CombatWombatEsq@lemmy.world to Fuck Cars@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 year agoIt’s time to ban ‘right-on-red’www.fastcompany.comexternal-linkmessage-square225fedilinkarrow-up1321arrow-down1161
arrow-up1160arrow-down1external-linkIt’s time to ban ‘right-on-red’www.fastcompany.comCombatWombatEsq@lemmy.world to Fuck Cars@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 year agomessage-square225fedilink
minus-squareAA5B@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up14arrow-down7·1 year agoPersonally 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-up10arrow-down1·1 year agoIt costs nothing to make people wait for a green.
minus-squareduffman@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2arrow-down5·1 year agoYou just listed the cost. Time. Another is reduced thouroughput/increased traffic.
minus-squareJerkface (any/all)@lemmy.calinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up6·edit-21 year agoDude. Fucking context: saving money for towns who don’t want to invest in more complicated traffic lights
minus-squareFredthefishlord@lemmy.blahaj.zonelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·1 year agoIt’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