[trimethylpurine]

I've long suspected that this model is meant for cities to make money on DUIs. They close the public transit before the bars in almost every city across the country, and they ensure the bars are far enough away and restrictive enough that you have to drive. Then they tax the hell out of taxi services to ensure that there aren't enough cabs to take you home and rides can exceed $100 (which is a lot in most of the country by area, not population). It's zoned this way where bars and restaurants aren't near houses, in summary.

If they did it like Spain, for example, where you can just walk out of your home, sit on the street at any restaurant, and drink wine with your friends, we'd have exactly what you're describing.

But then they wouldn't be able to rake in DUI profits.

[dfxm12]

A city does not want drunk people crashing cars into infrastructure or murdering its inhabitants. They don't want to support injured people who are unable to work. They don't want these types of cases taking up the court's time. All this stuff costs a city money & they aren't inviting people to do it just in case they get caught (because the type of person who can't afford a cab home probably also can't afford to replace a downed traffic light).

Save the conspiracies for red light cameras or speed traps.

[trimethylpurine]

The above makes me think we're overestimating how much damage to infrastructure and human life is really being caused. As much as I wish you were right, the solutions are nearly free and they are right in front of our faces and being actively selected against by municipalities across the country. I'd love to hear the explanation for that.