Yeah but is Jevons Paradox really also the same in your field? I know it namely from mine in environmental science, where productivity gains from improved efficiency lead to overall growth in aggregate production.
@@BigBlueMan118 Honestly, this 'version' of it in the video is a bastardisation for automobiles. With trains, for example, you will get more revenue to increase frequencies. Which will encourage more people to live closer to stations, and if the agency is a developer/landlord of adjacent property... more revenue to improve services! And as a bonus, more energy efficiency per capita... saving people money they can invest instead. Sure, you could value capture an increase in motorists with a congestion tax, whilst you continue to expand, but you will continue to demolish houses (that pay property tax), people will commute longer (increasing total maintance needed), and will likely ruin metro centres even further. And guess what a lot of suburbs use to slow down their decay? Metro centres! Ruining them will make things worse... If you were to increase the congestion tax as value capture method - instead of a way to manage congestion on adequate roads, ideally with active & public transport investments (but I think it would still would do good even without these) - to meet these... a lot less would drive, defeating this weird policy I made up. Society is subsidising driving, in my offered situation and right now. And, subsidise in a very ruiness way, eating slowly away at society itself, instead of having a net positive BCR. Tho, worth pointing out that this stuff is more about the tendency to continue to expand. Stuff is less worse when expanding a few select, sparse roads into four lanes. To create a sparse arterial network, with a few sparse large intersections, like you find in the Netherlands. This type of stuff would usually have a net positive BCR, but not really that high.
@@C0deH0wler whilst I agree with alot of the core of your argument, it comes across a neoliberalist capitalist take, and I assume you were focusing on those arguments because you think they're more likely to persuade people who otherwise wouldn't listen to what for me is the key. Namely the energy andsoace efficiency, the better places, the access to jobs and places of interest for less well-off families, and the climate and ecological impacts.
@@BigBlueMan118 ABSOLUTELY. My dad is an economist, he was working on sims for planning out City Link and other freeway expansions in the early 90s. The corridors need to be secured DECADES before you actually need them, to provide extra slack in the system due to Jevon's Paradox. I was like 12 at the time, so I loved the joke for personal nostalgia reasons along with everything else. ❤️ Jevon himself was an economist in the era of the Industrial Revolution, so we've known about the problem in various ways for more than 150 years!
I still have the last season, unwatched, waiting for me on my disk. I was a APS public servant and it was too hard to watch. An episode would take me 3 weeks to watch, having to pause it and bury my head in my hands every 3 minutes before running off to do something more fun, because it was way too much like a combination of work and watching the news.
It's really true, without exaggeration. Younger people have this starry-eyed view of government vs private-sector. I've worked in both, and the amount of money taken from taxpayers and used to make things worse is astonishing.
Public servants are 1/2 the problem. Embedded bureaucrats who are more interested in making their job more important than actually accomplishing anything. They're the ones who make up the stupid rules that make any government project take 3X as long as require 50 extra administrators to install a street lamp.
This is when they'll just hire consultants to tell them what they want to hear and then can blame them when it inevitably ends in a parliamentary inquiry.
I have been both a hirer of consultants for this purpose and a consultant hired for exactly this purpose. As one was mainly in Australia and the other mainly in China, that allowed me to learn that bureaucracies are the same the world over, even under radically different political systems. Because we all like to pretend our cultures are unique but in fact people are the same the world over.
It’s true though. Amazingly true. Everyone in Academia knows how to fix a study, and that most of them are not objective. Also, I spent most of my career in tech. Near the end I figured out that most of the “progress” from the late 80’s to present day had really been speeding up the process of garbage in, garbage out. We made it so that idiots could use more tools, but the tools haven’t really improved so much as they have just gotten prettier. So, that AI is just reflecting what it was fed. Induced demand theory doesn’t gain or lose any validity because a computer applies it. What’s most amazing is the very people who will scream how absolutely true it is will deny the underlying principle and vice versa because it’s not convenient to their “side”.
This is too much like my reality. We produced a proposal spec for a project with £60m of benefits, the powers-that-be said £100m would be better. They made us put down £100m and then work backwards to get that outcome. The final spec wasnt worth the paper it was written on but got approved because it said £100m. In 9 months I'll probably be in for a reaming because we're £40m short
@SirJonathonDanielGregorySrVthe yeah I pretty much nailed it, only thing I missed was how many times I'd have to write the same information across briefing notes, quarterly performance updates and management information reports
The WA Labor minister for transport was being interviewed for the 6pm news with the newly opened freeway widening behind him. When asked about traffic implement he informed the reporter that “problem is when the travel gets better more people use the road and it clogs up” It was laugh your ass off TV.
The thing is, even though it's clogged, there are more people choosing to use it. They make tge choice as to whether it's worth it, so there's an improvement.
Yes, people do like to use cars, because they enable you to go to anywhere from wherever you are. Whenever a new road is built, people do use it. But that won't stop public transport zealots from insisting that people only use cars because of lobbying by big auto and big oil, and that what people really want is only to be able to go from A to B at occasional times.
@@daleviker5884there is somethinc called environment and climate. You might have heard of it. Both gets worse if you drive alot of cars. So in order to improve environment and climate. It is good to reduce amount of cars that drive.
In 1984, I took a course at a world-famous university titled, "Computer Aided Design in Environmental Systems". 1/3 of the class was traffic engineering, so we learned of this principle very quickly. Ten years later, a newspaper article quoted a head traffic engineer near the shore as saying, "We didn't realize more people would start using [the bypass] once it was built and made it faster to get to the beach!" That was when it really clicked for ne that the people actually making the decisions are often not the smartest ones.
The people making the decisions are not the people taking those classes. They just know they saw/heard about a shiny fancy new thing that sounds good. And they want it for themselves.
Does anyone even use it other than tourists?. I was there all those years ago when they built the Eastern Distributor, and the relentless hype and over-runs and delays . . . and then it turned the streets into a siht-show. Absolute chaos, and questions asked in Parliament and every single Sydney road user KNEW it was a disaster and yet the entire time the spin-doctors ran their mouths telling everyone it was great.
