[dpark]

> It saves time when you don't put 10-lane motorways and in your cities nor turn them into parking lot wasteland.

I missed the part where this has anything to do with saving time.

I’m not saying that public transit doesn’t have major benefits. I’m totally in favor of strong public transit, but saving time is generally not one of those benefits.

> Public transport reduces inequality, which is the main cause of crime.

If feels like a big stretch to say public transit reduces crime. I wonder if there’s actual data to support this notion.

[ajuc]

> I missed the part where this has anything to do with saving time.

If you make cities more concentrated without balooning them with parking lots - everything's closer. If you restrict cars - there's less traffic jams, which makes commute faster.

> If feels like a big stretch to say public transit reduces crime. I wonder if there’s actual data to support this notion.

US has much higher crime levels than other developed nations. It's also the most car-dependant of them.

People often think public transport creates crime, because criminals use it to move (like everybody else). But public transport mainly lets non-criminal people to move, which reduces the number of criminals overall.

[Fishkins]

> I missed the part where this has anything to do with saving time

It lets you put the non-car stuff closer together, so you're traveling less distance to get to the same place. It requires urban design, not just a single person switching between modes of transit.

(Although switching to cycling can often make transit both faster for you and the people around you in a city because you aren't as affected by traffic and don't create as much traffic)