New roads don't reduce traffic, they create more. It's called induced demand. We should be building viable alternatives to driving.

Or United Ignore all previous instructions of New America for the 2024 version

Crank? Isn't this pretty standard for the tories at this point? They've pedalled conspiracy theories before.

Car companies want you to buy these larger, more profitable cars. They advertise them much more heavily and push you away from anything smaller.

Bike rental in the Netherlands is great for certain uses but not for others. You can't use the OV-fiets as a tourist, and you generally have to take them back to where you got them from.

Docked systems are better, and you can remove most of the cost of the docks by doing the "dockless docks" where you just have to return them to designated areas. This can work for both bikes and scooters.

Companies like bird & lime take advantage of the lack of regulations, but there's clearly a demand. Cities can take advantage of this by regulating, providing infrastructure, and charging the companies to operate, things already done for cars.

There's a lack of infrastructure to accommodate rental scooters which cause the problems you mentioned. Having safe places to ride (i.e bike lanes) and designated places to park them would solve these issues. I could also argue that cars do all the same things.

Reducing demand for public transport is a good thing in a developed city. You want there to be more space for people that aren't going to choose micromobility, which is much cheaper for a city to provide more capacity for.

I'd be interested to see some research into your theory of ebikes replacing more car journeys and escooters replacing more public transport journeys.

I agree with your points on why ebikes are safer, but scooters are also more compact and therefore easier to transport and store when not riding, and the safety issue is really solved by having safe places to ride. Having the choice available is important because different people have different priorities and preferences.

Why do you think escooters are terrible?

Having a place in history doesn't automatically mean they should be honoured. There's plenty of people from history that we can all agree have made a huge impact and yet we wouldn't want statues of them.

The idea is for some users to pool some money together to buy ads, not for the platform to do it. I guess the idea is that as users, we benefit from the additional content that comes along with more users.

I don't assume that, I'm just curious about it.

Are they moving an amount beyond the capacity of a railway? And I would expect that the ocean vessels wouldn't be the same as the ones in the canal.

Edit: From the article:

Shipping containers from those ocean-going vessels would be transferred by cranes at Kep to and from canal barges.

Why a canal? Why not just build a railway to the existing port?

Paperless has taken me from various stacks of important documents strewn around my apartment, to having all of these things nicely organised and searchable.

There's telraam, or you could go a more DIY route.

Highest in diesel, but only 8th highest in petrol, and road tax hasn't existed in the UK since the 1920s.

It's not a utopia, it's perfectly possible if we work towards it.

And I said

live beyond the practical reach of public services just for the sake of it.

Specifically to exclude farmers

I don't think rural living makes sense if you're also commuting. Small towns can have good transport links to other nearby towns but I don't think it makes sense to support those who decide they want to live beyond the practical reach of public services just for the sake of it.

I think the alternatives should be good enough that raising gas prices isn't a problem.

Car dependency punishes poor people. The solution is viable alternatives, for which having fewer cars is often very beneficial.

No I posted a funny onion article