@@uncletiggermclaren7592 The tunnel and the Eastern Distributor get plenty of use. But the Utopia episode is correct. You cannot build your way out of road congestion.
Nah, never credit to malignancy, what might be credited to stupidity. ONE person might think to themself "I will push this project, because it is going to increase congestion, which will force people to move, or use public transport* and that is my real hidden aim". But TWO people, more than two?. A secret known to two people, is no secret at all. They would never dare be so obvious, because they would be pillared when it came out, and it always comes out. And tourists use things because they are not from there, and know no better. The tunnel speeds you out of the city . . . except it leads you right into the eternal congestion of the Cahill Expressway, and DOUBLES the traffic that goes out and jams at Woolloomooloo. It has never been as effective as they promised, because it LEADS into congestion. ( Spoilers, ALL their traffic ideas run into the fact that Sydney is constantly congested. )@trapd00rspider
@@sylviaelse5086 I think you just have prejudices that will never be shifted. I grew up in Mt Druitt and in the 1970s it took an hour and 20 mins to get to the Sydney CBD by car. By the 1990s, with the M2(?) I could visit my mother in Mt Druitt in just under an hour. I left Sydney twenty years ago, and only recently had cause to drove from Brisbane to Melbourne, via Sydney. I was STUNNED at the new M7, which meant that I crossed the city from Hornsby to the Blue Mountains without encountering a singe traffic light. My travel times of the 1970s would be half that today. Your claim that "you cannot build your way out of road congestion" is just ideology talking. There's three times as many cars in Sydney as when I was a boy, and travel times are faster, at least in the north and west. That has come about because of new roads, mainly built by the private sector.
@@daleviker5884 So, just to check, your trip today is slower than it was in the 70s ("my travel times in the 70s would have been half of today") despite the fact that this purpose built highway had no traffic lights. You then point out that there is 3x the amount of cars today than there was in the 70s. This means that despite building a highway with no traffic lights, it took 2x the time to cross Sydney than compared to the 1970s, when presumably there was no purpose built highway. Sounds like you can't build your way out of congestion eh? Maybe it's time to go to bed there granpa
The number of people on UA-cam who seem to sip hot drinks and hold them in their mouths just before listening to comedy is unfathomably high to the point that it has never happened except in TV shows.
@@GaryGoals The number of people on UA-cam who take a harmless little piece of hyperbole as an opportunity to snark is unfathomably high. Do you really think that if I write "LOL" I am actually laughing out loud?
So that's the reason why they are building a network of mass transport lanes in the city, to remove the congestion. Been to Brisbane this year and found that they were building a mass transport option using buses to get people around.
Roads are the basic building block of a society - they are the means by which every member of the community is connected with every other. They are the means by which goods and services are delivered to the specific places they need to be. Roads are the means by which emergency services vehicles can get to every member of the community. (Except for you, of course. I'm sure you're not a hypocrite, and that you've told the authorities that if your house ever catches fire, you insist that the firefighters use public transport to get to your house.) You cannot have a functioning society without roads, whereas trains are only a nice to have. Obviously they should be assessed differently.
@@daleviker5884 Nice strawman there, did you build it yourself or did you get it from Dim Tool? Nobody is saying there shouldn't be roads, where do you think the buses are supposed to go? In the air? The argument is simply that society should be structured so that the things on the road are efficient, that to get you, a 0.1 tonne human from place to place, you are not lugging around 3 tonnes of steel. Roads are great, keep the cars and "light" trucks off them.
Public transport is awful. Firstly you have to share with the public. Have you ever met the public ? You are at the mercy of timetables which can change at any time with no notice. You have to wait IN THE RAIN for the bus to show up. If you are catching a bus at night sometimes the driver can't actually see you in the bus stop AND KEEPS DRIVING PAST. You are at the mercy of unions, vandals, planned maintenance and unexpected breakdowns. It is no cheaper to pay the fare than to drive a car. A car can get you somewhere in 5 minutes but public transport will take you 30 minutes. Bottom line - Keep building roads or I will vote for the other mob.
@@captainpoppleton Not sure if satire but lol car expensive. you have to first own one. then maintain it. and buy insurance. and fuel it with big oil. then your suburb taxes don't even cover the sewage pipes running under the roads they're attached to in addition to power lines and asphault cracks. then ya gotta walk through a dangerous parking lot at whatever mall you're going to. then your car breaks down and now you can't go to work and now you don't have money to fix your car.
If you're going to spend a lot of money to try and improve transit times and reduce road traffic then for the love of god JUST BUILT PUBLIC TRANSPORT NETWORKS! Buses might move slowly but they're 1 vehicle and can carry thousands of passengers per day, many of which would previously have been using individual cars. Do the same with trains for longer distances and before you know it you've reduced car usage immensely.
The good think: At some point, it's stop getting worse. You only need to wait until it's faster to walk (assuming cycling an public transit would need to use the same congested roads).
@@darrenrobinson9041 Nah, that's not the point. Car transit is inefficient transit so when you add car infrastructure (like lanes), you just get more inefficient transit. If you want to impove transit, you need to go from cars to something more efficient: walking, biking, bus, trains, etc. So if you have inefficient car traffic, you add an efficient train line, and that improves overall transit for a long while. It's why Tokyo has the population of Canada yet has good mobility: insanely efficient urbanism.
@@darrenrobinson9041 Adding on to what the other guy said, it's not something you can EVER fix with cars alone anyway. it's simple physics, they are too space inefficient.
@@dzellomakes sense . First family of 4 uses that lane . Then husband & wife gets a seperate car . By year 3 , even the kids move onto their own vehicle with a p plate . With a metro or a bus that number will be consistent . No one is gonna get a seperate bus than to use the existing one . Is that what u mean ??
