Cities should be mixtures of commuter and freight rail, lightrails, metros, and buses. Car rentals should be subsidised in some way for special use, but I want Japanese-style urban trucks at the largest and almost no urban private ownership. Union taxis can fill the gaps within the city. Also, those Dutch standardised bike lane updates with new road maintenance/construction that were in the latest Well There's Your Problem episode. Every road where bike commuting is a practical option should have the same standards nationally and focused around biker safety rather than driver convenience.
Suburbs should be burned to the ground and converted to forests.
Rural areas should have regular bus service with commuter options that funnel to commuter trains running England-but-Good lines. That's ideally at least a chunk of passenger transit, but I live in the mountains. Only very small buses could navigate these roads in good conditions, and without the population density to make them efficient. Running rails through this area also wouldn't make sense for the same reason. My car, a fuel-efficient hatchback, is insufficient both for the kind and amount of cargo living here requires and the condition of the roads. If pickup trucks have to exist, this is the specific kind of area where their ownership shouldn't come with significant disincentives. Otherwise the only private vehicles that shouldn't be disincentivised should be utilitarian options designed by state bureaus for specific uses. There shouldn't be an arms race between SUV sizes, surrogate penis cars outside of municipally-run race tracks where you can rent them for that purpose, or ten competing models of the same car using ten mutually exclusive parts. I should be able to go into a parts store and say I own the hatchback, at which point I receive parts for the hatchback. Development in areas where cars are necessary should be disincentivised unless for necessary shit like agriculture.
Cities should be mixtures of commuter and freight rail, lightrails, metros, and buses. Car rentals should be subsidised in some way for special use, but I want Japanese-style urban trucks at the largest and almost no urban private ownership. Union taxis can fill the gaps within the city. Also, those Dutch standardised bike lane updates with new road maintenance/construction that were in the latest Well There's Your Problem episode. Every road where bike commuting is a practical option should have the same standards nationally and focused around biker safety rather than driver convenience.
Suburbs should be burned to the ground and converted to forests.
Rural areas should have regular bus service with commuter options that funnel to commuter trains running England-but-Good lines. That's ideally at least a chunk of passenger transit, but I live in the mountains. Only very small buses could navigate these roads in good conditions, and without the population density to make them efficient. Running rails through this area also wouldn't make sense for the same reason. My car, a fuel-efficient hatchback, is insufficient both for the kind and amount of cargo living here requires and the condition of the roads. If pickup trucks have to exist, this is the specific kind of area where their ownership shouldn't come with significant disincentives. Otherwise the only private vehicles that shouldn't be disincentivised should be utilitarian options designed by state bureaus for specific uses. There shouldn't be an arms race between SUV sizes, surrogate penis cars outside of municipally-run race tracks where you can rent them for that purpose, or ten competing models of the same car using ten mutually exclusive parts. I should be able to go into a parts store and say I own the hatchback, at which point I receive parts for the hatchback. Development in areas where cars are necessary should be disincentivised unless for necessary shit like agriculture.