Reminder that if you're not green, and you have a population of more than 2 million, you're a third world shithole
Green = countries with a metro
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
tyznik.com
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
How does Australia not have a metro? Is it shit there?
Please explain why would we need a metro.
>Indonesia
what the fuck
Ireland will be building one soon apparently.
en.wikipedia.org
we have no need for metro
I was recently in Sofia, Bulgaria as well as Chengdu, China. Their metros are brand new and fucking amazing. I'm sure Dublin's will be good as well.
>tfw no metro in my city
Someday, though, since we're on track for 1 million people. We're also the only major city without some kind of mass transit system. The only thing here are buses and cars. Traffic is already becoming a major problem despite all of our highways and the presence of an outer belt.
You do though. Metro is hands down the best form of transit.
Because it is the best, most efficient form of transit.
kek, here only Medellin has a metro, Bogota (the capital) has like 8 million people and no metro, what a shithole
don't you girls never read metro 2033?
No we dont, our biggest city has population of 400 000. It would be dumb to build it
>our biggest city has population of 400 000
should've remained with the Czech 2bh
makes no sense
but we're still a third world
Everyone uses the bus here, or they just fucking walk. The bus grid is super efficient, takes you everywhere.
big countries like brazil, russia, usa, etc should have this kind of map divided by states, so we could see how much of third world shitholes most parts of these countries are. I've never been in a metro.
We are building second line. :)
How can uruguay become first world like Panama
>his city has a metro system
>it's above ground
Better to have none at all, tbfh.
>First world
Keep going in your direction.
>Like Panama
Increase corruption, violence, etc.
>Keep going in your direction.
but we're fucked
>Increase corruption, violence, etc.
Don't worry we're on it
why is the american continent so civilized?
Because they were colonized by civilized folk.
australia and new zealand you 3rd world pieces of shiet
Metro lines take 30 years to pay off the investment, and are only worth buildings in 1 million + cities.
>tfw my city just passed 860k as of last year
I would love even a light rail. Buses are pretty bad for public transit.
But we don't have cities with a million+ people.
We have commuter rail
Well, that and only poor people, communists and degenerates don't have a car
I guess density is the more important factor
Cities with high population density pretty much need a metro system. Most American cities and the like are spread out over big areas unlike the rest of the world. Making metro systems in places like Columbus, for example, isn't the best idea right now because our density is so low.
Metros are comfy when not at rush hours
Australia has great public transport, it's just not underground
>pathetic American fatass mentality
Is it safe?
Yeah, unless you have bus only lanes throughout the entire city, bus is terrible
>bus lanes
We have some bike lanes, that's it
obviously
How is it obvious? We're talking about Pablo's city here. Still it looks beautiful and I really want to visit for a prolonged period of time.
plenty of underground trains in sydney, don't know why that doesn't count as a subway
>Australia has great public transport
KEK
we have the most cars per capita and our cities aren't really that big or high density barring two
>butthurt he's Africa tier
>we have the most cars per capita
That's a bad thing. Also, you're actually 7th per capita, just checked.
it used to be most a while ago, with Perth having the most of any city
it's not a great thing, no, but it's not a huge problem just yet. Besides, most cities have alternative forms of public transport. Melbourne has a lot of trams, while Brisbane uses ferries. There isn't really a pressing need to upgrade any of them as things stand.
Here you are
Thing about subways is, no traffic. Frequent. Fast. Efficient.
yeah I'm not fucking stupid
Australia isn't filled with Londons or New Yorks though, that's what you don't understand. Barely anyone actually lives in the cities. We don't need a subway as things stand right now.
t. Commie
Metro here used to be comfy, now it's the mark of the inmigrant negro. Looking at you rest of latam. I walk and use rental bikes.
I hate public transport
Probably because you're an obese low IQ American
Nope. It just doesn't work well and it's too small and cramped
My country is having massive rail expansion with LRT, monorail, 3 new MRT lines, ERL, ETS, HSR to Singapore, and new trunk line to the East Coast.
Metros are for faggots and non-countries.
Sorry you can't all be top lads
But this guy said you are third world
Australia and New Zealand have cars, they don't need a metro to fulfill their needs.