Here in the USA this is an unfortunate reality as well. Can't tell you how many times I've seen people clamor for the widening of a congested road or building a new one altogether. And then every. Single. Time. It gets worse. A 4-lane road that sucks becomes a 6-lane road that sucks. And the "bypass" doesn't bypass jack shit, because it inevitably gets just as bad as what it was supposed to bypass. The idea of enabling alternate modes of transportation is the only thing that comes close to a long-term solution for congestion, but it is such a hateful idea to most Americans. After enough pressure cities will sometimes throw some token money at a crappy little bus system or something that inevitably fails so the carbrains can say "sEe iT dOeSn'T woRk!!1!!" We are stuck in a cycle of car dependency that won't stop until our cities are bankrupt and blighted off the map. Even then they'll be clamoring for just 1 more lane and opposing bike lanes and buses.
Build more roads, you get more traffic. Need to put caps on who can be on the road at peak times…..gov: no, we prefer everyone to fight with each other for road space….it’s a dog eat dog world, and a free market economy means we can’t make rules to stop it. By having more cars on the road than it can support, we make sure people use more petrol, which means more trips to the petrol station, which means more excise tax collected plus GST added on. So therefore we can’t afford to not have traffic.
Naw it's just that they're short sighted and putting in PT scares them. The solutions are easy from a design and budget perspective: Light and heavy rail, bike paths, sending cars around the long way, more walkability. Done. The ideal models for this are all well understood, if done right they cost WAY less in the long run, and they're only hard to implement because people are scared of change and politicians are spineless.
You know the gov gets like 5 dollars of GST per like $120 of gas sold right (5% on pretax prices)? Also, for things like the carbon tax, it doesn't change based on the price of gas, only the amount used. If the government were trying to maximize profit, they would encourage more gas use so as to collect more carbon taxes while not affecting GST. Almost like this isn't actually happening or something
Mobility consultants and made this edit from an Australian satirical show, Utopia.It's now on Netflix, www.netflix.com/au/title/80063251?s=i&trkid=258593161&vlang=en&clip=81440235
The Working Dog team are veteran Aussie Comedy creators. They've done sketch comedy - the D-Generation and The Late Show; media satire - Frontline; Films including The Castle and The Dish; And government comedies like Hollowmen and this one - Utopia. Seriously, they've been at it for 40 years now!
This is all fine and very clever, but just remember not to pretend that induced demand doesn't exist in other areas as well - if you aren't careful going down this road can lead to a defeatist "build nothing" attitude that will inevitably lead to national stagnation, higher prices and poverty. House prices would be a good example - "if you build it they will come", and you'll need to build yet more houses - but that doesn't mean you shouldn't build at all, as the alternative is often going to be homelessness in any sort of growing population. Even the "lefty greeny" option of more public transport is very susceptible to induced demand as well. Here in London the new Elizabeth Line is packed full already most mornings, and new housing developments are going up along its route to take advantage of its quicker links all the time. This isn't a bad thing necessarily, its growth! It just needs to be factored in when building new infrastructure. Of course population of a city (and demand) won't necessarily go up forever, but it's pretty fair to say that in a great majority it will tend to increase as much as local infrastructure allows.. and then quite a bit more!
A train line can carry easily carry 60,000 passengers an hour though - while a freeway lane can do max 2,400 - and that's in perfect conditions. You build a 4 lane freeway and you'll get congestion at around 9,600 passengers an hour. A train line already has a smaller foot print and is casually running at 1/6th it's max passengers at that usage. Chuck in an advanced automated Metro on that same train line and you can get up to 90,000 passenger an hour. Train lines are just so much better for scale.
@@shraka Yeah I don't disagree, I live near the Victoria line for instance, which I'm reliably informed is one of the most efficient metro lines in the world! I'm just saying to be careful when making the argument that people using infrastructure means it has failed, because I see it a lot already with the newly opened Elizabeth line, and also with opposition to other train lines like HS2.. it's quite amazing really, people oppose infrastructure both because they have decided it's not needed, but also it's somehow going to be completely full.
@@JT29501 I see. I think of it in terms of what the alternative is. Adding a lane to a freeway that results in more traffic jams within a year or two is a terrible use of resources because spending that same money on improving rail would have been much more effective use of money. A fully utilised train line also has way better long term ROI, so yeah a fully utilised train is a good thing.
Yes you need mass transit, but the same paradox applies. The reality is that whatever transportation system you use will inevitably become congested as long as the city continues to grow, which is a good thing. So the choice is to grow or not. “Back to normal levels” in this case being more commuters arriving at roughly the same speed as before. Unfortunately this doesn’t appeal to existing city dwellers, because Growth is always bad for them. Increasing their rent/hassle/competition. So selling existing tax payers on growth is always full of some deceit.
Growth will always pose challenges. Better to have more public transport, shared transport and active transport options than more cars which are mostly single occupancy/driver only.
Point really went over ur head . When u create more & more private lanes , more & more cars pop up . Family of 4 gets 4 cars . With mass transit like bus or metro that number remains consistent. Atleast that’s what I got from the clip
Have not seen the show but I work at a major city. Im guessing that the suits in the beginning are politicians? Conservative id guess. This is how they reason. And the woman in white reason as 99% of all civil servants in my country. You would have to look for a long time to find any civil servants that would suggest building more roads because, WE KNOW THAT WON'T SOLVE ANY PROBLEMS. Trains, trams, buses, bikes and WALKING. Give me a green city!
Utopia is the best ABC series that has been pretty much ignored by the US, and that is a shame considering the drivel it has managed to pick up on, like the execrable US Office. At least the US IT Crowd pilot thankfully died quietly. But, never waste your time UNDERestimating the intelligence of the US ..., just ask Duh-Nald.
Utopia. Can't find it here either (Europe). Since Australia was initially made up of thieves.. I'm not saying you should, I'm just informing you on the origins.
