Yes and no. But if you’re commuting 3 hours a day at an average 65 mph your burning 500 dollars a month in gas. More if you’re going faster.
At that point eating 250 more a month in rent to live closer in isn’t the world’s worst idea.
And you’re still putting other people in a lot of danger just for your convenience. If an accident does happen then survivability drops off sharply after 65-70 mph.
I drive with traffic, sometimes 90, sometimes 30, sometimes 70… And no, with 40mpg I spend 200 a month in gas. I can assure you driving 97 North/south, driving the posted speed limit will get you killed.
I’m not sure why I’m even arguing with you about this, you’re West Coast, correct?
The east and west coast have the same popular myth. And it’s bullshit. The stats don’t lie. Fatality increases with accident speed. If you want to survive an accident then stay 70 or below.
Neat. Maryland has traffic codes for hindering traffic. If you are impeding traffic you will get a ticket.
Regardless of physics. You going into this so deeply tells me that you’re either Californian or Washington state. I’d go with Californian on the premise you haven’t let this go yet.
Also I haven’t downvoted you a single time. That’s not me doing that.
I grew up in Maryland actually. And you have to go very slow, like 40 on the controlled access roads, before they issue that ticket. Going the speed limit or near it isn’t a crime, no matter how much you want it to be. And every cop I’ve talked to wants us all to slow down, especially when the 95 gets fogged out. The Southwest has the same problem with people yeeting themselves into sandstorms and getting into accidents on mountain highways where they roll right off the mountain.
Thinking about it I’m pretty sure any cop that tried to bring a ticket for doing 60 in a 65 would get laughed out of the courtroom.
I commute 5 hours a day for work, and have to go in 3 times a week. I take the train now, but still have to drive 25 min to the train station. Taking the train takes exactly the same time as driving to my job. Which by itself is ridiculous. Up until recently, the option of taking the train in was not available. So I spent 5 hours in my car. The price difference between moving closer to work Vs living where I am right now is almost 2.5k a month. I don’t get paid enough to pay 48 to 52k a year in rent. I work in cancer research. The jobs are in the city, not outside. So I don’t have a choice, because every company that does what I do is in the city, and doesn’t do remote work.
I have a feeling you don’t really understand how things work for people sometimes
If you have a train then you’re not the one concerned with the speed of traffic. Unless you’re trying to shave seconds off that drive to the Park and Ride?
At any rate the answer to the housing crisis is not turning our highways into a racetrack. Your edge case in no way justifies that.
Yes and no. But if you’re commuting 3 hours a day at an average 65 mph your burning 500 dollars a month in gas. More if you’re going faster.
At that point eating 250 more a month in rent to live closer in isn’t the world’s worst idea.
And you’re still putting other people in a lot of danger just for your convenience. If an accident does happen then survivability drops off sharply after 65-70 mph.
I drive with traffic, sometimes 90, sometimes 30, sometimes 70… And no, with 40mpg I spend 200 a month in gas. I can assure you driving 97 North/south, driving the posted speed limit will get you killed.
I’m not sure why I’m even arguing with you about this, you’re West Coast, correct?
The east and west coast have the same popular myth. And it’s bullshit. The stats don’t lie. Fatality increases with accident speed. If you want to survive an accident then stay 70 or below.
Neat. Maryland has traffic codes for hindering traffic. If you are impeding traffic you will get a ticket.
Regardless of physics. You going into this so deeply tells me that you’re either Californian or Washington state. I’d go with Californian on the premise you haven’t let this go yet.
Also I haven’t downvoted you a single time. That’s not me doing that.
I grew up in Maryland actually. And you have to go very slow, like 40 on the controlled access roads, before they issue that ticket. Going the speed limit or near it isn’t a crime, no matter how much you want it to be. And every cop I’ve talked to wants us all to slow down, especially when the 95 gets fogged out. The Southwest has the same problem with people yeeting themselves into sandstorms and getting into accidents on mountain highways where they roll right off the mountain.
Thinking about it I’m pretty sure any cop that tried to bring a ticket for doing 60 in a 65 would get laughed out of the courtroom.
I commute 5 hours a day for work, and have to go in 3 times a week. I take the train now, but still have to drive 25 min to the train station. Taking the train takes exactly the same time as driving to my job. Which by itself is ridiculous. Up until recently, the option of taking the train in was not available. So I spent 5 hours in my car. The price difference between moving closer to work Vs living where I am right now is almost 2.5k a month. I don’t get paid enough to pay 48 to 52k a year in rent. I work in cancer research. The jobs are in the city, not outside. So I don’t have a choice, because every company that does what I do is in the city, and doesn’t do remote work.
I have a feeling you don’t really understand how things work for people sometimes
If you have a train then you’re not the one concerned with the speed of traffic. Unless you’re trying to shave seconds off that drive to the Park and Ride?
At any rate the answer to the housing crisis is not turning our highways into a racetrack. Your edge case in no way justifies that.
Reading comprehension isn’t your strong suite is it