I know you aren't too bright Muhammad, considering what you are doing to your country, but cars = traffic and pollution.
This is wrong, Guadalajara has 2 metro lines and a third one in construction
I don't think muslims can survive up here in northern Sweden, we have more cars up here than in southern Sweden.
lo we have a metro
I take what I said back. Of course you need a car if you live in a rural area. And trust me, Muslims will eventually leak to the North. That's what's happening here right now.
Melbourne and Sydney both have metro lines
Because of global warming. The winters here will become more pleasant in the future, so that muslims could be able to survive up here.
>Because of global warming
Kek.
hey we're still building it
>Algerian metro
>*french babble*
>now departing: desert station
>now arriving: desert oasis station
Convenient!
pretty sure Perth is about to get one too
What's a metro? A subway?
Is it like how petrol = gas?
"metro" is an umbrella term for basically every public transport station network
every country has that, the fuck is the criteria here?
They meant Subway systems
It's only in Algiers (And Oran I think) So there's no desert.
I work for the metro system and we are planning and building a 5th line in Hamburg
Tramways are better and more economic, metros should only be for big cities like New York City and London with several million people and a very high population density, otherwise it's ridiculous.
>get stuck in traffic
>slow
>downright infernal during summer
>one accident creates a 500m line of trams
Metro is superior by far.
They somehow manage to survive even in the Far North of Russia, beyond the polar circle.
Those are polar muslims
>Metro means first world
You confirm that Brazil is a poor shithole of a country because you think like a third worlder. In the West the metro = wealthy country was in XIXth century and early XXth century. Today having a metro system or not has nothing to see with development but with utility although I think at least half of these metro systems are useless and a tram would be more appropriated, see Australia for example which is a billion times better than Brazil and they don't think like you.
The Prague metro is not any better Vaclav. Crowded, full of pickpockets and gypsy people.
>gyppos
There is way more outside than underground
>pickpockets
Literally never happened to me
>crowded
Depends on the hour and place you want to go. Crowded metro is still a bit better than crowded tram.
>Paragay
How do you know anyway?
I would personally consider Chicago L to be a metro despite not underground
Vietnam and South Africa surprised me
>Okinawa
If you consider that monorail as a metro then you should add lots of dots onto the map
There is nothing comfier than riding on a subway train during the day when it's empty because all the agecucks are at work.
...
user from Bucaramanga here. We don´t have a metro either, but bullying Bogota is funny af, they get pissed off pretty quickly
Same
Tfw it's green, but still is a 3rd world shithole.
I walk whenever possible even if it's 5km I got nervous when I used the metro in buenos aires and I was also nervous in montevideo the first times I used the buses.
Just leave me in small cities.
en.wikipedia.org
Are trainlet cities with less than 100km of metro even worth visiting?
So there aren't any cities in Canada worth visiting?
>Paris Metro is rubber-tyred
AHAHAHAHHAHAH
Can't fabricate this stool
No, only Quebec.
Yes
We don't have one because we don't have the population to sustain one. Metros need to be subsidised all over the world to keep functioning (only two in Japan pay for themselves), with the current population and the average movement of people from Monday to Friday, we would have to invest 50 USD per passenger everyday, more than 10 times the average subsidy over the world, and of course, this doesn't take in to consideration the huge decrease of movement during the weekend.
Basically, it would mean a huge investment just to build it and sustain it, from the country, for something that wont work and will only benefit San José at some point, a city of 280 000 people. It has become a meme to build one the past years, but it is just one of those stupid promises politics make to attract idiots.
You idiot.
Medellin Metro was pretty comfy, IIRC.
I remember Bogota having some shitty network of rapid buses called the Transmilenio. One of my friends got robbed at knifepoint two or three times over the course of a year.
>Australia has great public transport
Trust a namefag to post something retarded.
Large chunks of the Chicago L do go underground
>You do though. Metro is hands down the best form of transit.
t. I have never used a tram
Like what?
>Only in Buenos Aires
I hate my country so much
>Frankfurts light rail is a metro
Nice map there fampai.