Nope, because people will drive more. In fact if you build a new freeway you tend to clog up all its feeder roads - ie "relocate the traffic jams". Jevons' paradox doesn't automatically mean that new roads/more lanes etc aren't worthwhile - just that the benefits will be less (sometimes much less) than you'd think if you didn't allow for it. Honest and competent models do allow for it, though of course if the project is some politicians' plaything those models may be neither honest nor competent.
"How do we launch this?" - the guy knows the issue is impossible to solve ahead of time, he only cares about the optics and how it is sold to the public.
its still doesnt make much sense like if it will be stuck after 5 years does that means there is more vehicles? and if yes wouldnt that make old model worse.
in London, every route is crap. Once google map finds out that one route is NOT 100% fucked, it sends the entire traffic through that way so it will be the most fucked up route. There is no way out. It was horrible before GPS, its horrible with GPS. And then the people who try to outsmart googlemap, realize that a route is not better only from the GPS not sending them that way. Sometimes it does happen though, that you keep ignoring googlemap and suddenly, for a very brief time, you find yourself on no mans land, no cars, no traffic and you can glide like a buttered dildo. than the AI is cathching up and its all fucked again.
Brisbane 👍🏽 This city is a psychologically dysfunctional Band-aid fix of a "city". Nothing will ever come good of it. Hey let's spend 2billion on upgrading a stadium with 6000 seats 😅 Hey let's build a tunnel for trains, and got 4x over the budget Hey let's build a spider web of overpasses near the hospital which are ugly and useless in 4 major directions... You cannot get from - 1) Bowen Hills mayne Rd to Gympie rd north (must take tunnel) 2) Gympie rd northbound to Abbotsford Rd Bowen Hills northbound. Must go long way 3) south bound Gympie rd to Abbotsford Rd again... - it's a giant concrete spiderweb of shite with a boral plant that only directs in a few ways... 😅 Dysfunctional and stoopid 😅
1:50 - and this explains why this phenomenon never affects public transport: It's ALWAYS bad, so there will never be enough people wanting to use it to cause any congestion. Genius. Make worse roads while you're at it too I guess.
"Do I have to be there myself?"
"You were supposed to be there."
"I got stuck in traffic" 😂😂
We know, we watched the video.
As a mobility planner working in transit, this is the reason I don't watch Utopia. I already see too much of this in my real world!
Yeah but is Jevons Paradox really also the same in your field? I know it namely from mine in environmental science, where productivity gains from improved efficiency lead to overall growth in aggregate production.
@@BigBlueMan118 Honestly, this 'version' of it in the video is a bastardisation for automobiles. With trains, for example, you will get more revenue to increase frequencies. Which will encourage more people to live closer to stations, and if the agency is a developer/landlord of adjacent property... more revenue to improve services! And as a bonus, more energy efficiency per capita... saving people money they can invest instead.
Sure, you could value capture an increase in motorists with a congestion tax, whilst you continue to expand, but you will continue to demolish houses (that pay property tax), people will commute longer (increasing total maintance needed), and will likely ruin metro centres even further. And guess what a lot of suburbs use to slow down their decay? Metro centres! Ruining them will make things worse...
If you were to increase the congestion tax as value capture method - instead of a way to manage congestion on adequate roads, ideally with active & public transport investments (but I think it would still would do good even without these) - to meet these... a lot less would drive, defeating this weird policy I made up. Society is subsidising driving, in my offered situation and right now. And, subsidise in a very ruiness way, eating slowly away at society itself, instead of having a net positive BCR.
Tho, worth pointing out that this stuff is more about the tendency to continue to expand. Stuff is less worse when expanding a few select, sparse roads into four lanes. To create a sparse arterial network, with a few sparse large intersections, like you find in the Netherlands. This type of stuff would usually have a net positive BCR, but not really that high.
@@C0deH0wler whilst I agree with alot of the core of your argument, it comes across a neoliberalist capitalist take, and I assume you were focusing on those arguments because you think they're more likely to persuade people who otherwise wouldn't listen to what for me is the key. Namely the energy andsoace efficiency, the better places, the access to jobs and places of interest for less well-off families, and the climate and ecological impacts.
@@BigBlueMan118 ABSOLUTELY. My dad is an economist, he was working on sims for planning out City Link and other freeway expansions in the early 90s. The corridors need to be secured DECADES before you actually need them, to provide extra slack in the system due to Jevon's Paradox.
I was like 12 at the time, so I loved the joke for personal nostalgia reasons along with everything else. ❤️
Jevon himself was an economist in the era of the Industrial Revolution, so we've known about the problem in various ways for more than 150 years!
More buses needed
This is not comedy. This is therapy for public servants.
You wouldn't want to laugh. You'd want to punch the tv.
Yep. I can't really watch it.
I still have the last season, unwatched, waiting for me on my disk. I was a APS public servant and it was too hard to watch. An episode would take me 3 weeks to watch, having to pause it and bury my head in my hands every 3 minutes before running off to do something more fun, because it was way too much like a combination of work and watching the news.
It's really true, without exaggeration.
Younger people have this starry-eyed view of government vs private-sector. I've worked in both, and the amount of money taken from taxpayers and used to make things worse is astonishing.
Public servants are 1/2 the problem.
Embedded bureaucrats who are more interested in making their job more important than actually accomplishing anything. They're the ones who make up the stupid rules that make any government project take 3X as long as require 50 extra administrators to install a street lamp.
This is when they'll just hire consultants to tell them what they want to hear and then can blame them when it inevitably ends in a parliamentary inquiry.
They had a scene where that exact thing happened :D
@@unematrix lol, I think their line was "What do you want the report to say?"
Think Rozelle Interchange.
I have been both a hirer of consultants for this purpose and a consultant hired for exactly this purpose. As one was mainly in Australia and the other mainly in China, that allowed me to learn that bureaucracies are the same the world over, even under radically different political systems. Because we all like to pretend our cultures are unique but in fact people are the same the world over.
X: I thought we were going to be data driven?
Y: The data doesn't know what it's doing.
Lamentably familiar to anyone working with data.
