It's an interesting question I would like to see answered here: policymakers know that more car infrastructure does not improve traffic. This has been an established fact for at least 75 years at this point. So why do they keep doubling down on it? What is the motive force behind this? Is it that cars are one of two gigantic purchases (the other being housing) that every person is basically obligated to make, so it's a giant cash cow for the capitalists?
Because governance is determined by material interests of the ruling class, not rationality. There's no Big Bike, and Big Car isn't going to dissolve itself after reading a few articles by scientists. And yeah you're not going to get a clear answer if you ask. This stuff is generally obfuscated in public speech.
Despite the other replies' good points, I think Doug Ford's Ontario is a unique case because he's so terminally car brained he sincerely thinks that adding more car infrastructure will help relieve traffic. On top of that he's also a corrupt pig that's making decisions almost entirely for the benefit of capitalists who have been friendly with him. Basically all his major transit decisions have been made to juice property values for big land owners (Highway 413, Bradford Bypass, Ontario Line stations, etc).
Does he have his hands in any construction businesses? A lot of city government officials will get kickbacks from local companies. Construction can be a really easy way for money to disappear or commit insurance fraud.
Yup it's pretty much that, exacerbated in this case by the fact that auto manufacturing makes up an unusually large portion of Ontario's economy. Ontario produces the second most cars of any state or province in North America after Michigan.
Yeah, this. I know it's tempting to imagine that all the people opposing good policies are evil masterminds operating on a reverse Marxist understanding of the world, but the problems are much more structural. All sorts of weirdos run for office, and businesses fund the campaigns of the ones whose weirdo ideas line up with what they want, and that is sufficient to put people in power who perpetuate capitalist interests, without anybody actually thinking "perpetuate capitalist interests" at any point in the process.
It's an interesting question I would like to see answered here: policymakers know that more car infrastructure does not improve traffic. This has been an established fact for at least 75 years at this point. So why do they keep doubling down on it? What is the motive force behind this? Is it that cars are one of two gigantic purchases (the other being housing) that every person is basically obligated to make, so it's a giant cash cow for the capitalists?
Because governance is determined by material interests of the ruling class, not rationality. There's no Big Bike, and Big Car isn't going to dissolve itself after reading a few articles by scientists. And yeah you're not going to get a clear answer if you ask. This stuff is generally obfuscated in public speech.
Despite the other replies' good points, I think Doug Ford's Ontario is a unique case because he's so terminally car brained he sincerely thinks that adding more car infrastructure will help relieve traffic. On top of that he's also a corrupt pig that's making decisions almost entirely for the benefit of capitalists who have been friendly with him. Basically all his major transit decisions have been made to juice property values for big land owners (Highway 413, Bradford Bypass, Ontario Line stations, etc).
Does he have his hands in any construction businesses? A lot of city government officials will get kickbacks from local companies. Construction can be a really easy way for money to disappear or commit insurance fraud.
Yup it's pretty much that, exacerbated in this case by the fact that auto manufacturing makes up an unusually large portion of Ontario's economy. Ontario produces the second most cars of any state or province in North America after Michigan.
It was like 20% of jobs were related to transportation or something at one point.
Never assume they're not just stupid.
Like, yeah, class interests and donor pressure and cultural bias etc etc. Ignoring all of that, some of them are just useful idiots.
Yeah, this. I know it's tempting to imagine that all the people opposing good policies are evil masterminds operating on a reverse Marxist understanding of the world, but the problems are much more structural. All sorts of weirdos run for office, and businesses fund the campaigns of the ones whose weirdo ideas line up with what they want, and that is sufficient to put people in power who perpetuate capitalist interests, without anybody actually thinking "perpetuate capitalist interests" at any point in the process.
deleted by creator