One thing that came as a culture shock for me is that I’m used to driving like 4 hours to see relatives. And this is usually several times a year. Then I heard from some Britons that they have rarely visit their relatives who are only like a hour drive away. Really messed me up the first time.
I would make the point (not necessarily for an hour’s drive) that the roads are often more tiring to drive on in the UK – that is, they’re not as flat, wide or straight as freeways often are, so require more concentration. Driving for an hour along Welsh country lanes doesn’t feel the same as hitting the freeway for an hour. Just my two cents/tuppence
Being from SoCal and having lived in the UK, let me explain:
In the UK many of the roads are quite literally conversions from horse drawn carriage paths. In some cases, a drunk wanker from Liverpool could draw a better line for a road than most roads connecting off many of the UK motorways (Especially in Wales or Scotland). Add in round abouts, hills, creeks, rivers and stupidly narrow bridges, it’s difficult.
I’d sincerely rather drive the Grapevine through Mammoth into Yosemite Village with black ice warnings than try and drive myself from Maidenbower, West Sussex UK to Dundee, Scotland again tbh.
While living in the UK, I bought a Heritage pass and took off almost every weekend either by light rail or by car. When my wife came to visit though, we drove from my flat near Crawley to Scotland over a 3 day trip. We visited in order: Ashford, Broomfield (Leeds Castle), Rettondon, Chelmsford, Ipswitch, Cambridge, Nottingham, Leeds, Newcastle upon Tyne, Edinburgh, Perth and finally ending in Dundee where I have distant relatives.
In all my trips, driving through the hills of Yorkshire and Cumbria are the scariest, but getting to Scone Palace outside of Perth through snow was quite challenging.
Most of the non main roads are a result of the feudal farming system. The US differs because people could buy up large rectangles of land which fit nicely together. The farming in Europe was a piecemeal affair, and roads were built onto to that. The UK is a very London centric country. The further north you get the less that is spent on roads and transport.
And they say we should all just switch to electric bikes like in the Netherlands. I tried showing them a comparison of the states using a map but turns out “I am just being difficult”
Size of a country has zero impact on your daily commute.
Lol Ok. Guess everyone has to crowd together in comparatively tiny little cities. All this usable land outside the cities is now uninhabitable. Genius.
Let me guess, we will own nothing and be happy, right? Oh and don’t forget about eating bugs!! Yum yum!
That’s not how cities work. That’s just how America decided to approach that problem.
To spell it out for you: your commute is always in your local area. The size of your country is not relevant to your local area. What is relevant, is density. Density though, has nothing to do with the size of your country. Unfortunately, you are about twice as dense as Hong Kong.
Your local area is trees now. Two and a half hours of trees. And a hideous tower thing painted to look like a marlboro cigarette, that people use as a landmark.
Not that I disagree the other commenter kind of…went off the deep end at the end, there. But if your suggestion is not that we take everyone in most of the middle states and shove 'em all together into what would probably come to 3-4 mid-sized American cities — so I guess a medium European one, an event that will absolutely never happen anyway — then your remaining solution to the city density/commute thing must be…to…increase the density?
Is that what you guys are asking? The only problem with America is that there aren’t enough Americans? Especially in Wisconsin?
I mean, this sounds just like a big city thing, not an American thing. I live in Paris and hour long commutes are common here too.
As European cities are close together though, this can lead to situations where travelling between cities is not what takes the most time. I once (about a year ago) travelled a Paris-London which took me about 5 hours from start to finish - the Eurostar takes only just over 2 hours. The rest was travelling from my home to Gare du Nord, from St. Pancras to my destination, and border checks before boarding at Gare du Nord (thank Brexit for that one).
Same experience when my wife and I went to Scotland to visit friends. We were in Glasgow and wanted to check out Edinburgh, less than an hour bus ride, for the day. They told us that we were crazy and that’s a whole weekend trip.
We laughed pretty hard. A full hour drive is only half of a daily work commute in Toronto, on a good day.
I used to commute Edinburgh - Glasgow, and plenty of others do the same. It’s also common for folk to do the trip just for an evening to go to a gig or something (a lot of tours will have their only Scottish date in Glasgow). I think your friends were probably meaning that you’d need more than a day to fully be able to see what Glasgow has to offer? If not, that seems really odd as it’s a busy commuter route.
Nope, they were really saying that you can’t see anything there unless you go for the whole weekend.
We walked around, checked out the castle, saw a lame touristy film about Nessy, sampled some incredible whisky and were home for dinner.
It was kinda the same with St Abbs. They said we had to leave Friday morning and leave Sunday evening (again from Glasgow) or we wouldn’t get to do much. Now I’m not going to say the place isn’t gorgeous, but what we did was hang out in a… cottage? I’m not sure what to rightly call it, but we hung out at someone’s place, played board games, played cards, hung out by the bluffs, on the beach etc.
I don’t disagree that it was a relaxing and fun weekend, but we didn’t need to spend a full 2.5 days there to do what we did. They made it seem like if we lost even an hour the weekend was lost.
I’ve got four different countries, with different languages and currencies, within a four hour drive from my house. I only drive if the road trip is the goal.
One thing that came as a culture shock for me is that I’m used to driving like 4 hours to see relatives. And this is usually several times a year. Then I heard from some Britons that they have rarely visit their relatives who are only like a hour drive away. Really messed me up the first time.
I would make the point (not necessarily for an hour’s drive) that the roads are often more tiring to drive on in the UK – that is, they’re not as flat, wide or straight as freeways often are, so require more concentration. Driving for an hour along Welsh country lanes doesn’t feel the same as hitting the freeway for an hour. Just my two cents/tuppence
The mountains of Northern California are treacherous. Many of the highways up there are frequently shut down for extended periods.
