Musk is another blowhard spewing about what he likely doesn't experience daily living in Bel-Air and all. You'd have to be a masochist trying to drive a car daily around an actual city (not an ever expanding suburb)

The budgets of buses are rarely threatened with cuts in Seattle. We’re frequently threatened with cuts to service if we don’t cough up money for their latest budget increase.

So the takeaway on public transportation is a draw: Musk 1, Mudede 1

Cars make total sense if you can afford them. Because the mass transit system here in the Pacific Northwest fucking sucks. I live five miles from my work. It takes me 15 minutes to drive there, 30 minutes with traffic. But the nearest bus stop is two miles from my home, and Google calls that 59 minutes assuming I catch the bus exactly on time.

I routinely go to a place that's eight miles from my house. It takes me half hour to drive there, 45 minutes in traffic. Google tells me the bus would take two hours and involve riding all the way to Seattle to transfer buses. Fuck that.

Yeah, public transportation (including airplanes) does suck. And yeah, mainly because the auto industry, petroleum industry, parking lot industry, and who knows how many other big corporations make damn sure it sucks.

Capitalism.

Sounds to me like somebody has a teenager nearly old enough for a driver's license!

"Now for cars. For very obvious reasons, they are loved by serial killers:"

Every now and then, Mudede dumps into his usual, garden-variety stupidity a nugget of pure, uncut dumbshittery, like a brown M&M in Van Halen's dressing room, just to make sure we're paying attention. This is one of those examples.

@4 they make sense when there is no adequate public transit and even that is debatable considering their environmental footprint. The distances you mentioned could be bikeable fastest depending on specifics.

@7: Actually, car ownership is a consistent check-box for serial killers. The Cleveland Torso Murderer, considered the first modern serial killer, was presumed to own a private automobile, allowing him to transport and dump bodies while evading capture.

@ 6 could you leave Charles' family out of whatever you have going?

@2, the dilemma is that the population is increasing, ergo ridership increases, ergo the need for more drivers and buses, ergo a bigger budget is needed to fulfill the increased need for bus service.

The hayseeds in Olympia won't fund transportation, so we in the city have to do it ourselves, in all likelihood through some regressive tax measure.

@8

I'm always a bit astonished at this implied assumption that every adult in the pacific northwest is physically capable of ten to twenty miles of cycling every day, rain or shine.

Sure, it's good for you, and if you do it a lot you get better at it. But there are a quite a lot of medical conditions and other constraints out there, beyond "sedentary lifestyle."

@10

I could, but then this blog-post of his wouldn't be anywhere near as hilarious as it is when you imagine him fuming and fretting over a teenager's automobile-related desires and demands.

FWIW, I don't know anything about his kids that he hasn't published, and I'm only guessing that one of them is of an age to exacerbate his transportation-related rages.

Bikes.

#5: Wrong bogeyman. Switzerland is the most capitalistic county in Europe and has perhaps the finest public transportation system in the world.

For someone who's supposed to be such a visionary, Musk's statement shows a real lack of perspective. Then again, maybe that's deliberate. Maybe he's speaking not as a philosopher without any skin in the game but as a salesman who does have a vested interest. Public transportation and walkable communities are the competition for Musk's self-interested vision of people relying on electric, self-driving cars to get around.

Cont from @16...

But here's the real lack of perspective, even from Musk's standpoint. Aren't these criticisms of public transportation especially applicable to his hyperloop idea? I thought one of the elements of the hyperloop was people sharing a particularly confined space. I'm seeing this on a quick search for "hyperloop capacity:" Five minute station times, top speeds of 760 mph, isolated internal tube environments, and a capacity of 840 passengers per hour make the Hyperloop the fastest, safest, and most efficient mass transportation system ever proposed. As for that "isolated internal tube environments:" I'm seeing: The capsule will also be 9 feet (2.7 meters) across and weigh 20 tons, with a passenger capacity of 28 to 40 people.

I suppose Musk can tolerate the presence of other people if he's traveling at 760 MPH.

And let's not forget the immdiate outcome Elon Musk was looking for when he introduced the hyperloop concept a few years ago--to convince California to kill its high-speed rail project. I'm still inclined to believe that continues to be hyperloops primary reason for being.

@12 which is the reason I said "depending on specifics" like climate, topography, urban sprawl, demography, etc. That cycling has a role to play in transit is not an assumption, it already plays a part.

@15:

It's also a relatively small country, not much bigger in landmass than the Dallas/Ft. Worth metropolitan area, and with a population of less than 8.5mm people, roughly that of New York City. It also has the highest average individual wealth at nearly $600K (US) per adult. With that small of a footprint, and that much money it's no wonder they would be able to afford a first-class public transit system.

