There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

usa.streetsblog.org

JigglySackles , to news in D.C. to Dangerous Drivers: We Will Slow You Down!

This will not solve much. I’m so over speeders being blamed for everything and creepers not being blamed enough. The largest indicator to problems on the road, is interactions with other vehicles. If you have a very high level of interactions such as passing or being passed, changing lanes or causing another to change lanes, these events create higher opportunity for traffic problems like collisions and crashes.

So someone going over the speed limit in the passing lane but in general staying with the flow of traffic (like rush hour where the vast majority are already over the limit) is alone not as big an issue as perhaps someone going the speed limit but slower than the flow of traffic in any lane.

This is because the one breaking the limit but with the flow has not created as many interactions as the person sticking hard to the limit but being slower than the rest of traffic.

I.e. Go with the flow whether fast or slow and you’ll be safer than if you ignore all the rules or stand immovable on the rules.

Much like all of life, many rules give a basic guideline to achieve an optimal outcome. But they are too rigid to account for outlying events and therefore cannot give the best outcome in all situations. At times rules are bent, at times they are broken, and at times they aren’t enough. Consider the situation and make an educated decision based on the conditions.

JeeBaiChow , to news in D.C. to Dangerous Drivers: We Will Slow You Down!

Slow people in the fast lane are just as dangerous as fast people in the slow lane. Stick to the appropriate lane. And absolute speed isn’t the killer, relative speed is.

ripcord , to news in D.C. to Dangerous Drivers: We Will Slow You Down!
@ripcord@lemmy.world avatar

The much, much bigger problem in every city I’ve driven in in the last 3 years (including DC) are the fucking weavers. Sometimes they’re also speeders, but the dumbass lane changes are way way worse and out of control.

Daveyborn ,
@Daveyborn@lemmy.world avatar

Weavers and speeders are the same pool of people where I’m at, people in a dang rush.

Jentu , to news in D.C. to Dangerous Drivers: We Will Slow You Down!

lol imagine driving fast in DC and not being stuck in traffic.

QuarterSwede ,
@QuarterSwede@lemmy.world avatar

I was also wondering where the hell the traffic is light enough to speed around DC. You can’t even go the speed limit if you’re in constant bumper to bumper traffic.

TimLovesTech , to news in D.C. to Dangerous Drivers: We Will Slow You Down!
@TimLovesTech@badatbeing.social avatar

I would love to see something done in the opposite direction for those people that are “just out for a drive”, doing speeds that should require them to be using 4-ways and certainly increasing reckless driving and road rage. Clocked doing under a minimum limit so many times and you lose your right to use the highway.

I really can’t wait for the day when AI can keep traffic at a constant flow and automatically redirect around traffic issues. Nothing grinds my gears like waiting in gridlock for an hour, just to find out it’s because some asshats need to fight about being first in line instead of just getting over so everyone can just get by safely and on with there day.

Microplasticbrain ,

Right, so many times i see 5 people driving recklessly because one oblivious selfish cunt is driving 5 under the limit at the front. And then people will inevitably say ,“oh but you caused the accident by speeding” nah dude the slow driver that made everyone change lanes around them caused this mess. If you wanna drive slow, just get into the right hand lane. If you’re in the right lane you can clamp your car to your nipples and pull it for all I care.

FuglyDuck ,
@FuglyDuck@lemmy.world avatar

This comment amazes me.

Some one drives recklessly and causes a crash… but it’s not their fault. It’s the fault of the person driving in a responsible and safe manner, and more importantly- legal manner?

I suppose you also believe it’s the wife’s fault for making the husband angry? Same logic.

Besides the point that I doubt very much that you’re talking about people who are going significantly under the speed limit; rather than people who are unwilling to go as fast as you.

Microplasticbrain ,

Im talking about people who are creating slow downs.

Obviously if you speed to pass someone and cause an accident it’s your fault.

But if slow people would just stick to the right lane then faster drivers wouldn’t need to be going around them.

FuglyDuck ,
@FuglyDuck@lemmy.world avatar

So, it’s okay to drive recklessly and put everyone else- including yourself- into more danger because somebody…. Slowed you down? Got a little bit in your way?

You’re not that special.

The person “causing a slow down” is driving in, presumably what they see as a safe manner. Blaming them for people who can’t regulate their emotions is stupid.

Microplasticbrain ,

Thank you for missing the point entirely.

FuglyDuck ,
@FuglyDuck@lemmy.world avatar

No.

You’re missing the fucking point. The fucking point is somebody driving “slow” probably has a reason to do so. And that reason is probably that they have determined it’s unsafe to do so.

Some one who then drives recklessly because of that… that is not the fault of the slow person. The slow person did not make them drive recklessly. The slow person did not some how mind control the reckless driver.

The reckless driver is solely responsible for how they drive. The slow person is not responsible for how the reckless person drives- the slow person is responsible only how the slow person drives.