Being from SoCal and having lived in the UK, let me explain:
In the UK many of the roads are quite literally conversions from horse drawn carriage paths. In some cases, a drunk wanker from Liverpool could draw a better line for a road than most roads connecting off many of the UK motorways (Especially in Wales or Scotland). Add in round abouts, hills, creeks, rivers and stupidly narrow bridges, it’s difficult.
I’d sincerely rather drive the Grapevine through Mammoth into Yosemite Village with black ice warnings than try and drive myself from Maidenbower, West Sussex UK to Dundee, Scotland again tbh.
What roads did you take? A majority of that is dualed.
While living in the UK, I bought a Heritage pass and took off almost every weekend either by light rail or by car. When my wife came to visit though, we drove from my flat near Crawley to Scotland over a 3 day trip. We visited in order: Ashford, Broomfield (Leeds Castle), Rettondon, Chelmsford, Ipswitch, Cambridge, Nottingham, Leeds, Newcastle upon Tyne, Edinburgh, Perth and finally ending in Dundee where I have distant relatives.
In all my trips, driving through the hills of Yorkshire and Cumbria are the scariest, but getting to Scone Palace outside of Perth through snow was quite challenging.
So not really the main roads.
Most of the non main roads are a result of the feudal farming system. The US differs because people could buy up large rectangles of land which fit nicely together. The farming in Europe was a piecemeal affair, and roads were built onto to that. The UK is a very London centric country. The further north you get the less that is spent on roads and transport.
Or even at night. Lotta these highways though just a straight line can be real dangerous.
Yeah the Karen migrations are rough.
Yeah, I can understand that. My cars got cruise control. Id doubt thatd be very effective in the UK less your in some scenic area like the Cotswolds.
Cruise control is fine on motorways, but that doesn’t mean you can relax when you’re still surrounded by other vehicles also going at 70mph!
I’ve heard similar things. Like, I’ve had work commutes that are an hour long before. (Not that that’s healthy or ideal, but it’s far from rare)
And they say we should all just switch to electric bikes like in the Netherlands. I tried showing them a comparison of the states using a map but turns out “I am just being difficult”
The “map” is not the problem, you just completely fucked up your city planning. Size of a country has zero impact on your daily commute.
Lol Ok. Guess everyone has to crowd together in comparatively tiny little cities. All this usable land outside the cities is now uninhabitable. Genius.
Let me guess, we will own nothing and be happy, right? Oh and don’t forget about eating bugs!! Yum yum!
Go slink back to hexbear.
Are you completely insane?
Your response has nothing to do with my comment.
Here I’ll speak slowly
We have a big country. Big spaces mean longer commute. City design can't change physics of space-time.That’s not how cities work. That’s just how America decided to approach that problem.
To spell it out for you: your commute is always in your local area. The size of your country is not relevant to your local area. What is relevant, is density. Density though, has nothing to do with the size of your country. Unfortunately, you are about twice as dense as Hong Kong.
Your local area is trees now. Two and a half hours of trees. And a hideous tower thing painted to look like a marlboro cigarette, that people use as a landmark.
Not that I disagree the other commenter kind of…went off the deep end at the end, there. But if your suggestion is not that we take everyone in most of the middle states and shove 'em all together into what would probably come to 3-4 mid-sized American cities — so I guess a medium European one, an event that will absolutely never happen anyway — then your remaining solution to the city density/commute thing must be…to…increase the density?
Is that what you guys are asking? The only problem with America is that there aren’t enough Americans? Especially in Wisconsin?
What haopenes when commute is is 200km
We don’t all live in cities genius. Cities are shit. Outside of cities, public transportation and bikes are shit.
I mean, this sounds just like a big city thing, not an American thing. I live in Paris and hour long commutes are common here too.
As European cities are close together though, this can lead to situations where travelling between cities is not what takes the most time. I once (about a year ago) travelled a Paris-London which took me about 5 hours from start to finish - the Eurostar takes only just over 2 hours. The rest was travelling from my home to Gare du Nord, from St. Pancras to my destination, and border checks before boarding at Gare du Nord (thank Brexit for that one).
It turns out it’s not the distance to our family that’s important, we just don’t fucking like them
Then you obviously dont apply to my analogy then. Knew someone would comment that eventually.
Same experience when my wife and I went to Scotland to visit friends. We were in Glasgow and wanted to check out Edinburgh, less than an hour bus ride, for the day. They told us that we were crazy and that’s a whole weekend trip.
We laughed pretty hard. A full hour drive is only half of a daily work commute in Toronto, on a good day.
I used to commute Edinburgh - Glasgow, and plenty of others do the same. It’s also common for folk to do the trip just for an evening to go to a gig or something (a lot of tours will have their only Scottish date in Glasgow). I think your friends were probably meaning that you’d need more than a day to fully be able to see what Glasgow has to offer? If not, that seems really odd as it’s a busy commuter route.
Nope, they were really saying that you can’t see anything there unless you go for the whole weekend.
We walked around, checked out the castle, saw a lame touristy film about Nessy, sampled some incredible whisky and were home for dinner.
It was kinda the same with St Abbs. They said we had to leave Friday morning and leave Sunday evening (again from Glasgow) or we wouldn’t get to do much. Now I’m not going to say the place isn’t gorgeous, but what we did was hang out in a… cottage? I’m not sure what to rightly call it, but we hung out at someone’s place, played board games, played cards, hung out by the bluffs, on the beach etc.
I don’t disagree that it was a relaxing and fun weekend, but we didn’t need to spend a full 2.5 days there to do what we did. They made it seem like if we lost even an hour the weekend was lost.
Canadian here. I drive 4 times a year to my family cottage 8 hours away.
I’ve got four different countries, with different languages and currencies, within a four hour drive from my house. I only drive if the road trip is the goal.