@15: then AMERICAN Capitalism.

the country with a Climate Change-Denial Industry. the country that chanted "kick their ass and steal their gas". the country that tore out its rail infrastructure. the country that created Malls. the country that created the Generic Suburban Retail Shitscape. the country that can barely keep potholes patched and bridges standing.

@14, biking as a form of daily medium to long distance transportation sucks more than cars, trains, and buses combined.

How would he know? When was the last time that asshole took transit?

And of course serial killers like cars. They'd get caught if they tried to bring a body aboard a bus without paying the extra fare.

St lightrail is great, it’s fast (once its off street level), and is large enough and comes regularly enough that getting a seat isn’t a shit show.

The buses in Seattle are another story. Trying to bus through downtown Seattle during rush hour is a horrible experience. The bus is stuck in the same gride lock that the cars are in, the buses are crazy packed, and there’s usually at least one or two people either on drugs or coming off drugs . The bus stops throughout downtown Seattle are incredible unsafe (so much so one of the Stranger staff felt the need to pack heat and walk around that area for part of his “spend a day in a gun nuts shoes” experiment...).

Not enough context to see what What’s his face though the fix was, but it seems pretty simple:
1) invest heavily in off street rail
2) invest heavily in our (almost non-existent) social safety net, so that buses (and libraries) don’t have to become defacto homeless shelters.

If you've got to hang out with a serial killer, you're far better off on the bus than a car.

Also,

... doesn’t start where you want it to start, doesn’t end where you want it to end?

In a dense urban environment, this describes car ownership. I image Elon Musk's idea of a perfect system is an Uber-type scheme running on Tesla self-driving cars.

18: You're right, as you often are. I was responding to the comment blaming any and all of our transportation woes on the go to bogeyman of all bogeymen, the greedy capitalist, and certainly there are plenty of them. And for the reasons you mentioned, the US will never be like Switzerland, the poster child for free market capitalism. Weird people, but they seem to have found the pot gold at the end of their lucky tight assed little rainbow. But in every other larger country the transportation systems are usually cobbled together based on urgency, geography and economics, and ours is no different, where our size makes these projects incredibly expensive to build and operate. And people here are simply unwilling to pay the costs for fixing not only our transportation woes, but for fixing all of the other woes that beset this incredibly divided country, unregulated capitalism being the low hanging fruit of the pseudo-intellectual lefty.

Also, not to be that guy, but Ham the Astrochimp was a chimpanzee that went to space in 1963. Just sayin.

Also i’m considering buying a second car. I basically commute from Ballard to sodo every day (and back) and have tried all different ways.

Biking- it’s great but damn it gets cold, dark and wet. I’m trying to push through but it’s tough...Biking during the spring/summer was awesome. Totally trip time about 30 minutes.

Walking- same downside as biking but longer. Totally trip time about 90 minutes.

Car share - not bad, about 10-15 bucks depending on the timw of day, total time about 20 minutes

Driving- great, totally time about 10 minutes (as long as you don’t need to go during peak rush hour, then about 30 minutes)

Bus - ive tried different routes. They’re usually pretty busy (standing room only), and require either transfering or a 30 minutes walk. The downtown stops have some serious safety issues, and you don’t save much more time for walking. On a good day its about a 45-60 minute commute, on a bad day it can be hours (literally there’s been times i gave up half way and walked).

I want to use public transportation. But we do need to realize that street level public transportation sucks just as bad as being stuck in a car. At least you have control over your environment in the car. Coupled with the lack of a social safety net, taking the bus sucks. It will get the job done if need be, but it’s never a great experience.

And Charles I think you know this, thats why you only mentioned the light rail.

Getting into this stupid car vs public transportation debate where we pretend one side is always awesome and the other side is always horrible helps no one. Public transportation should be great and can be great (and some parts are, such as the lightrail from the stadium to beacon hill - once it gets street level its slow).

True story. I got in a car accident with Ted Bundy in the summer of '73. I was going north on 16th Ave NE and he ran a yield sign at 52nd. Smashed up the front fender of my mother's Duster and his girlfriends VW beetle. He didn't have his insurance info on him so we both hoofed it the 4 or 5 blocks over to his girlfriends on 21st. She was pissed. But her insurance settled the claim and the whole thing was forgotten until 20 years later when my mother was going through old records and pulled out the old hand-written information he had given me. I've always felt a little guilty about the whole thing, like just walking with me for those 5 blocks emphasized what a pathetic specimen of American manhood he was in contrast to the real swinging dick I was at 19. Made him hate himself even more...he was the very embodiment of privileged Young Republican frat-boy asshole. Treated his girlfriend like shit too.

