Rupert Murdoch to get Fox News viewers in the US in the late 90’s. He started that dumb shit the way you understand it today.

So like…same as the other moronic tools they’ve been hiring. Got it.

Boo hoo

Jail

No, they cannot, and have not, and I gave you examples and reasons as to why they have not.

You seem to think that arguing on best intentions or whatever is going to wish all those reasons away, and it won’t. You also tried to say I was saying the idea is pointless or whatever, which isn’t even true. Arguing in the blindly optimistic fashion you are while ignoring facts and reason is pointless though.

Literally NEVER said any of that 🤣🤣

My first comment was even that these systems are great if they can work where they are.

WITAF is up with people in the comments lately. Wow.

Yes, so how in ANY of my comments am I being inaccurate or wrong about anything, because you’ve got the wrong grioe, exactly?

My God.

Sorry, I should have been more. ABOVE the 250k level is what they aren’t LEGALLY required to cover. Banks that do that and are FDIC insured are doing that on their own.

Great piece

Not legally guaranteed though, and it has to be a HUGE bank. Regional banks or Credit Unions will not do this.

Okay, well if they aren’t accurate then why do you think people choose cars over walking in these areas?

Useful is not the same thing as practical.

The material posted and a ton of the comments are about “WHY DOESNT THE US DO THIS?!?!”.

I’m simply stating why. Different locale, society, and problems. Just because it’s possible in one place doesn’t mean it translates everywhere, which is the naive fallacy of a lot of these comments I’m reading.

Great! Glad you can do that.

Your elderly neighbors can’t, and also can’t ride a bike 8 blocks to the nearest grocery store, then lug groceries home.

The terrain in Seattle is just not walkable, is my point.

Never even said it wasn’t useful. Not sure where you’re getting that from at all. Original comment was even in support under the right circumstances. Think you missed something.

You literally just said “walkable”, and then referred to it as “hikes”. Hiking is not walking 🤣

It’s the difference between somebody with mobility issues walking two blocks, or eight. Neither Seattle or SF even attempt to pretend they are walkable because of the topography.

Well, you’re either unaware of, or just ignoring a lot of things that do not fit into your tidy explanation.

Every been the Bay Area in the US? You know what it takes to ride a bike from one side of SF to the other and any direction? What about crossing a bridge to Oakland? What about crossing the GGB to get to literally any other city on the other side?

Also,.most major US cities were not built for walking, only East Coast earlier cities. Let me ramble off a bunch that discount your point: Los Angeles, Atlanta, Chicago, Seattle, San Diego, Denver, Philadelphia, and even Washington DC.

Your immediate response is going to be something like “Well they WERE originally…”, but that doesn’t matter. Maybe 100+ years ago, but that’s not where we live. We live in the reality of now, and that reality is that none of the cities are AS accessible by walking or bike as they are with cars. If not Topography, then the general logistics of where jobs vs living spaces are located.

People don’t have the luxury of choosing where they get to live in the US anymore in proximity and convenience of their commute to work. Just not the reality of things. No argument you might have will beat the consumer logic of finding the most ideal place to live first, and worrying about the commute second. Likely to be by car.

You seem to think I’m somehow making a statement AGAINST ped infrastructure,.and I’m clearly not. Just saying the ability to have it be useful requires a lot of stuff the US just doesn’t have. The US was too focused on Suburban sprawl for way too long to suddenly just make this a viable alternative to cars. That’s the issue.

Yes it has been solved in other countries…with 1/5 the land mass of the US. That’s the problem as I mentioned.

Every major US city aside from LA has both local and long distance train networks, and they are heavily utilized. These cities were not planned around walking or rail though. Most US cities didn’t even hit what constitutes as “Urban” density until after the advent of the car,.so everything is built around cars. Reclaiming land to focus on ped or rail after the fact is in quite difficult.

Case in point, the California high speed rail project which has blown Billions of dollars over more than a decade and has yet to manifest anything usable. That’s just one state, and only serving a handful of cities. Doing this in a national scale as Japan has done is just not going to happen when Air Travel is faster.

The density in a specific location isn’t the issue, it’s the space BETWEEN all other locations. Too much sprawl to begin with requires extensive work of a long period of time to even be able to do something this.

Also helps that the cities this works for were built for walking a long time before cities in the US had even developed a unique urban footprint. East Coast cities established in the 1500-1700’s would be the closest in design to European cities.

Works great if you have smaller spaces, able bodied people, and the infrastructure in place to support it.