yeah, i've become more and more leery of the "induced demand" argument (whether it's true or not!) first, I just think it's far more persuasive to have a concrete vision/story of what _positive_ future I want, instead of some quantitative argument _against_ roadshttps://twitter.com/JakeAnbinder/status/1183833551449407488 …
I think it's easy to argue that buses or trains have much higher goodput (and people do argue this, but I don't really hear this from the induced demand people). I don't buy the "people don't want to be stuck in traffic" line because that's exactly the cause of induced demand.
-
-
Increased b/w allows more people to travel at a level of congestion they find tolerable. That's supposed to be bad? Maybe it's not worth the cost relative to other possible projects or maybe the externalities are bad. But that's not the argument I hear.
-
When I lived in a driving city, traffic didn't impact me since I had a job where I could work any hours I wanted, but for a normal person with a 9-5, increasing throughput at peak times (as they did in Austin by adding a lane to the highway) is a huge quality of life improvement.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.