Any - ANY - argument that the reckless person is not responsible because a slow person made them frustrated/angry/stupid is illegitimate and in the same vein an abuser uses to justify abusing their victims.

Further, I’m willing to bet that your definition of “slow” is somewhere above the speed limit. outside of immediately obvious reasons like weather or a crash or, you know another “slow” person in front of them… almost no one goes less than the speed limit. Even when it does, the vast majority of people not going the speed limit- are in the furthest right lane.

Even if it does happen in your area, there’s nothing you can do about it and you should probably learn to not get angry and to leave more time so you make your by destination. Part of being an adult is controlling your emotions.

Mambele ,

“No.You’re missing the fucking point. The fucking point is somebody driving “slow” probably has a reason to do so.”

Were you controlling your emotions when you typed this or are you not adult enough to make a point without being antagonistic. This adds nothing to the discussion but I always find it interesting when I think I hear kitchenware calling names.

Have a nice day 😀

OpenPassageways ,

If you’re in the passing lane and not passing, you’re not driving in a responsible OR legal manner. It is against the rules of the road in every state that I’ve lived in.

It causes traffic congestion, which leads to people weaving around you, speeding, accidents. Stop it.

Furedadmins ,

Dc does not have any 2 lane highways. Multi lane roads don’t follow this simplistic passing lane concept that people seem to think applies everywhere. Stop it.

Daveyborn ,
@Daveyborn@lemmy.world avatar

Highway driving logic doesn’t apply well to city driving and vice versa, it’s why it was taught as two separate concepts when I went through classes.

dudinax , to news in New Study Finds Subsidizing Transit Actually Makes It More Efficient

Hmm, more people ride cheap highly available transport!

Nachorella , to news in New Study Finds Subsidizing Transit Actually Makes It More Efficient

And here I was thinking defunding it would yield the biggest improvements. Astonishing

ObviouslyNotBanana , to news in New Study Finds Subsidizing Transit Actually Makes It More Efficient
@ObviouslyNotBanana@lemmy.world avatar

No way!

SnotFlickerman , to news in New Study Finds Subsidizing Transit Actually Makes It More Efficient
@SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

This Just In: When cities are given more money for transit, they surprisingly do actual research on where transit is needed and add transit routes where it is needed and will actually be used.

Pundits everywhere gasp in shock because like the gaslighting pricks they are they assumed everyone is a giant piece of shit like themselves who would piss away money on projects so they could slide more money into their own pockets. They assume everyone is a violently anti-social loser like themselves, and cannot possibly conceive of the idea that people in government jobs actually use their educations to, you know, do their fucking jobs.

I’m shocked, shocked, that the pundits were lying.

Well, not that shocked.

dantheclamman OP ,

The Cato Institute hates this one weird trick

FenrirIII ,
@FenrirIII@lemmy.world avatar

New York spent theirs on more roads

iopq ,

Where my dad lives, the bus doesn’t sync with the train. You get to the stop, the train comes and you’re not allowed to cross while it’s in the station. So you actually can’t make the train unless you get off one stop early and run for it to enter the station from the other side

And people wonder why public transit is not as popular

BreakDecks ,

What kind of wait are we looking at for the next train? 10 minutes? A day?

iopq ,

Next train is in 10 minutes, but doesn’t stop at that station. Train after that stops at every stop, so it would take you 70 minutes to get up to the city.

Basically, from home to where I want to go, minimum two hours (let’s not forget public transit after the train). A cab would take me 45 minutes (but also like $80)

Yamainwitch , to news in 'Bidenomics': Feds Seek to Promote Commercial Conversions Into Affordable Transit-Friendly Housing

On paper it sounds like a great idea, realistically the government needs to actually buy the property from them or at least a share of ownership otherwise it will be exactly the same with cable companies getting subsidies to “upgrade” infrastructure only to pocket the majority and leave the tax payers in the dark. I’m so over blackrock and their ilk screwing us over at every turn

Franzia , to news in 'Bidenomics': Feds Seek to Promote Commercial Conversions Into Affordable Transit-Friendly Housing

Yeah I think this is an excellent use of Federal funds. Ive heard of some of these projects, and they all seem pretty wise use of funds, and took some public feedback. Here, we’re not calling buildings blighted and knocking them down - we preserved these unused buildings for the day funding like this would arrive to repurpose them.

tallwookie , to news in 'Bidenomics': Feds Seek to Promote Commercial Conversions Into Affordable Transit-Friendly Housing

makes sense - a lot of commercial real estate remain vacant in many cities, businesses having since gone bankrupt, relocated (due to crime usually), or the employees have been working remotely and are never going to return.

the conversion process isnt going to be cheap though. Feds are going to have to spend a LOT to convert commercial property to residential property - especially in plumbing and reinforcement as there will be significant changes in load-bearing structures.

HurlingDurling , to news in 'Bidenomics': Feds Seek to Promote Commercial Conversions Into Affordable Transit-Friendly Housing

Yes please!

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines