![](/static/be9a2c79/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.ml/pictrs/image/2QNz7bkA1V.png)
Yes, but they want money. So why deny us teeth when they can let us have teeth for money. They can make more selling it to millions of people then a few rich people.
Yes, but they want money. So why deny us teeth when they can let us have teeth for money. They can make more selling it to millions of people then a few rich people.
Distinction without a difference to the point. The demand was always there. It was never induced.
But the demand was always there. They wanted to move, they just didn’t. So the lane didn’t induce it. The choice of that word was intentional. It was to argue against more lanes. It is really unserved demand that they just ignored originally.
Yeah, the interactions suck. But if dealt with earlier, they could have been mitigated. Same way mass transit does. Express trains. Have a highway over a highway that goes to a specific place. If you stack enough of those, people get on the one they need and go straight to where they need to get. Not realistic though unless planned in advance.
My last paragraph agrees with you.
See you are missing the point. The demand isn’t induced, it was always there. They wanted to move and use thier car, but traffic was too bad. My complaint is with the BS argument that the extra lane caused demand to materialize out of no where. It was always there, just unserved.
People aren’t hitting 60 in LA during rush hour…
People will talk about induced demand and all that. But those people really just want to be able to get around. The fact that they just don’t because the traffic is so bad doesn’t mean you shouldn’t add more lanes. It means you should add a lot more. Same with the one lane at a time approach. The fact that it didn’t work does mean you are doing something wrong, but it maybe that you need to add 5 lanes at a time, not one.
Now I’m not saying they should actually do that, just that the arguments against are BS.
A comprehensive public transit system, well maintained and well patrolled is what LA really needs. I am talking Paris metro on steroids. And it is going to cost in the trillions. But it isn’t getting any cheaper by waiting.
So what is the stack overflow replacement?
Insurance is why. They can sell insulin at the prices they currently do, and still sell it to millions. Insurance companies can in turn charge more overall as well, pointing at the cost of insulin and the millions who need it as one of the reasons. So it is win win for both the buyer (Insurance) and the seller.