town could easily add 30 minutes each way to the route. Probably more, getting from a hub city to these rural towns is a good amount of driving with not much of anything between. A bus that stops at a rural 500 person town once every hour or so isn’t moving enough people to be more efficient than cars. Now you want to do that for every town surrounding a hub city? The economy of scale simply doesn’t exist for rural areas. Even suburbs stretch that a bit.
So basically, they would drive to a bus station, just to get on a bus? How often do you expect them to need to into the city? And they already have a car at this point, why would they get on a bus?
Are you for real with this? Have you even ever seen a functioning bus line like this before? No. That’s not basically it at all.
You have a couple stops in the small town direct from the hub/city to pick up and ferry people to the larger area. From there they can walk/take another bus or other form of transport like a train. It’s similar to light rail, but with roads and busses instead of tracks and trains.
It’d be a lot easier for some people to find jobs who can’t afford their own car if they could actually get to the city where the jobs are. So every day.
Well, yeah. If you have your own car, then there is no reason to use a bus. The only reason to use a bus is if you don’t have a car, like you got multiple DUIs or you just totaled your car, but even then you would probably just get a taxi or uber.
Nobody was arguing that, though, so it’s irrelevant to the conversation.
Your town underinvested in transit because everyone has a car, and they sprawled the architecture because everyone has a car. People got by in rural areas with trains just fine before cars were invented
I would love a better bus or LR in my town, but that shit ain’t happening in my life time.
The bus comes every hour, if that, and doesn’t really go to many places.
If I went full public transit, I’d have to schedule the county transportation via state health insurance and schedule the whole week in advance just to even get to a bus stop…and that’s if I even have medicaid.
I try not to drive as much as possible, make my errands all at once, or while en route to and from work. Me and partner car pool. We have one hybrid vehicle.
The other people round here LOVE their coal rollers.
Why don’t you join the transit movement and push for light rail in your town? You could make some persuasive arguments to the local government. Strong transit systems lead to higher GDP and more tax revenue
I don’t mean to be a doomer…but that would probably just be me yelling at clouds to a bunch of out of touch backwoods gangsters. However its worth a look into what is going on in my area. Also worth noting we do have a bus line for commuting into NYC once a day real early AM. So it’s not all doom and gloom I suppose.
Having grown up in a rural area, here’s what I think the solution would look like.
Why can’t people in a 500 person town walk to the bus station? How is there traffic in them?? WHO IS PLANNING THIS