Jesus Christ this is just humor applied to 100% real shit. I love it. Anyone who has worked in this kind of stuff knows this. Very well written.
Realistic Satire...
This is one of the funniest and most accurate things I've ever seen, like a modern Autralian match for Yes Minister 😂
Utopia and Hollowmen were really good shows
@@Myne1001 New season of Utopia coming this year!
I actually felt nauseated and angry watching this. I’ve worked with people like that. Yes, it was in Canberra.
@@TheRealJavahead my wife too with current vic govt
@@TheRealJavahead Same.
"I knew AI was a bunch of greenies" My sides immediately died after this RIP
"I got stuck in traffic" was what got me.
It’s true though. Amazingly true. Everyone in Academia knows how to fix a study, and that most of them are not objective. Also, I spent most of my career in tech. Near the end I figured out that most of the “progress” from the late 80’s to present day had really been speeding up the process of garbage in, garbage out. We made it so that idiots could use more tools, but the tools haven’t really improved so much as they have just gotten prettier.
So, that AI is just reflecting what it was fed. Induced demand theory doesn’t gain or lose any validity because a computer applies it. What’s most amazing is the very people who will scream how absolutely true it is will deny the underlying principle and vice versa because it’s not convenient to their “side”.
@@nunyabidness3075 That's why I don't like science. What's it ever done for us? Now the middle ages, there's a way to live.
@@CatatonicImperfect 🤣😂🤣
People miss the point, in Australia, induced demand can be counted as "vehicles per household".
This is so accurate I actually feel physically ill
This is too much like my reality. We produced a proposal spec for a project with £60m of benefits, the powers-that-be said £100m would be better. They made us put down £100m and then work backwards to get that outcome. The final spec wasnt worth the paper it was written on but got approved because it said £100m. In 9 months I'll probably be in for a reaming because we're £40m short
Bahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha - great comment and you're right about the reaming unfortunately
It's been nine months.
@SirJonathonDanielGregorySrVthe yeah I pretty much nailed it, only thing I missed was how many times I'd have to write the same information across briefing notes, quarterly performance updates and management information reports
The WA Labor minister for transport was being interviewed for the 6pm news with the newly opened freeway widening behind him. When asked about traffic implement he informed the reporter that “problem is when the travel gets better more people use the road and it clogs up”
It was laugh your ass off TV.
I’m trying to find the quote. Do you know which channel and date?
@@zipidi it would have been 4 years ago, north bound freeway widening of Kwinana freeway at South street. 6pm news covered it , commercial MSM.
The thing is, even though it's clogged, there are more people choosing to use it. They make tge choice as to whether it's worth it, so there's an improvement.
Yes, people do like to use cars, because they enable you to go to anywhere from wherever you are. Whenever a new road is built, people do use it. But that won't stop public transport zealots from insisting that people only use cars because of lobbying by big auto and big oil, and that what people really want is only to be able to go from A to B at occasional times.
@@daleviker5884there is somethinc called environment and climate. You might have heard of it.
Both gets worse if you drive alot of cars. So in order to improve environment and climate. It is good to reduce amount of cars that drive.
In 1984, I took a course at a world-famous university titled, "Computer Aided Design in Environmental Systems". 1/3 of the class was traffic engineering, so we learned of this principle very quickly.
Ten years later, a newspaper article quoted a head traffic engineer near the shore as saying, "We didn't realize more people would start using [the bypass] once it was built and made it faster to get to the beach!"
That was when it really clicked for ne that the people actually making the decisions are often not the smartest ones.
The people making the decisions are not the people taking those classes. They just know they saw/heard about a shiny fancy new thing that sounds good. And they want it for themselves.
There are often corrupt motives...Lobbying by the roadbuilding and motor industries are a thing. They haver deep pockets and a lot to gain.
Yes. The Sydney Harbour Tunnel was great. For a few years.
Does anyone even use it other than tourists?. I was there all those years ago when they built the Eastern Distributor, and the relentless hype and over-runs and delays . . . and then it turned the streets into a siht-show.
Absolute chaos, and questions asked in Parliament and every single Sydney road user KNEW it was a disaster and yet the entire time the spin-doctors ran their mouths telling everyone it was great.
@@uncletiggermclaren7592 The tunnel and the Eastern Distributor get plenty of use. But the Utopia episode is correct. You cannot build your way out of road congestion.
Nah, never credit to malignancy, what might be credited to stupidity. ONE person might think to themself "I will push this project, because it is going to increase congestion, which will force people to move, or use public transport* and that is my real hidden aim".
But TWO people, more than two?. A secret known to two people, is no secret at all. They would never dare be so obvious, because they would be pillared when it came out, and it always comes out.
And tourists use things because they are not from there, and know no better. The tunnel speeds you out of the city . . . except it leads you right into the eternal congestion of the Cahill Expressway, and DOUBLES the traffic that goes out and jams at Woolloomooloo.
It has never been as effective as they promised, because it LEADS into congestion.
( Spoilers, ALL their traffic ideas run into the fact that Sydney is constantly congested. )@trapd00rspider
@@sylviaelse5086 I think you just have prejudices that will never be shifted. I grew up in Mt Druitt and in the 1970s it took an hour and 20 mins to get to the Sydney CBD by car. By the 1990s, with the M2(?) I could visit my mother in Mt Druitt in just under an hour. I left Sydney twenty years ago, and only recently had cause to drove from Brisbane to Melbourne, via Sydney. I was STUNNED at the new M7, which meant that I crossed the city from Hornsby to the Blue Mountains without encountering a singe traffic light. My travel times of the 1970s would be half that today. Your claim that "you cannot build your way out of road congestion" is just ideology talking. There's three times as many cars in Sydney as when I was a boy, and travel times are faster, at least in the north and west. That has come about because of new roads, mainly built by the private sector.
@@daleviker5884
So, just to check, your trip today is slower than it was in the 70s ("my travel times in the 70s would have been half of today") despite the fact that this purpose built highway had no traffic lights. You then point out that there is 3x the amount of cars today than there was in the 70s.
