Your comment reads as if Israel continuing to starve Palestinians was absolutely unavoidable since 1947.
I'm not sure about the economic models of how such cities work, but Manchester and Nottingham have very competent rail/ tram services and public transport. I'm also pretty sure Nottingham also offers free travel to students.
The UK has some of the worst public transport of Europe's "more economically developed countries" after decades of austerity and lack of investment into public services. But which local councils would you say have made the most out of what they have had to work with in developing a transport network that is effective for people to get to work, school and social events? What would you say makes each of them so effective and how did they achieve these things? I have excluded London as the UK (in my opinion) has a problem with pretending like London is the only place worth investing in when it comes to public transport.
I ask this question so that we can reflect on how places can make the average citizen's life easier for getting about whilst on a budget. Even though the UK is in dire straights at the moment, it might be worth looking to the towns and cities that make the most out of what they're given to understand how to develop good public transport (which will inevitably develop those micro-economies)
Thanks.
The mindset behind this comment confuses me. Who do you think is more called to action by their beliefs, the one who vehemently opposes the status quo or those one who is apathetic to/ supports it?
Second of all they're right. It IS exhausting being like this, but someone has to do it. Because if people aren't being exhaustingly fed up of the status quo, billionaires will keep fucking us up, down and sideways. I almost wish I COULD be like Ilovethebomb. Ignorance, willing or not, is bliss afterall...
Fair. I have to visit there one time to get a good idea of it.
This is interesting. I was talking to someone who studies in Sheffield and they said it's a terrible city for public transport
Fantastic. So a nice small town can really rely on well planned out bike paths with a good tram network if they can afford the upfront costs. If not, then a BRT system or similar with separated bus lanes would be the next best thing, making sure that these "mid" to "short" distance forms of transports linl well with the town's train station(s).
I wouldn't call Birmingham a small city haha, but thanks for this!
Edit: I am an idiot, I get what the link means by "Birmingham is a small city" after taking 5 mins to read.
Edit 2: Just taken some more time to read this and it's gold, thanks for sharing. Really informative.
Sure. Some cities where I come from where trams exists have roads that have tram tracks in the middle of them. As others have alluded to this is probably rare - I don't really know as the last time I took a tram I was too young to remember it and I live in a town that has no trams at all.
Because of my experience with seeing tram tracks on roads I assumed they shared significant parts of their journey with road cars which made me think they're subject to traffic jams.
Yeah this makes sense. I come from a country that doesn't have many trams and when I do see them they tend to be interacting with the road which is probably where my perception comes from.
Sometimes when watching videos on effective ways of public transport and trams come up, I get a bit annoyed at people not addressing the fact that they seem to share the road with cars. Why do people twerk for trams so much as a form of light rail if they share the road with cars and are subject to being affected by traffic? Doesn't that just make them rail buses without their own bus lane? Doesn't that make them more obsolete? Why do people like them so much?
Edit: Also, does anyone have any resources about the cost to benefit ratio of different intratown/city forms of transport (bike lanes, BRT, trams and other forms of light rail, subways etc)? Would be much appreciated.
Thanks for the info I wanted to access the article but it's blocked by a paywall/ email submission to view which I'm not too keen on doing. I know Israel had funded Hamas to maintain its own status quo many years ago but wasn't privy to the possibility it may still be happening. Was wondering if you had any other sources on this?
I don't support Hamas just like you don't. I don't support the death of civilians, Israeli or Palestinian. What I have a problem with in the general sentiment of this thread is people acting as if the Israeli government's actions are not the cause of this war. Hamas would not exist if the Israeli government never oppressed Palestinian people first. The PLO wouldn't exist if the Israeli government didn't oppress Palestinian people first. Hamas killing innocent civilians wouldn't have happened if the Israeli govrnement never tried to genocide Palestinians. You can argue that Hamas would commit genocide if they could, but the fact is Israel is the one commiting genocide at the moment. Making out as if both need equal condemning (although they need condemning nonetheless) is equivalent to giving a bully the same punishment as the victim who fights back. They are simply not the same.
Fuck Hamas and fuck Israel. But especially fuck Israel.
If a 16th century Native American wanted to destroy the government of the United States of America, would you say they were wrong?
Hamas' blatant anti-semitism towards all ethnic jews is wrong. Hamas' desire for Israel to not be a nation anymore is justified.
It's conversations like this that confuse me because who exactly is commiting genocide? I'm calling the take centrist because you're making out as if both sides are guilty of genocide when it literally is only one side (the government of Israel, the organisation that the original post refers to). It is a false equivalence. But if you think by me stating support for the liberation of indigenous Palestinians is making it a team sport where I'm somehow trivializing genocide then so be it, that's what you think.
I live in the UK and my town has not got transport that allows mobility for all. No bike lanes (and if they exist they're just painted on the road), no bus lanes (buses get stuck in the same rush hour traffic and everyone else which doesn't incentivise people to take them) and these buses are also unreliable and infrequent. What makes it worse is that my local council is right leaning. How do I hold my local council accountable to implementing even the cheapest solutions to traffic and transportation? How can I lead to public transport change in my community?