Quote:
Originally Posted by Phalanx
I don't think it's 'best technology' per se, I think it has more to do with industry and economy. North America was shaped largely by the prevalence and power of the automotive and energy (oil) industries from the 30s-70s.
Manufacturing jobs were plentiful, fuel and cars were cheap, and both industries had a lot of sway. The distances and relatively low population density between cities made the infrastructure required for rail prohibitively expensive at the time.
If you look elsewhere (Europe and Asia) things developed differently.
|
I disagree mostly. While there's no question that large industries had (have) great power in North America, I think it would be inaccurate to ignore the usefulness of the motor vehicle to traverse the large expanses of the US and Canada.
When the car became widely available to the average person with a regular paycheque, it opened up a whole world of freedom that hadn't existed for them previously. Now, you could pile your family or friends into a vehicle and think nothing of traveling hundreds of miles, enjoying the scenery and experiences along the way. It was clearly the 'best technology' of the time, and in fact I would ask what means are available today that are able to accomplish that any better?
I also think it's a little misleading to compare North America to Europe and Asia, as their situations were vastly different than the US.
My point is that in Canada and the US motor vehicle ownership was a choice that many people made because of the advantages that it gave them. People would not have bought into it if they did not want them. They most certainly weren't forced into car ownership by 'big oil' or 'big auto'...
That said, I applaud the city for creating safer bike lanes to give cycling as a method of commuting a chance to catch on. Build the infrastructure, give it a chance. In 20 years, maybe it will be in widespread use, or maybe not - at that point perhaps a decision would be made to try something else... we will see.
Threaded Mode