• AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        41
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        The “map” is not the problem, you just completely fucked up your city planning. Size of a country has zero impact on your daily commute.

              • AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                33
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                1 year ago

                That’s not how cities work. That’s just how America decided to approach that problem.

                To spell it out for you: your commute is always in your local area. The size of your country is not relevant to your local area. What is relevant, is density. Density though, has nothing to do with the size of your country. Unfortunately, you are about twice as dense as Hong Kong.

                • Noodle07@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  11
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Unfortunately, you are about twice as dense as Hong Kong.

                  Not very passive of you but dayum!

                • Nepenthe@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Your local area is trees now. Two and a half hours of trees. And a hideous tower thing painted to look like a marlboro cigarette, that people use as a landmark.

                  Not that I disagree the other commenter kind of…went off the deep end at the end, there. But if your suggestion is not that we take everyone in most of the middle states and shove 'em all together into what would probably come to 3-4 mid-sized American cities — so I guess a medium European one, an event that will absolutely never happen anyway — then your remaining solution to the city density/commute thing must be…to…increase the density?

                  Is that what you guys are asking? The only problem with America is that there aren’t enough Americans? Especially in Wisconsin?

                  • AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    6
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    I think you still completely misunderstand almost everything.

                    Long commutes are the result of bad city planning. Most of the long commutes are not in rural areas, but essentially from the outskirts of a city to the city center.

                    America decided to build huge suburbs devoid of any meaningful jobs. Suburbs are low density, so you need to build a lot of them to house the people, but that also means a lot of space is taken up by hardly any people. So the distance between your house and your job is simply longer.

                    That has absolutely nothing to do with the size of the country. You don’t plan a city on a national scale. That happens locally.

                    This entire thread is another example of the “murica never bad, murica special” trope. North America isn’t magically a completely different place from everywhere else.

                  • Zagorath@aussie.zone
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    The suggestion is that you permit the building of higher density housing. Note that currently, the law actually forbids doing this in most of America. Something anyone opposed to “big government” (like any American conservative claims to be) should be horrified by. (While left-leaning people should be horrified by it because it’s terrible for the environment, makes cost of living worse, and has negative social effects.)

                    Some people would still choose to live further out, and that’s totally fine. But a lot of people would choose to live closer to their place of work, which they can now afford to do because you’ve suddenly got 3 terraced homes and some parkland in the space that used to only hold 1 sprawling house and a mostly-unused yard. And even better, as you increase density, the relative efficiency of public transport goes up, and if it’s frequent and reliable, many people will choose to use public transit rather than drive everywhere because it’s just less stressful and easier. Or they might cycle instead.

                    Either way, they’re getting a car off the road and decreasing congestion, making it faster and easier for everyone else who still does drive.

                  • AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    7
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    This is what people call “rather uncommon”.

                    Anyway the question is: why is there so much space between you and your job? If you can’t realistically move closer to your job, you’re either just too attached to your home (that’s a personal choice) or there’s just no housing available. In this case, you’d likely drive through large suburbs. Which take up land, but house hardly any people. This is a city planning issue.

                • Mango@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  We don’t all live in cities genius. Cities are shit. Outside of cities, public transportation and bikes are shit.

    • BrandonMatrick@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I worked on a session in the nearest big metro to my small Texas town of 200,000 - daily commute of 2 hours and 25 minutes to get there in the morning, then 2 hours 25 minutes home (closer to 4 hours to get home on traffic heavy days). Not really unheard of.

      Then, a few months ago - took a vacation on the beach island of South Padre, Texas then had to rush to a client in north Texas that next day. 12 hours of driving, all without leaving the state.

      UK drivers know nothing of the true road trip life.

      • Klystron
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’d say the 2 1/2 hour commute is pretty unheard of. I’ve never heard of it before. That sounds like hell. My boss’s is 90 mins and he’s always complaining.

        • CADmonkey@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          I used to have a 40 mile/65km commute one way. I hated it. Inevitably someone would wad their car up on the highway, closing three lanes down to one lane during rush hour, and it would rapidly become a 90-minute commute.

        • BrandonMatrick@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Boss should find a good podcast and learn to meditate. Driving is my zen, especially on long highway stretches. I guess it also depends largely on if there’s a love of driving and what vehicle you’re in.

          Thankfully it was just for 1 artist and we were done in about 3 weeks.

          • jscummy
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            As a temporary thing it’s not that bad but it’s also an extra 5 hours on your day. I’ve done 3.5 hrs for a client meeting but at that point that hour long meeting is all I’m getting done that day

      • averagedrunk@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Sounds like when I lived in Tyler and had to work in the DFW Metro for a job. I spent months driving back and forth. Luckily my travel was paid.

          • averagedrunk@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah, I do. Right after I got done doing it for work the singer in our band booked us at Trees. So I spent all that time driving back and forth, then drove out on Saturday with a car full of equipment.

            It’s not like it was a big deal and that’s such a fun venue. I had a great time. I just can’t think of it without remembering that drive haha.

            I hope you had a place to store your equipment there so you didn’t have to load and unload everyday at least. Doing that every day would have been my nightmare.

      • Diasl@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Losing nearly 5 hours of your life just driving is pretty crazy. I’ve done East Yorkshire to Cardiff and back in a day to collect something and that took the best part of 9 hours with good traffic. In bad traffic that could have easily been 13 and it’s not that far.

    • Interesting_Test_814@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I mean, this sounds just like a big city thing, not an American thing. I live in Paris and hour long commutes are common here too.

      As European cities are close together though, this can lead to situations where travelling between cities is not what takes the most time. I once (about a year ago) travelled a Paris-London which took me about 5 hours from start to finish - the Eurostar takes only just over 2 hours. The rest was travelling from my home to Gare du Nord, from St. Pancras to my destination, and border checks before boarding at Gare du Nord (thank Brexit for that one).