@25,
Blaming any and all transportation woes on capitalism? No, just the problem of mass transit. And I'll even capitulate a little and revise that to say "the problem of mass transit in densely populated urban areas."

Suburban and rural areas have their own issues with implementing mass transit, but dense urban areas? Barring non-stop flooding (New Orleans) or unpredictable earthquakes (Los Angeles) there's no reason why highly populated areas shouldn't have the best public transportation in the world. New York City--and really only Manhattan--has top notch public transportation. But what about Boston? Houston? Denver? Washington D.C.? Even Chicago's E-trains are sorely lacking.

If it's not because of corporate interference, then why? What's the boogeyman I'm not seeing?

@29

I don't know if you've spent any time in Boston or not, but the T is a rather good metro transit rail system. I'm also wondering what your complaint with the CTA's rail system is, compared to MTA.

Many of the world's major cities have excellent metro rail trasit-- London, Paris, Tokyo; the ones that don't are the ones that have less capital: Lagos, Karachi, Dhaka... and those undergoing rapid capitalist development tend to have major metro rail projects underway as well (Delhi, Beijing, Mumbai, Shanghai).

In the US, the glaringly obvious 'boogeyman' is simply population size and density. Larger, denser (and generally older) cities tend to have effective rail systems, while small, younger cities (Seattle) and sprawling cities (Phoenix) do not.

@29- The reason is largely financial. Putting subways, trains etc. in urban areas costs a fortune (look at what Sound Transit is costing). New York's system and I suspect Chicago's was largely put in years ago when wages & land costs were much lower (not to mention that we now put a lot of thought into environmental effects, which is worthwhile but does cost $$). I don't know that you need to invoke some corporate conspiracy to explain it. Eventually things will get crowded/trafficky enough that people will be willing to pay for real transit.

@28, Bundy's shitty driving is what eventually got him busted (in Utah). A traffic cop tried to pull him over for driving at night without headlights, and he tried to outrun the cop in his Beetle (not a best practice).

Public transportation is for poor people and eco-whiners looking for an excuse to call in sick because someone on public transportation sneezed on them and got them sick. If it weren’t then the BMW, Audi, Mercedes, Infinity, Cadillac, Tesla population in downtown would be a dramatically decreased.

@30, 31, I have spent a little time in Boston, though not nearly as much compared to Chicago, NYC, and D.C. Boston's trains are decent, so is the cta. Dc still sucks unless they've made major changes since 2012. The mta is great in Manhattan... The other four boroughs? Not so much.

Manhattan is crisscrossed throughout with so many trains and stations and runs so frequently you rarely need to wait but a couple mins at each stop. I didn't get that same feeling in Boston, Chicago, or dc. I can't speak for other countries.

So yeah, Chicago, boston, and D.C. have decent public transportation. And yet, cars are still far more convenient. And that's just the cities with great public transport. That doesn't even address places like Dallas, Phoenix, Atlanta... Huge cities with shitty or non-existent public transport.

@34

The difference between Manhattan and the outer boroughs and the difference between NYC and Atlanta are exactly the same thing: density.

It's really quite simple, especially once you've got a bit of a grasp on the history of urban development in the US.

I feel like you almost understand this; let's keep at it, yes?

I feel like everyone of Charle's articles follows the EXACT same formula.

1) Briefly mention a problem/issue.

2) Somehow blame capitalism and/or cars

3) Make a snarky comment about anyone who even slightly disagrees

Would be real simple to program a bot to do the same quality of writing...

You know what really sucks? Cleaning my house. That is why I have a maid. Cooking also sucks. I don't understand why everyone doesn't just hire a professional chef. Oh, and fuck driving or taking public transportation. Get yourself a limo, bitch, and a good chauffeur. I'll ride a bike around the estate maybe, but unless I'm in the back of a rickshaw, I'm not riding amongst the commoners.

Musk shows how otherwise smart people can be so socially clueless. Cars are expensive to own, insure and maintain. They also don't scale. The more people use cars, the more crowded the streets become. They make sense in remote areas, but are simply not an efficient option for large scale movement within cities (as has been explained many times). That's just from a space standpoint. When it comes to operations, public transit gets cheaper and improves when it is used a lot, while automobiles are the opposite. We've spent billions trying to work with cars, and even places that are known for embracing them are moving away from that.