What's new

Is the world overpopulated?

If we could have a European like rail system in America right now, I'd sell my car today. Seriously.

And from what I gather, Europe's rail system sucks compared to the newer ones in Asia.

I thought the UK's tube/bus system was amazing. If I knew I could get from SLC to Los Angeles in 6-8 hrs in a comfortable and affordable train, there would be no need for me to have a car. Even locally, I'm finding myself use Trax/Frontrunner. And those suck compared to what they have in Europe and Asia.
I was able to get back and forth to work within 10-15 minutes time of my coworkers who were driving, using the public transport in Germany, all for 80 euros per month for a city pass. (Not 40 euros per day with Uber, what a stupid comment that was.) I finally bought a car a few months in so we could have a bit more freedom in visiting friends and going to tour other countries, and because the American in me wanted a Mercedes, but frankly we could have done it with train everywhere. I would take a train were it available. I am tired of 1 hour 15 minute commutes in erratic traffic. I would be fine if it took an extra 15 minutes if I didn't have to deal with Inland Empire traffic anymore.
 
Far superior? Did you say that with a straight face? LOL

Of course you find it superior because it proves my point. Someone can get rich off those "services" charging exorbitant fees, and they don't provide a public service. Who could possibly afford $20 each way to Uber to work and back every day? But hey, it gets people around and someone got rich, right? That is all that matters in the grand scheme of things. And it put a lot more cars on the road that might not otherwise be there, so that helps the environment somehow, right? And somehow Southwest gets people to work? um, ok. I really think you must be a troll.
The socialist wanted trains that transported people long distances, as in from outside of a city and into the city for work. Trains are terrible for serving that role. You live in Riverside and should know that first hand. Trains, and any form of public transportation, do not work in medium or lower population density environments. It can be useful in urban centers, but in sprawl you need a car.

Even in providing passenger service between urban centers, it is less effective than airplanes as it evidenced by the debt issues threatening China's rail service.


Passenger train service loses money everywhere now precisely because on a cost basis it cannot compete with the more efficient and effective alternatives. It can make some sense inside dense urban environments, but in all other areas it is better to have an economy that provides a standard of living high enough to allow people to buy cars, or book tickets on airlines when they need to travel long distances.
 
I would be fine if it took an extra 15 minutes if I didn't have to deal with Inland Empire traffic anymore.
To be fair, I avoid the Inland Empire as if it were the epicenter of a plague outbreak all because of your traffic. Your local government ruined traffic flow by splitting I-15 into paying and non-paying lanes with transponder requirements. You could solve 90% of the Inland Empire's traffic problems overnight if they would rip down the pylons to make all of I-15 into regular lanes.

I also think the interchange that makes you exit I-215 to stay on I-215 is awful. Those are all public projects, and how you could see that at the same time wanting those people to have control over trains is hard to wrap my head around.
 
To be fair, I avoid the Inland Empire as if it were the epicenter of a plague outbreak all because of your traffic. Your local government ruined traffic flow by splitting I-15 into paying and non-paying lanes with transponder requirements. You could solve 90% of the Inland Empire's traffic problems overnight if they would rip down the pylons to make all of I-15 into regular lanes.

I also think the interchange that makes you exit I-215 to stay on I-215 is awful. Those are all public projects, and how you could see that at the same time wanting those people to have control over trains is hard to wrap my head around.
It has been shown in many studies that adding lanes does not ease congestion, it is an issue of induced demand. And I fully agree they have not handled the IE freeway system well at all. the 60 and the 10 are simply overloaded and they have not kept pace with the increasing population in the area due to the warehousing jobs here. This is where some public transport would help. I commute from Redlands to Chino every day, and it is a minimum of 1:15 in the afternoons to go 32 miles. I would happily take the train even if it adds to that time.

The problem is America designed everything centered on cars, with little thought to the repercussions with increased population, even ignoring the great work being done in city design in other countries such as the Netherlands to worship the almighty car, and therefore it will take some heavy restructuring to get more effective public transport even in areas as densely populated as this.

Just check this out about stroads.


