• ClimateChangeAnxiety [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    The answer: Not if they have to share the road with cars.

    Busses are the least pleasant, slowest, least reliable form of public transit. When people say they don’t like taking public transit, busses are why. Give me rails or give me death. BRT is the bare minimum. But if you have BRT, the main question is “Why isn’t this on rails”

    • morrowind@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      Trains are very limited, they cannot serve all purposes, especially building off a car centric place like the US

      • wopazoo [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        especially building off a car centric place like the US

        Why?

        The only advantage buses have over trains is their flexibility, owing to their ability to literally go off the rails.

        The predictable and unchanging routes of a suburban commute call for rail service rather than bus service. And besides, any American transit project that proposes suburbanites take the bus will be dead on arrival, given the social stigma against riding the bus.

        • i_need_a_non_identifiable_name [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Trains are kind of expensive if you live in and are trying to get around a small to medium sized town that is underfunded by your government. BRT is fast to implement and cheaper (although yes, a lot easier to get rid of if the party in charge of your country is obsessed with austerity).