197 karma · joined May 25, 2013
Not sure if you're mistaken in your comment or there's a bug in the site. When I select all unknown dimensions and a block-level element, it gives me a flexbox output (the right answer, IMO).
Maybe its true that saving money isn't a priority, but spending money on things that have the most impact, or that get the most value is a priority.
I work for OpenGov, so I hear this from our customers (who work in government) all the time.
This is why Caltrain has the highest (I think) number of bikes onboard of a commuter rail line in the nation.
At this point, we should just all agree that article titles are at least slightly sensational. If no one on HN debated the clickbaitiness of a headline, comment volume would drop dramatically.
Edit: reordered the paragraphs.
It's funny you say this, because you've managed to reduce real people (transit riders) into an unreal stereotype ("crazy drugged out/drunk").
Historically, cities like Brasilia were designed around the logic of the car. For example, most roadway intersections feature over and underpasses, cars are completely segregated from pedestrians. By most accounts, it doesn't work so well.
Businesses can count on their presence into the future, as can riders who try to plan their car-less lives in their community.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garden_city_movement http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ville_Radieuse
Car owners kind of already pay for infrastructure for their vehicles through excise tax, gas tax, and tolls (not really, but at least its something). Why not charge for parking too?
Why couldn't our city councils tax each parking space? Landlords would pass that on as a parking fee.