"Stroad" is a word we coined in 2013 to explain those dangerous, multi-laned thoroughfares you encounter in nearly every city, town, and suburb in America. They're what happens when a street (a place where people interact with businesses and residences, and where wealth is produced) gets combined with a road (a high-speed route between productive places).

They are enormously expensive to build and, ultimately, financially unproductive.

A good article about redesigning cities to be more pubic and non-car transport friendly:


The issue is not having any foresight or control or fundamental planning to control urban sprawl and make our cities people-friendly instead of car-friendly. But car-centric urban development was a direct result of the booming auto industry. So capitalism is why we have terribly designed cities and no effective way to change it. It was not a social structure issue, it was an economic one.

Capitalism is not the devil, I rely firmly on it for my livelihood and am a believer in the openness of entrepreneurship and businesses have the freedom to follow the market trends. However, completely unchecked capitalism naturally creates huge wealth disparities, as well as systems that are business-centric or product-centric and not people-centric, so it is not the most effective system for things that should be viewed as basic utilities, such as electricity, water and sewer service, health care, and city planning and development. Allow capitalism to control these areas unfettered and people suffer even if they might have more "stuff", as you create strata of those who can afford the basic utilities and those who cannot, as we have done in healthcare, which is a travesty in such a wealthy country.
 
It has been shown in many studies that adding lanes does not ease congestion, it is an issue of induced demand. And I fully agree they have not handled the IE freeway system well at all. the 60 and the 10 are simply overloaded and they have not kept pace with the increasing population in the area due to the warehousing jobs here. This is where some public transport would help. I commute from Redlands to Chino every day, and it is a minimum of 1:15 in the afternoons to go 32 miles. I would happily take the train even if it adds to that time.

The problem is America designed everything centered on cars, with little thought to the repercussions with increased population, even ignoring the great work being done in city design in other countries such as the Netherlands to worship the almighty car, and therefore it will take some heavy restructuring to get more effective public transport even in areas as densely populated as this.

Just check this out about stroads.




A good article about redesigning cities to be more pubic and non-car transport friendly:


The issue is not having any foresight or control or fundamental planning to control urban sprawl and make our cities people-friendly instead of car-friendly. But car-centric urban development was a direct result of the booming auto industry. So capitalism is why we have terribly designed cities and no effective way to change it. It was not a social structure issue, it was an economic one.

Capitalism is not the devil, I rely firmly on it for my livelihood and am a believer in the openness of entrepreneurship and businesses have the freedom to follow the market trends. However, completely unchecked capitalism naturally creates huge wealth disparities, as well as systems that are business-centric or product-centric and not people-centric, so it is not the most effective system for things that should be viewed as basic utilities, such as electricity, water and sewer service, health care, and city planning and development. Allow capitalism to control these areas unfettered and people suffer even if they might have more "stuff", as you create strata of those who can afford the basic utilities and those who cannot, as we have done in healthcare, which is a travesty in such a wealthy country.

This is a banger post #****cars

We need to find what works best. Tying capital ownership and the profit motive to anything that involves externalities and, more importantly, inflexible demand is going to create non-optimal results. Let market economies dominate where they work best.
 
Last edited:
Let market economies dominate where they work best.
In this we agree. Market economies should dominate where they work best, like Earth and reality. Socialist economies should be left to dominate lists of countries where the most people were starved, shot, tortured, and worked to death.
 
As a percentage, there are fewer people starving now, living in poverty now, than ever in human history and the curve is continuing in the direction of global prosperity thanks to the global adoption of technologies in the late 20th century.
I fixed it for you.

No other system is better at resource allocation or production, including food production, than capitalism.
Considering the way the Chinese can out-build us, and the way resources are distributed in the US, much less from the US to the rest of the world, both of these claims have significant qualifications.

Those wishing for the return of 1930's socialist ideals rightfully have about as much credibility as flat-Earthers.
World-Poverty.gif
Go tell those wishing for the return of 1930s socialist ideals.
 