This means that despite building a highway with no traffic lights, it took 2x the time to cross Sydney than compared to the 1970s, when presumably there was no purpose built highway.
Sounds like you can't build your way out of congestion eh? Maybe it's time to go to bed there granpa
Don't laugh. I worked for the government. So much money wasted, nothing achieved but what is most important is what bin you throw your rubbish into.
"Have you ever heard of the Jevons Paradox?"
"I was hoping it was a death metal band"
As an economist this line made me splutter out my coffee.
The number of people on UA-cam who seem to sip hot drinks and hold them in their mouths just before listening to comedy is unfathomably high to the point that it has never happened except in TV shows.
@@GaryGoals The number of people on UA-cam who take a harmless little piece of hyperbole as an opportunity to snark is unfathomably high. Do you really think that if I write "LOL" I am actually laughing out loud?
“The data doesn’t know what it’s doing.” Incredible
You see, they just didn't add enough lanes.
THE ANSWER IS ALWAYS MORE LANES!🤪
One more lane bro
So that's the reason why they are building a network of mass transport lanes in the city, to remove the congestion. Been to Brisbane this year and found that they were building a mass transport option using buses to get people around.
This show is really good at slowly burning me up into a smouldering pile of ash.
We have such great freeways around Phoenix, Arizona, USA, drivers enjoy driving the wrong way until the inattentive other motorists get in the way.
Huh, Jevons paradox. I just learned something new today.
I love that they’re in Brisbane but their modelling is on Melbourne
They are based in Melbourne?
It’s set in Melbourne - the office shots are the top of Spring St on the corner of Nicholson.
Probably part of the incompetent satire.
Councillor - "which city are we in again?"
Brisbane doesn't have traffic lights yet.
@@darrenrobinson9041 we are still arguing whether to name it Brisbane or Meanjin.
It is a temporary decongestion, I can get that from cough syrup.😂
That fact that this is so close to reality makes my blood boil.
The directors of this episode should be ashamed of themselves. The guy who wanted to data, actually wanted to use his pipes!
Having said that, I still want more from this show. Get every disappointed participant to get some vengeance.
Show them Mercy.
Lights. Action. Showtime. Give that guy another go.
Lay off the crack pipe mate.
Roads, never get cost benefit, transit, always gets one with unfavourable assumptions.
Roads are the basic building block of a society - they are the means by which every member of the community is connected with every other. They are the means by which goods and services are delivered to the specific places they need to be. Roads are the means by which emergency services vehicles can get to every member of the community. (Except for you, of course. I'm sure you're not a hypocrite, and that you've told the authorities that if your house ever catches fire, you insist that the firefighters use public transport to get to your house.) You cannot have a functioning society without roads, whereas trains are only a nice to have. Obviously they should be assessed differently.
@@daleviker5884
Nice strawman there, did you build it yourself or did you get it from Dim Tool?
Nobody is saying there shouldn't be roads, where do you think the buses are supposed to go? In the air? The argument is simply that society should be structured so that the things on the road are efficient, that to get you, a 0.1 tonne human from place to place, you are not lugging around 3 tonnes of steel.
Roads are great, keep the cars and "light" trucks off them.
I wish more Americans could grasp the concept of induced demand. Unfortunately I think this video would fly over most of their heads.
Bro, just one more lane. Will definitely solve traffic.
Most Americans live in places not dense enough to experience it. You can put a 20 lane highway through Kansas, nobody is coming to drive on it.
Public transport is awful. Firstly you have to share with the public. Have you ever met the public ?
You are at the mercy of timetables which can change at any time with no notice.
You have to wait IN THE RAIN for the bus to show up.
If you are catching a bus at night sometimes the driver can't actually see you in the bus stop AND KEEPS DRIVING PAST.
You are at the mercy of unions, vandals, planned maintenance and unexpected breakdowns.
It is no cheaper to pay the fare than to drive a car.
A car can get you somewhere in 5 minutes but public transport will take you 30 minutes.
Bottom line - Keep building roads or I will vote for the other mob.
@@captainpoppleton Not sure if satire but lol
car expensive. you have to first own one. then maintain it. and buy insurance. and fuel it with big oil. then your suburb taxes don't even cover the sewage pipes running under the roads they're attached to in addition to power lines and asphault cracks. then ya gotta walk through a dangerous parking lot at whatever mall you're going to. then your car breaks down and now you can't go to work and now you don't have money to fix your car.
@@captainpoppleton Sounds like you live in a place with terrible public transport. I’m pretty sure you don’t live in the Netherlands.
It'd be funny if the reality wasn't that they knocked my childhood home down for this shit.
WestConnex took nearly 5 months to become red on the gardners rd exit.
I always want to give Rhonda a slap, and I'm not even a violent person.
Kitty Flanagan does a great job of playing her
Then slap yourself honey, because all you see is something within yourself.
What is scarely is there are Rhondas out there!😀
Its a supercomputer that can predict outcomes with 99% accuracy.
God:"Damn that's impressive."
Not another super computer. 😭
If you're going to spend a lot of money to try and improve transit times and reduce road traffic then for the love of god JUST BUILT PUBLIC TRANSPORT NETWORKS! Buses might move slowly but they're 1 vehicle and can carry thousands of passengers per day, many of which would previously have been using individual cars. Do the same with trains for longer distances and before you know it you've reduced car usage immensely.
LOL!! The most hilarious part of this show, is that most of it is all too true!!
Steven Miles currently suggesting a road tunnel from Carseldine to Kedron to "solve" congestion.
The better you make it, the more people will use it; means you are getting your money's worth out of your improvements
The good think: At some point, it's stop getting worse. You only need to wait until it's faster to walk (assuming cycling an public transit would need to use the same congested roads).
Talk about "Jevons Paradox" and watch as peoples eyes slowly glaze over...
So the logic is that there is no point building stuff because the stupid public will just use it ?
