Public Transportation should only be for the employed and students during rush hour, amirite?

So fixed income seniors who worked 50 years before they retired shouldn't be able to get to the grocery store in a public bus? This isn't just unpopular. It's stupid.

by Anonymous 2 days ago

during rush hour my guy, he not just specifically said so in the title, he even pointed out the exact time frames, how seriously dense are the people here.

by Flashy-Chemical1408 2 days ago

"You're unemployed? Old? Just wasting time? Start walking." Even if old people didn't pump money into the economy (which they do, by purchasing goods), it's an absurd take that only people who you or greater society deem most important should have access to public transit.

by Anonymous 2 days ago

So you read that part but not the part where it's only for 2-hour windows during weekdays? That's crazy.

by Anonymous 2 days ago

I will admit I missed the 2 hour window piece. It's still absurd. Those people that you are advocating we exclude still have places they need to be, otherwise they wouldn't be using public transit. Like, if there was this massive issue that people could not get to work because of non-workers and non-students taking public transit, maybe it would be up for discussion. But do you have an idea of any of the current quantitative impacts of those people using public transit during rush hour? In terms of minutes late, public safety, etc. I am going to guess that those impacts are statistically insignificant.

by Anonymous 2 days ago

All I know are the old people who refuse to fold their walkers, SAHMs who won't fold their strollers, and the occasional old person who needs the bus to clear out so they can get off the bus to sit at the corner bench for hours.

by Anonymous 2 days ago

It's written right there and in the title. "Rush hour" isn't just a movie. Don't blame me for the schools that have failed you.

by Anonymous 2 days ago

Dude, just proof read your title or don't be an ass when people misunderstand your poorly formulated title.

by Anonymous 2 days ago

How would you make it clearer? Because I added every word necessary to convey my opinion as well as spelled it out in very simple language in the OP.

by Anonymous 2 days ago

They did. You flat out said "old, start walking"

by Keelylemke 2 days ago

Yes, we all saw the "rush hour" thing. It's still stupid.

by Anonymous 2 days ago

How dare they use emotion and empathy to respond to the entitled business man. The nerve.

by Anonymous 2 days ago

You literally said "Old?", and followed it up with "Start walking." Real pot kettle situation you got here, considering an upset reply in under 2 mins.

by Recent_Floor 2 days ago

I'm just killing time. Why does my responding quickly equate to anger for you?

by Anonymous 2 days ago

This is idiot talk

by Anonymous 2 days ago

If you are employed why can't you afford a car.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

When I worked in Chicago and Boston I owned a car, but couldnt afford to park it in the city.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Major cities don't require personal vehicles like more rural areas might.

by lessie40 1 day ago

Is this satire?

by hermistonlindse 1 day ago

It toes the line.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Cars are an abomination in cities. Hence, public transit.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

But unemployed, old, lounging people are also part of the public. Hence, using public transit.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

And they can use it in the off hours.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Why not just increase the amount of busses / trains available for the public?

by Anonymous 1 day ago

NO! HOUSE ARREST IF YOU AREN'T CURRENTLY CONTRIBUTING TO CAPITALISM

by Anonymous 1 day ago

You've heard this before, and you'll hear it again, but one day, you will be old too.

by mckaylamarvin 1 day ago

And I'll abide by the rules.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

So what happens if you have a doctor's appointment that ends at the beginning of rush hour, but you're retired? Or if you were looking after your grandkids and need to get home to make dinner? Or you're disabled and have to get to the specialist on the other side of town for a 9:30 am appointment, but you have to leave at 8:00 to get there? Your schedule ignores travel times, limiting retired, elderly, ill, and disabled people to a 5 hour window in the middle of the day in which to accomplish what needs to be done. It's not just about the two hours they can't travel, it's about the times in which businesses and services are open, and how travel times impact when they can visit those services.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

So you don't want cars in cities, but also don't want too many people to use public transit. Interesting.

by No-Excitement1640 1 day ago

Maybe the unemployed are going to a job interview, or going to meet someone that can help them get a job or skills they need. Maybe they are unemployed but have money and just want to go shopping or something. Public transportation is for all the public not just some at certain times. While it does get crowded at times, that does not make it go off schedule.

by Winter_Butterfly 1 day ago

They can use it after 9a and before 3p

by Anonymous 1 day ago

And what if the job interview is at 9am? Or after 3 pm?

