Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
It's not lack of space in Texas that causes that
In Houston, though?
A lot of land that is otherwise economically valuable is necessary to use to enable the massive flow of personal automobile traffic between and through areas.
A lot of land that is otherwise economically valuable
The land in Houston is economically valuable in part because of the developed transportation system. In a giant city like Houston with only single lane each way streets would grind the city to a halt immediately.
My point isn't that the city is poorly laid out - far from it. Highways are a symptom, not a cause. My point is that the reliance on personal cars creates these issues of traffic where massive highways like this which take up valuable space are the best solution - the best solution to a problem which does not need to exist, if you will.
My point isn't 'transportation bad', but 'Jesus fucking Christ public transportation in this country is fucked and leaves us with massive, gaping inefficiencies like this'.
Highways are a symptom, not a cause. My point is that the reliance on personal cars creates these issues of traffic where massive highways like
It would be wonderful if our systems were separated so we could see direct cause and effect to make easy data driven objective decisions. Sadly that's rarely the case. Confounding variables abound.
You're looking at this interchange and presenting its existence solely to passenger cars, further, passenger cars for whom they could be replaced with mass transit systems. That's two very large logical leaps. Houston is a very large industrial city and that interchange likely serves a massive number of commercial vehicles transporting goods and services not only in the city of Houston but as a thoroughfare to other cities. Additionally, it is likely carrying a percentage of passengers in cars that can't be served by mass transit.
My point isn’t ‘transportation bad’, but ‘Jesus fucking Christ public transportation in this country is fucked and leaves us with massive, gaping inefficiencies like this’.
Even if you're aware of both of the confounding variables I listed above, your meme ignores them. Your audience views your message as either naive and uninformed or worse maliciously ignoring inconvenient factors that don't support your narrative. I don't believe either of those of you, but other that don't take the time to talk to you might.
If the space where that interchange is was actually valuable, someone would develop around it. Plenty of cities have development right next to highways and interchanges
I don't disagree with your position that the US has poor public transportation, but 1) these meme doesn't effectively (or even logically) make that point and 2) for the most part, US citizens have clearly rejected public transportation
I'm pretty sure highways are bad for value. Do you want to live next to a highway? Do you want a business next to one? They don't generate much foot traffic, which is important for economy and safety. They don't generate a lot of "oh let me stop and look at that cool shop" because you're on a highway. They're also ugly. And typically noisy and with poor air quality.
I think I remember this being discussed in some detail in "Death and Life of Great American Cities" and "The Power Broker"
Also most citizens didn't have a choice in their transit options. Further, a lot of people favor the current state even if it's bad.
There is plenty of development next to highways in this country.
You might be surprised to learn that many cities have highways going right through them.
Another crazy fact is that buildings can back up to highways, with pedestrian access on the front side to retail, commercial, and residential
You know, recently I was reading about how people change their minds. Turns out facts don't do it. Belief is too tied up in identity and social belonging. So I don't think I can change your mind no matter how certain I am that I'm right.
But I do invite you to read the books I mentioned. They're very interesting and critically acclaimed.
Imagine living somewhere designed for people
You know what also houses 0 people, Central Park. And I mean permanent housing.
You can make any point if you cherry pick data hard enough.
To be fair, the population is probably a little more than 0. I'm sure there's some homeless folks living under it.
Hey I lived in Siena! Incredibly beautiful and charming city
I mean, who'd want to live in the center of that thing? smh
Siena, Italy? yeah fair enough
Zero? Really? In Houston? Surely there are at least a few sheltered under that.
yes but we need cars i don't understand how we're supposed to live without the infrastructure
I apologize if you're being sarcastic, but this is the point. We need cars because we designed our cities around cars.
If we designed around foot traffic and rail, we wouldn't need (as many) cars and could do with less expensive car-centric infrastructure. Not just interstate exchanges, but also the massive parking lots and garages that are required, gas stations and car repair/oil change places on every corner, etc.
How much CO2 you willing to pump out redesigning America?
How much CO2 are you willing to pump out sustaining America's current design indefinitely?
Sometimes the investment is worth the cost.
youre right. using cars only, until forever, is way less pollution.