@@darrenrobinson9041 Nah, that's not the point.
Car transit is inefficient transit so when you add car infrastructure (like lanes), you just get more inefficient transit.
If you want to impove transit, you need to go from cars to something more efficient: walking, biking, bus, trains, etc.
So if you have inefficient car traffic, you add an efficient train line, and that improves overall transit for a long while.
It's why Tokyo has the population of Canada yet has good mobility: insanely efficient urbanism.
@@darrenrobinson9041 Adding on to what the other guy said, it's not something you can EVER fix with cars alone anyway. it's simple physics, they are too space inefficient.
@@dzellomakes sense . First family of 4 uses that lane . Then husband & wife gets a seperate car . By year 3 , even the kids move onto their own vehicle with a p plate . With a metro or a bus that number will be consistent . No one is gonna get a seperate bus than to use the existing one . Is that what u mean ??
When applied to road transport (Jevons' Paradox has implications in many other fields of course), I always spin it as "relocating the traffic jams".
What about just making express lanes thag travel through the city, bypassing local traffic for those just passing through?
Ronda is brilliant.
Here in the USA this is an unfortunate reality as well. Can't tell you how many times I've seen people clamor for the widening of a congested road or building a new one altogether. And then every. Single. Time. It gets worse. A 4-lane road that sucks becomes a 6-lane road that sucks. And the "bypass" doesn't bypass jack shit, because it inevitably gets just as bad as what it was supposed to bypass.
The idea of enabling alternate modes of transportation is the only thing that comes close to a long-term solution for congestion, but it is such a hateful idea to most Americans. After enough pressure cities will sometimes throw some token money at a crappy little bus system or something that inevitably fails so the carbrains can say "sEe iT dOeSn'T woRk!!1!!" We are stuck in a cycle of car dependency that won't stop until our cities are bankrupt and blighted off the map. Even then they'll be clamoring for just 1 more lane and opposing bike lanes and buses.
1:48 😂 I'm hoping they're a death metal band
Math-core, as it turned out.
"enoughl talk, let the algorithm speak"
Build more roads, you get more traffic. Need to put caps on who can be on the road at peak times…..gov: no, we prefer everyone to fight with each other for road space….it’s a dog eat dog world, and a free market economy means we can’t make rules to stop it. By having more cars on the road than it can support, we make sure people use more petrol, which means more trips to the petrol station, which means more excise tax collected plus GST added on. So therefore we can’t afford to not have traffic.
Just no.
Naw it's just that they're short sighted and putting in PT scares them. The solutions are easy from a design and budget perspective: Light and heavy rail, bike paths, sending cars around the long way, more walkability. Done. The ideal models for this are all well understood, if done right they cost WAY less in the long run, and they're only hard to implement because people are scared of change and politicians are spineless.
Yeah, but most caps, come in the form of congestion charges and so discriminate based on income.
You know the gov gets like 5 dollars of GST per like $120 of gas sold right (5% on pretax prices)? Also, for things like the carbon tax, it doesn't change based on the price of gas, only the amount used. If the government were trying to maximize profit, they would encourage more gas use so as to collect more carbon taxes while not affecting GST.
Almost like this isn't actually happening or something
Who the heck are you and why are you making such top notch content
Mobility consultants and made this edit from an Australian satirical show, Utopia.It's now on Netflix, www.netflix.com/au/title/80063251?s=i&trkid=258593161&vlang=en&clip=81440235
The Working Dog team are veteran Aussie Comedy creators.
They've done sketch comedy - the D-Generation and The Late Show; media satire - Frontline;
Films including The Castle and The Dish;
And government comedies like Hollowmen and this one - Utopia.
Seriously, they've been at it for 40 years now!
@@jamesperkins191 "The Hollowmen"
@@mrookeward Damn autocorrect, thanks!
After yet again being delayed by qld rail the algorithm has once again nailed my views
Data driven working, and I am a data scientist
What is a mobility planner in transit and what do they do
When the legislature is in session, nobody is safe.
This is all fine and very clever, but just remember not to pretend that induced demand doesn't exist in other areas as well - if you aren't careful going down this road can lead to a defeatist "build nothing" attitude that will inevitably lead to national stagnation, higher prices and poverty. House prices would be a good example - "if you build it they will come", and you'll need to build yet more houses - but that doesn't mean you shouldn't build at all, as the alternative is often going to be homelessness in any sort of growing population.
Even the "lefty greeny" option of more public transport is very susceptible to induced demand as well. Here in London the new Elizabeth Line is packed full already most mornings, and new housing developments are going up along its route to take advantage of its quicker links all the time. This isn't a bad thing necessarily, its growth! It just needs to be factored in when building new infrastructure.
Of course population of a city (and demand) won't necessarily go up forever, but it's pretty fair to say that in a great majority it will tend to increase as much as local infrastructure allows.. and then quite a bit more!
A train line can carry easily carry 60,000 passengers an hour though - while a freeway lane can do max 2,400 - and that's in perfect conditions. You build a 4 lane freeway and you'll get congestion at around 9,600 passengers an hour. A train line already has a smaller foot print and is casually running at 1/6th it's max passengers at that usage. Chuck in an advanced automated Metro on that same train line and you can get up to 90,000 passenger an hour. Train lines are just so much better for scale.
@@shraka Yeah I don't disagree, I live near the Victoria line for instance, which I'm reliably informed is one of the most efficient metro lines in the world! I'm just saying to be careful when making the argument that people using infrastructure means it has failed, because I see it a lot already with the newly opened Elizabeth line, and also with opposition to other train lines like HS2.. it's quite amazing really, people oppose infrastructure both because they have decided it's not needed, but also it's somehow going to be completely full.
@@JT29501 I see. I think of it in terms of what the alternative is. Adding a lane to a freeway that results in more traffic jams within a year or two is a terrible use of resources because spending that same money on improving rail would have been much more effective use of money. A fully utilised train line also has way better long term ROI, so yeah a fully utilised train is a good thing.
