you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 19 points 2 years ago (1 child)

Not a horrible idea if you have solid, simple, and actionable plans to replace them with robust, simple, and effective public transport options. Otherwise… yeah, a bit too far.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -23 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Uh huh, and what about material delivery to stores, restaurants, &etc in the city? What about postal service?

    We should absolutely invest more in public transit, but light rail and buses are not logistics solutions.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Trains carry cargo all the time. I don't think it's too crazy to suggest light rail be adapted to do the same.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [+] -13 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    And we're going to build rails to every store, restaurant, and other business that needs cargo pickup & delivery? And run a train to each of them, every day? And you think that would end up being more efficient/environmentally friendly than trucks?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Every store? Obviously not. Running cargo trams through major business or industrial districts, though? More plausible, if the will exists.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CarGoTram

    Something like that, but as a public service.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -14 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CarGoTram

    The main route went from the logistics center in Friedrichstadt via Postplatz and Grunaer Straße to Straßburger Platz and finally on to the factory.

    This went from one logistics center to one production facility. It is insane to think that this could be a scalable solution.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Wow, a train line goes defunct in a country that heavily subsidizes car infrastructure and actively works against other modes of transportation. I'm shocked, really. Shocked.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -9 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I didn't say anything about it going defunct. That has to be one of stupidest attempts at a straw man I've ever seen.

    I pointed out that it only ever carried material from one location to one other location, and that such a system would not be scalable to serving an entire city.

    Did you even read my comment?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Mh, why do you think it never grew beyond "one line serving one location"? 🤔

    We did have more extensive tram services transporting goods in the past: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geschichte_der_Straßenbahn_in_Hannover#Güterstraßenbahn

    You know, before this country became the world's largest car exporter and started to dismantle its train network...

    such a system would not be scalable to serving an entire city.

    Lol, nobody is talking about entire cities, but do go ahead talking about strawmen.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 2 years ago (1 child)
  • [+] -15 points 2 years ago* (3 children)

    Sorry. Good luck transporting a washing machine or full kitchen on public transport.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Delivery of a full kitchen is not something that makes up the majority of traffic. I don't think anyone is saying you can't use a van for the "last mile" in such edge cases.

    Even washing machines can be delivered by cargo bike/trike though.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -9 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    How would you 'use a van' if the roads are "ripped out completely"?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    You do understand nobody is talking about ripping out all roads everywhere, right?

    Right?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -13 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

    It's literally the title.

    I can't even understand down voting this, unless you're delusional.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    Oh, you're basing your opinions on fact-twisting headlines of right-wing "newspapers", instead of, you know, reading the actual article where even they have to paint the picture just a liiittle bit differently.

    You do understand the difference between "removing roads completely" and "removing all roads", right?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    You do understand the difference between "removing roads completely" and "removing all roads", right?

    What do you think the distinction is, in this context?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Yeah, I can help you with that: "removing roads completely" does not specify how many roads are to be removed, only that the ones being removed are removed completely, as opposed to partially.

    "Removing all roads" on the other hand means removing all roads, as opposed to, e.g., some, or many.

    There, that was easy, wasn't it?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    A government adviser has called for roads in cities to be “ripped out completely” to combat air pollution. [...] “We should start changing our cities and actually start thinking about ripping out road infrastructure and turning them into green spaces or green transport corridors."

    This guy is talking about taking all the roads out of cities. That's what this article is about.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    So, after I explained to you, several times, that nobody wants to rip out all roads, you continue to drone on about that. Yeah, I can see why you fall for right-wing nonsense.

    Well, good luck, and have fun barking up all the fantasy trees in your mind! 👋

    PS: you totally should visit Seoul or/and Utrecht sometime. You know, might broaden your horizon a bit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Yes, I continue to "drone on" about the content of the article which this comment section is about.

    Are you lost? Did you read the article?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)
  • [+] -6 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Sorry, are you talking about a different article? Or different people?

    Maybe you could quote something from the article which supports your point... you know, like I did.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Can you point me to the quantifiers in your quotes or the article?

    Maybe you should do something about your terrible reading comprehension: https://elt.oup.com/student/solutions/preint/grammar/grammar_03_012e

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    "completely" is a quantifier.

    You still haven't supported your point from the original source. I have. I am not the one struggling with reading comprehension.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago* (1 child)
  • [–] -4 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    What is your point? Do you think this page contains an exhaustive list of quantifiers? "Completely" is a quantifier.

    And... you still haven't supported your point from the original source.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    "Completely" is a quantifier.

    A quantifier of intensity not a quantifier of quantity. This is really not that hard.

    you still haven't supported your point from the original source

    See, this is not how these things work. You're the one who made a claim about the content of this article. I showed you you're wrong. That is my point. End of story.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 2 years ago

    You're the one who made a claim about the content of this article.

    I didn't 'make a claim about the content of this article' ... I quoted content directly from this article.

    I showed you you're wrong.

    No, you haven't. You've given your opinion, which is different from what is proposed in the article. Which is fine, the proposal in the article is poorly thought out and anyone reasonable should have a different opinion... which is my point.

  • source
  • parent
  • One of the roads near my house was removed completely.

    All roads near my house were removed completely.

    Two different implications, no?

    Yes, the title implies something more extreme than is actually proposed, but that's why I read articles (usually) before commenting.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)
  • [+] -8 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    And which one is it that you think is being proposed to be "ripped out completely" in this article?

    Based on your link, I believe in this context it is 'streets'.

    Well, just go back and read my arguments, and then recognize that all of them apply to 'streets', and that making the distinction between 'streets' and 'roads' does not weaken my arguments in any way.

    Try a different approach, something besides pedantry.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Well, the expert is proposing to rip out roads - so my first guess would be they mean roads, not streets.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

    By the definition in your link, a 'road' would be between two cities, and the paths inside the city (where the buildings are) are 'streets'.

    The expert is talking about removing the paved surfaces inside cities, so he is talking about 'streets', by your definition.

    Apparently the expert uses different definitions from yours.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago

    A road may also have buildings on either side though its main function is as a transportation route, a way of getting from one place to another, especially between towns.

    Just for starter: "especially" does not mean "exclusively".

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Have a look at the Netherlands friend. I've seen people towing dishwashers behind their bikes more than once while living there.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    A dishwasher isn't that heavy. A washing machine is.

    We primarily use small vans. Eg. Utrecht, the example mentioned in the article:

    https://www.google.com/maps/@52.088105,5.1191065,3a,75y,353.3h,83.46t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1swsuMJHo-eVnOoD-GPERjkw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

    And that's fine. You can have almost no cars, but still use vans when they're required.

    Hell, do like the small Swiss town in that Tom Scott video. Abolish cars for private individuals or the able bodied. But you'll still need (small, electric) cars and vans to transport the heavy stuff.

    That and tradespeople often use their van as a mobile workplace. Tablesaw, semi-complete inventory of parts they may need, etc.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    You joke, but I have done this. Wheelchair accesible trams are awesome for this. Put appliance on hand truck walk it into the tram. No heavy lifting required like when loading it in a car.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    A washing machine? That shit's heavy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    A cheap logistics hand truck carries weights up to 250kg. If you need more it become a bit annoying because you need to switch to using OSB Boards with casters.

    Source: My life and helping friends move.

    Bonus: Hand trucks are really convenient to transport full size kegs and CO2 bottles to parties by tram.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Who said we were abandoning all of them?
    Street vs Road.

    You can totally have delivery vehicles for stores on a street, but no other cars are allowed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -8 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    This is different from "ripped out completely", which is what is proposed in the article. So the answer to your question is that Dr. Fuller said that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Apparently you didnt read past the headline and dont want to understand the content.. welp, cant help ya there.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 2 years ago*

    “We should start changing our cities and actually start thinking about ripping out road infrastructure and turning them into green spaces or green transport corridors."

    You mean that 'rest of the article'?

  • source
  • parent