CombatWombatEsq@lemmy.world to Fuck Cars@lemmy.worldEnglish · 2 年前It’s time to ban ‘right-on-red’www.fastcompany.comexternal-linkmessage-square225fedilinkarrow-up1330
arrow-up1330external-linkIt’s time to ban ‘right-on-red’www.fastcompany.comCombatWombatEsq@lemmy.world to Fuck Cars@lemmy.worldEnglish · 2 年前message-square225fedilink
minus-squareAA5B@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up15·2 年前Personally I do think that’s the real reason behind right on red: saving money for towns who don’t want to invest in more complicated traffic lights. Trading increased injuries for saving a little money
minus-squareJerkface (any/all)@lemmy.calinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up10·2 年前It costs nothing to make people wait for a green.
minus-squareduffman@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·2 年前You just listed the cost. Time. Another is reduced thouroughput/increased traffic.
minus-squareJerkface (any/all)@lemmy.calinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up6·edit-22 年前Dude. Fucking context: saving money for towns who don’t want to invest in more complicated traffic lights
minus-squareFredthefishlord@lemmy.blahaj.zonelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·2 年前It’ll cost them the election, that’s what
Personally I do think that’s the real reason behind right on red: saving money for towns who don’t want to invest in more complicated traffic lights. Trading increased injuries for saving a little money
It costs nothing to make people wait for a green.
You just listed the cost. Time. Another is reduced thouroughput/increased traffic.
Dude. Fucking context:
It’ll cost them the election, that’s what