[RHSeeger]

> the vast majority of the US

It's worth noting that <hotter | colder> than the vast majority of the US isn't a particularly useful metric.

- The people that say their kids can't walk to school because of the winter weather could be in an area where it's constantly below freezing and it's common to have over a foot of snow on the ground most of the time (ie, there is ONLY the road to walk on, and it's unsafe because of the snow). - The people that say their kids can't walk to school because of the heat could be in an area where 110degree weather is common (somewhat less of an issue since most school doesn't happen in the hottest months; but there is summer school). - There are plenty of places in the US where the houses are so far apart that its not realistic to have a school that even moderately close to more than a couple of them.

Even if "most of the US" is more temperate than "some location where kids walk to school", there's still plenty of places where its considerably less reasonable to walk to school year round.

[yencabulator]

> ie, there is ONLY the road to walk on, and it's unsafe because of the snow

As a Finn, the first part is an infrastructure issue and you're building it wrong, and the second part is just plain old weird; snow on the ground doesn't make walking unsafe. Too much snow makes walking slower and more tiring, but that circles back to infrastructure, specifically snow plowing.

[RHSeeger]

Solving the infrastructure problem is extremely costly. Sure it can be done, but that means someone else doesn't get done. You have to pick your battles.

And walking on the road when the road has snow on it (so is slippery) IS dangerous if there's any amount of traffic. Even if you can stay to the side of the road (which is hard when there's a lot of snow), the risk of being hit is increased because cars can lose fine control under such conditions.

[yencabulator]

It's not the snow that is dangerous, it's the cars.

Americans don't like to admit certain things, and this is one of those. You shift blame from how your roads are built to things like weather.

From the grandparent:

> Cold weather and darkness are not obstacles.

They really are not the obstacles, so I'd ask you to not use them as excuses.

[RHSeeger]

The roads are already built, and the towns are already laid out in ways that require cars. Arguing that the roads, towns, and cars could be changed so that walking to school is reasonable... while technically true, is not particularly useful in anything but the very long term. There isn't the money to do that.

So yes, because of the way the roads, towns, and cars exist today, it is not reasonable to have kids walk to school in many cases. The weather conditions for the area are one of the things that go into that calculation; they are one of the obstacles that add up to it not being realistic. Are they the root cause? No. But it's irrelevant, because they _are_ one of the factors involved in outcome. If the weather was always perfect, then those children could walk to school year round. If dedicated walking paths were created that cars could not travel on were created, then those children could walk to school year round. Neither one of those is going to happen.

> It's not the snow that is dangerous, it's the cars.

Pretending it's realistic to magic all the car focused town layouts away is completely and utterly unrealistic, so I'd ask you to not pretend that "if we just admitted cars were the problem, all the problems would go away".

[yencabulator]

The process isn't quick, but I don't think anyone has claimed it to be.

Meanwhile, this subthread started at

> Heat, cold, darkness, lack of infrastructure, and distance.

If you don't think poor civic planning is at fault, you'll never fix it.