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Take an Uber or get there before the rush hour service starts. You'll figure it out, I'm sure.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

So waste money (while on a limited income) or an hour and a half of my time? People are going on dozens of job interviews, you're talking about them spending thousands of dollars and wasting literal days worth of time just sitting around waiting. You really have zero respect for anyone but yourself, hey?

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Can you point out where I said "in one day"?

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Read like you did because even if you have dozens of interviews, you can schedule them in the 7-hour window provided each weekday.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Public transport is the lifeline for cities so you want to arbitrarily reduce the amount of people who use it?

by Local-Apricot3769 1 day ago

So those who pay the taxes can more reliably get to work, yes

by Anonymous 1 day ago

How does this make going to work more reliable? Other people taking transport doesn't affect you

by Local-Apricot3769 1 day ago

How doesn't it? Those are extra bodies on already strained public transportation systems.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Well that means it's working isn't it? A good service is being provided

by Local-Apricot3769 1 day ago

What if it's not beyond capacity? And more passengers means more funding anyway

by Local-Apricot3769 1 day ago

Unemployed and retired people also pay taxes, tho.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Cool. They can stay out of the time frames or walk to where they're going.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Oh that's a neat angle. Taxes. We should restrict access so that only those those who pay municipal property taxes can partake. Land owners only. That would class up the busses for sure. I dig it.

by Thin_Rope 1 day ago

I'm already part of that gang so it would not adversely affect me.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

So, what are they going to do? Have someone checking your student ID card or employment status before you get on the train?

by Anonymous 1 day ago

If necessary.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Which then slows down public transport for everyone. Creates the problem you're trying to solve.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Where'd I say that? Pregnant and disabled people can't be employed? That seems to be what you're implying.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Why though? Trains are every five minutes where I am and busses every ten during peak hours. Few extra folks isn't going to cause an issue.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Because they're jam packed already. Last thing a train needs in the morning is an old lady pushing a cart taking up 4 seats

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Then add another traincar. It's not that hard.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Yes

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Great. Can't wait to spend $2 billion me to add one more car.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

As opposed to building more highway lanes you would need by forcing people to take the car? Also, a train car doesn't cost 2 billion lmao.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

To expand a platform it does. Or around that, depending on where. Pretty sure the Penn Station expansion was like $10 billion or so.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

You don't need to rebuild a whole train station to lengthen a platform. Adding 20 meters of platform is a lot cheaper than 20km of extra highway.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

No one is arguing which is cheaper. I'm just saying, and using recent costs in the US, it's very expensive to do.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Our infrastructure is crumbling and can't handle increasing populations! We must punish the poor in response! Are you a Republican by chance?

by Conscious-Button 1 day ago

Public transportation is a paid service, drastically reducing the number of people "allowed" to use it would imply reducing its profit and making the actual cost of a single ticket totally impractical.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Um....Many "Old" People are employed so they can survive. Someday Tiger, you too will be "Old."

by Anonymous 1 day ago

If they're employed and old, I don't care. If they're unemployed and old, stay home a little later.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

I'm pleasuring myself to this opinion.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Kinda sounds like you don't know what the definition of "public transportation" is.

by purdytiara 1 day ago

Except public transit is just that PUBLIC transit; it's for everyone, not just people who use it to get to work or school

by Altruistic_Fee5092 1 day ago

How are homeless people booted off, then?