It has been shown in many studies that adding lanes does not ease congestion, it is an issue of induced demand. And I fully agree they have not handled the IE freeway system well at all. the 60 and the 10 are simply overloaded and they have not kept pace with the increasing population in the area due to the warehousing jobs here. This is where some public transport would help. I commute from Redlands to Chino every day, and it is a minimum of 1:15 in the afternoons to go 32 miles. I would happily take the train even if it adds to that time.

The problem is America designed everything centered on cars, with little thought to the repercussions with increased population, even ignoring the great work being done in city design in other countries such as the Netherlands to worship the almighty car, and therefore it will take some heavy restructuring to get more effective public transport even in areas as densely populated as this.

Just check this out about stroads.




A good article about redesigning cities to be more pubic and non-car transport friendly:


The issue is not having any foresight or control or fundamental planning to control urban sprawl and make our cities people-friendly instead of car-friendly. But car-centric urban development was a direct result of the booming auto industry. So capitalism is why we have terribly designed cities and no effective way to change it. It was not a social structure issue, it was an economic one.

Capitalism is not the devil, I rely firmly on it for my livelihood and am a believer in the openness of entrepreneurship and businesses have the freedom to follow the market trends. However, completely unchecked capitalism naturally creates huge wealth disparities, as well as systems that are business-centric or product-centric and not people-centric, so it is not the most effective system for things that should be viewed as basic utilities, such as electricity, water and sewer service, health care, and city planning and development. Allow capitalism to control these areas unfettered and people suffer even if they might have more "stuff", as you create strata of those who can afford the basic utilities and those who cannot, as we have done in healthcare, which is a travesty in such a wealthy country.
Very interesting post. Would rep if that still existed.
 
Is the world overpopulated? No.
Is Utah overpopulated? Yes.

We already are running out of water, cannot see the mountains for half the year due to air pollution, and rarely are the canyons not parking lots. Ever try to go anywhere north/south in between American Fork and Bountiful between 3:00-7:00? I-15 is a freaking nightmare. Should we talk about the toxic bomb we’re sitting on with the GSL trying up and exposing a toxic lake bed?

I remember a few years back sitting in during a Saratoga Springs meeting. Their city planner was bragging about a new marina the city had built on Utah Lake… at that same time, the lake had been closed due to a deadly algae bloom. What good does it serve to build marinas on a lake that’s toxic to humans for most of the summer?

And with Utah’s population set to double in the next 50 or so years? Yikes. So I know someone is coming out ahead with all of this development and growth. Not sure it’s your avg Joe though. Personally, I really miss the Utah of the mid 90s when there were spaces in between the cities, the GSL actually existed so we still got lake effect snow, and the canyons were just usable.
So much this.
 
As a percentage, there are fewer people starving now, living in poverty now, than ever in human history and the curve is continuing in the direction of global prosperity thanks to the global adoption of capitalism in the late 20th century. No other system is better at resource allocation or production, including food production, than capitalism.
Incoming monkey wrench…

 
Incoming monkey wrench…

Oh noes! A book pushing Marxist ideas is going to be translated, published, and sold on Amazon? I was worried someone would crack the code. I suppose our only hope now is to pray no one thinks of putting the image of a communist revolutionary like Che Guevara on a t-shirt, and starts selling that.

Marxism only works in books. Every time it is put into practice, a bunch of people die, and the core tenants are abandoned to install capitalism. There is a reason there are stock markets in China and Russia now after a past of trying to implement Marxism. Many people only see what they want to see or don't bother learning why Marxism hasn't swept the world, and so there will always be a market for another book.
 
Oh noes! A book pushing Marxist ideas is going to be translated, published, and sold on Amazon? I was worried someone would crack the code. I suppose our only hope now is to pray no one thinks of putting the image of a communist revolutionary like Che Guevara on a t-shirt, and starts selling that.

Marxism only works in books. Every time it is put into practice, a bunch of people die, and the core tenants are abandoned to install capitalism. There is a reason there are stock markets in China and Russia now after a past of trying to implement Marxism. Many people only see what they want to see or don't bother learning why Marxism hasn't swept the world, and so there will always be a market for another book.
I knew that would get a rise outta ya.
 
Back
Top