The Best Country in the World for Drivers

You might think so, but a flat number comparison doesn't do justice to the vast differences in urban planning. Check out this video, it describes Dutch urban planning pretty well: ▶ this video

Kind of weird article. If you want cars to stay out of bike lanes, make them protected like in here in the Netherlands. But also why do people expect to be taken to a bike lane rather than a parking space? Also seeing a lot of ignorance about cycling here in the comments. Would recommend some people to watch some Not Just Bikes videos. Building better cycle infrastructure is better for everyone, cars and cyclists included. Less people die, and cars don't have to deal with cyclists on the road. Ex ▶ this video

A city designed for other modes of transport is also better for drivers because only those who need (or really want) to drive need to do so. Result, less congestion and more relaxed driving. If you have 15 minutes to spare, watch this video: ▶ this video

One of the many excellent videos on the Not Just Bikes YouTube channel [1] shows how the Netherlands has done it. [1] ▶ this video

Most (or at least, a plurality of) people who cycle or take the tube in London also drive a car sometimes; it's not like you have to be wedded to one particular transport mode. Drivers aren't drivers 100% of the time. Reducing motor traffic makes for safer, more aesthetically pleasant streets. You can expand the pavement, have flowers, landscaping, public art, outdoor dining, etc. The air quality is better, the surroundings are quieter, people don't get run over and maimed in collisions. And when you really want or need to drive, there's less traffic around. Nobody likes sitting in traffic jams! See this video for how these kinds of policies benefit drivers directly[1]. The carrot is having a more pleasant city. Everyone wins from that. [1] ▶ this video

So the actual challenge is to convince those car drivers that they really should be pushing for more bike lanes, since it really is in their best interest. O:-) For more arguments than can fit in this margin, see: ▶ this video "The Best Country in the World for Drivers" (edit: +if you don't have time for an entire video, just watch this one traffic light for single example that exemplifies the story: link ... comments on that video are good too!)

Both are definitely a factor, but don't forget that a lot of the irritate driving behavior is because in America people are forced to drive. Even if they don't want to or really shouldn't be driving, they still have to drive to get around town. Here is a video that explains it further: ▶ this video

I think this is due to how car dependent North America is. There are so many aspects that are missed in these pictures or what you are for example experiencing. It's not that you're situation is improving, it's most likely not. But that's not due to car independent cities being bad, it's because changing from being car dependent to car independent is hard and takes time. I would recommend you have a look at Not Just Bikes on YouTube, a Canadian that moved to the Netherlands. He talks about car independent cities in Europe, more specifically The Netherlands and compares it to car dependent North America. Here is a video that talks about how these "car independent" countries are still the best to drive in compared to others: ▶ this video . Regardless, I would recommend you check out a few other of his videos, most importantly his series on the US non profit organisation "Strong Towns": link . It think it's about sharing the message that placing public transport, cyclists, and pedestrians in the forefront is better for almost everyone involved, including drivers, and especially people who live in cities and towns.

I've been watching a channel that really opened my eyes on how terrible urban planning is in america. ▶ this video

Even as a driver, if you think about the second-order effects of getting more (other) people out of their cars, it becomes obvious that it would improve traffic for you. An enlightened self-interested driver would want to increase investment in alternatives to driving, since that is the only proven solution for congestion. As a video: ▶ this video

> I kind of like his ideas (I know the channel), but he’s heavily biased against cars. He’s the “everything could be done on a bike” type of guy. It's kind of hard to over emphasize the the damage they've done, specifically as forms of personal transportation (versus more commercial transport). He does have a video called "The Best Country in the World for Drivers", in which he shows that by reducing the need for cars for most people, actually helps the optimize things for operating a car: * ▶ this video And until the ~1920s, societies managed to function pretty well without the streets being taken over by cars: * link I don't see why they need to have total priority with-in cities to the extant they currently do.

> […] considering the transit with the lowest capital investment, the bus, is also benefited by car oriented development like a road network with more connections between nodes. 'Improving' car-oriented development has been observed to make things worse: > It is a paradox in that improvements in the road network will not reduce traffic congestion. Improvements in the road network can make congestion worse if the improvements make public transport more inconvenient or if they shift investment, causing disinvestment in the public transport system. * link Improving things for non-car users can actually make things better for drivers: * ▶ this video * link * link