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Because they didn't pay the fare and get kicked off like anyone else in that situation. That and society hates the homeless.

by Altruistic_Fee5092 1 day ago

Depending on the system they do pay the fare. Bus drivers will seldom let them on without it in any place I've lived.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

I've often said that anyone over the age of 70 should only be allowed to drive between 9:00am and 3:00pm. Keep them off the roads during rush hour and after dark.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

I mean, in London it used to kinda be that way. Not sure if it's still the same but pensioners got a free bus pass that worked outside of peak hours. Meaning 9:30am and later. If they wanted to travel at peak time then they paid for it.

by IronRevolutionary788 1 day ago

This feels like the most reasonable solution. It's not that they aren't allowed, but just incentivizes them to go at different times. Gg London!

by Anonymous 1 day ago

So I'm not allowed to go out and enjoy my day off, then? No, if I'm not being productive, I don't get to partake in services my taxes pay for? How about extending that? "Unless you're employed or a student, fire departments won't put out your house fire.". Do you agree there?

by Carloshuels 1 day ago

That's just silly. What I'm saying is practical.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Why is it silly? Be specific and detailed.

by Carloshuels 1 day ago

No.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Because I didn't play your game you're going to make an opinion on what I would say? That's an interesting way to live life.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

...That's how everyone lives life, kid. We all form opinions on everything we encounter, all day, every day. And if we don't have all the information, we make assumptions to fill in the blanks. That's why I asked you to discuss this opinion more, so I wouldn't need to do that. Oh well. Maybe you'll learn about that this year.

by Carloshuels 1 day ago

Can we agree that public transportation in America needs a major face lift and railroad systems need updated and bullet trains need to be introduced. Imagine 100 bucks to travel across the country in 3 hours.

by lessie40 1 day ago

A huge congestion tax on personal cars during rush hours would fix traffic jams.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

tourist bring a ton of money to a city. restricting when they can travel is a big way to make sure people don't visit.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

That's fine. My city will survive.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

I personally do not care. This city will be just fine.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

why does chicago have a tourism board if the people who actually matter didn't care about to tourism?

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Every city has one. Countries, too. That doesn't mean those places are reliant on tourists.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

chicago has very big department and a ceo, way more of an investment that any average destination. if they didn't want the tourism money, they would have disbanded it and allocated funds to other things.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Yes but Chicago isn't reliant on it.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

You sound upset.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Why? That'll just make public transport more expensive? Terrible idea!

by dejuanwilkinson 1 day ago

Then its not public transportation. Don't want to deal with it. Buy a car. Don't like cars? Buy a bike. Don't want to bike? Then start walking.

by Extension_Major 1 day ago

More like asshole opinion you got here. Public transportation is for EVERYONE. That's why they exist in the first place.

by kariane03 1 day ago

So disabled people trying to get to their doctor's appointments, unemployed people trying to get to job interviews, people on welfare trying to get to the welfare office, retired people trying to get their medicine...none of them matter because they aren't contributing to capitalism? Jesus christ.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Why should i pay for it then?

by Anonymous 1 day ago

If there's not enough trains/busses on rush hours the city should increase the amount of trains/buses on rush hour instead of excluding people

by skyla47 1 day ago

There's only so much rail and road to be had. Even with infinite money you cannot just add an infinite number of trains.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

The rails are very much not full in the vast majority of cities, adding an extra cart on a train occupies almost no space. And for roads you can just make bus only lanes on cities that don't already have them or disincentivize driving to open more space for buses. Space is almost never the problem, the cars are. Not the old people and unemployed people using transit, but the rich people that insist on taking up a whole car space to move around 1 person

by skyla47 1 day ago

What if you need to get to a job interview or pay property/sales tax that goes to transit? I'm never a fan of not allowing people to use the things they are forced to spend taxes to maintain so either transit loses funding or it gets a bit crowded and I prefer the latter.

by National-Try 1 day ago

You can schedule an interview for later in the day. You don't need an interview to be exactly at 9 am or after 4pm. I also pay property taxes and would be happy for them to go to public transit instead of paying teachers' pensions.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Sounds like someone has to stand on the bus and that's too tough on their little legs. I'll take more people being able to go places over needing to have someone checking IDs on every bus and train making everything much slower.

by CleanTime 1 day ago