Rhonda I love you!!!
You are so REAL
I haaaate this 😭 Too real. Which is just awfully tragic.
This is Rozelle, right?
This is fantastic. I'm off to Netflix!
Does anyone else see the resemblance of Celia Pacquola and Kelly Macdonald? I love them both!
Yes you need mass transit, but the same paradox applies. The reality is that whatever transportation system you use will inevitably become congested as long as the city continues to grow, which is a good thing. So the choice is to grow or not.
“Back to normal levels” in this case being more commuters arriving at roughly the same speed as before.
Unfortunately this doesn’t appeal to existing city dwellers, because Growth is always bad for them. Increasing their rent/hassle/competition. So selling existing tax payers on growth is always full of some deceit.
Growth will always pose challenges. Better to have more public transport, shared transport and active transport options than more cars which are mostly single occupancy/driver only.
Kind of. Really it becomes an equilibrium where people will get to their destination at the same time regardless of transit method.
Point really went over ur head . When u create more & more private lanes , more & more cars pop up . Family of 4 gets 4 cars . With mass transit like bus or metro that number remains consistent. Atleast that’s what I got from the clip
“I knew AI would turn out to be a bunch of greenies.” 😂
We call them “granolas” in the US
Have not seen the show but I work at a major city. Im guessing that the suits in the beginning are politicians? Conservative id guess. This is how they reason. And the woman in white reason as 99% of all civil servants in my country. You would have to look for a long time to find any civil servants that would suggest building more roads because, WE KNOW THAT WON'T SOLVE ANY PROBLEMS. Trains, trams, buses, bikes and WALKING. Give me a green city!
Same at every public administration
Utopia is the best ABC series that has been pretty much ignored by the US, and that is a shame considering the drivel it has managed to pick up on, like the execrable US Office.
At least the US IT Crowd pilot thankfully died quietly.
But, never waste your time UNDERestimating the intelligence of the US ..., just ask Duh-Nald.
Rozelle Interchange
Brilliant...
Just like our HS2 railway here in the UK.
☮️💚🍻
This is HILARIOUS!
Does it work better in countries where there are referendums on new infrastructure?
Hell yeah Brisbane being kept alive by the construction industry!!!
Excellent show...
What is the name of this show and what streaming service carries it in the USA?
Utopia. Can't find it here either (Europe). Since Australia was initially made up of thieves.. I'm not saying you should, I'm just informing you on the origins.
Isnt it 0 sum, because other roads will see less traffic?
Nope, because people will drive more. In fact if you build a new freeway you tend to clog up all its feeder roads - ie "relocate the traffic jams". Jevons' paradox doesn't automatically mean that new roads/more lanes etc aren't worthwhile - just that the benefits will be less (sometimes much less) than you'd think if you didn't allow for it. Honest and competent models do allow for it, though of course if the project is some politicians' plaything those models may be neither honest nor competent.
Coomera Connector is what they’re talking about.
gold
You know you are dealing with a complete Wayne Kerr when they call something a "game changer".
planning is like predicting a sif will keep water ... in time
"So there is a margin for error..."
"How do we launch this?" - the guy knows the issue is impossible to solve ahead of time, he only cares about the optics and how it is sold to the public.
How can you watch this show in the US?
Try this link iview.abc.net.au/show/utopia. You may need a VPN. Good luck! The show is incredibly painfully, funny!
Brilliant
Has anyone noticed the brown guy is always in the corner or half cut out or out of focus
Utopia actually hurts to watch
its still doesnt make much sense like if it will be stuck after 5 years does that means there is more vehicles? and if yes wouldnt that make old model worse.
in London, every route is crap. Once google map finds out that one route is NOT 100% fucked, it sends the entire traffic through that way so it will be the most fucked up route. There is no way out. It was horrible before GPS, its horrible with GPS. And then the people who try to outsmart googlemap, realize that a route is not better only from the GPS not sending them that way. Sometimes it does happen though, that you keep ignoring googlemap and suddenly, for a very brief time, you find yourself on no mans land, no cars, no traffic and you can glide like a buttered dildo. than the AI is cathching up and its all fucked again.
Can they give drivers money out of 300 B to travel through others roads
5:21 has me laughing. I hope he has some evidence to back it up
One word: T R A I N S
I honestly can't watch this, it hurt's to much.
1000 terabytes man, EACH!!!
"Mass Transit" in other words transport for the plebs.
Some guy called Jevon's 😂😂😂
This is like Apollo 13!
productive output? of no mention in that room haha
"where did the green go ' ? 😂😂😂
Was this filmed at Sheffield City Clowncil?
"Clowncil" 😂😭💀
And then they all realised using a bike was faster.
nice to see Andy Mathews and Naomi Higgins in their engineering element
Brisbane 👍🏽
This city is a psychologically dysfunctional Band-aid fix of a "city".
Nothing will ever come good of it.
Hey let's spend 2billion on upgrading a stadium with 6000 seats 😅
Hey let's build a tunnel for trains, and got 4x over the budget
Hey let's build a spider web of overpasses near the hospital which are ugly and useless in 4 major directions...
You cannot get from -
1) Bowen Hills mayne Rd to Gympie rd north (must take tunnel)
2) Gympie rd northbound to Abbotsford Rd Bowen Hills northbound. Must go long way
3) south bound Gympie rd to Abbotsford Rd again...
- it's a giant concrete spiderweb of shite with a boral plant that only directs in a few ways... 😅
Dysfunctional and stoopid
😅
This is all purple. Bro, I feel your printer problems.
❤❤❤
This isn't comedy satire, it's a documentary.
genius.
Government/Corporate at the helm , means A I is involved . Arrogance & Ignorance . Yeah
#Rozelleinterchange
1:50 - and this explains why this phenomenon never affects public transport: It's ALWAYS bad, so there will never be enough people wanting to use it to cause any congestion. Genius. Make worse roads while you're at it too I guess.
Made a lot of money off the government already retaired at 59