Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

VitiateKorriban t1_j1twt2y wrote

Not everyone wants to live in cities. It’s actually a slight minority.

The vision of walkable and compressed cities is a dead end pipe dream.

11

The_Real_RM t1_j1tnrn2 wrote

I don't think you get it, with a car you can go away from the other people, that's the most importation thing

8

fitandhealthyguy t1_j1v9prn wrote

Do me a favor and walk from Chinatown to West Philly.

3

mocha_sweetheart OP t1_j1w7tei wrote

I already mentioned about using trains and other similar methods for travel across long distances

0

BlueShipman t1_j1w9kfg wrote

Tell me you don't live in a city without telling me you don't live in a city.

Cities are DANGEROUS in the US. That is why public transport doesn't work, because people don't want to get mugged, groped, raped or killed just trying to get around the city. Yes, a car is a 5,000 pound death machine, it protects you from people trying to hurt you in the city.

1

mocha_sweetheart OP t1_j1wd11d wrote

  1. Cars are arguably far more dangerous, the NHTSA says that 42,915 people died from motor vehicles in 2021 alone
  2. To make healthy communities you need to give everyone better opportunities and equality, and give mental healthcare to those who need it, that’s why people are going into crime because of the lack of such things, try solving the root causes to things
0

BlueShipman t1_j1zcqlr wrote

>To make healthy communities you need to give everyone better opportunities and equality, and give mental healthcare to those who need it, that’s why people are going into crime because of the lack of such things, try solving the root causes to things

WOW That's so simple. I think you might be a genius. Have you contacted the nobel prize committee? I think we might have a winner on our hands.

Now do violent crime stats. I'm much safer in my car than walking around in the city. Getting brain damage from getting punched in the head and getting my wallet stolen isn't on my things to do list.

2

Longjumping_Pilgirm t1_j1tmg1i wrote

Have fun walking for 10+ miles just to get to the nearest store. Unless you somehow can make rural areas easily accessible without a car and also affordable. This is not easy. You should go and take a vacation in the US midwestern countryside for a few weeks then say this again. I triple dog dare you to do this in northern Michigan without a car. Enjoy.

−1

mocha_sweetheart OP t1_j1ts0ic wrote

See, this actually directly proves my point. I think you're missing that the reason everything is built so freaking far away in the US is exactly because they're built for cars which makes us dependent on them. The car industry lobbied for these things decades ago in most of the US. In walkable places like NYC, Amsterdam, etc. everything is far more compact and close together.

14

Tencreed t1_j1tuks6 wrote

European here. Cars are a necessity in rural areas, stuff being built afar is just how rural areas are. On the other hand, this is not in rural areas that cars cause traffic issues, air pollution or noise nuisances. Yes, cars will still be needed in some areas. These areas still existing is no good basis to keep building high density area around car as the default choice.

9

Cryptizard t1_j1tut1b wrote

It seems like you have never lived outside of a city? And I’m not talking about a suburb, I mean a rural area. You can’t make those “walkable”. And you can’t just force people to move to cities.

9

Kinexity t1_j1uzgax wrote

Most people already live in cities

−1

Cryptizard t1_j1vnuzo wrote

Cool so just fuck all the people that don’t, right?

1

Kinexity t1_j1voi2i wrote

It's a common strawman on the part of carbrains to say that banning cars means complete ban on cars. Nobody says that. Cars are to be banned from cities. No one is going to take away cars from people living in rural areas.

0

Cryptizard t1_j1vt2dv wrote

Lol okay how do you get to a rural area from the city then, like I dunno, if you have a job there? Not everyone can work right where they live.

1

Kinexity t1_j1vtkzz wrote

Car sharing

−1

Cryptizard t1_j1vv5n3 wrote

You have a rent a car every day to commute. Right. Great solution.

0

Kinexity t1_j1vwokv wrote

If you really need one you can buy but you won't be able to enter denser parts of the city (or it will cost you). You are trying to undermine the whole concept by bringing edge cases which have nothing to do with what most people need. Those who live in the city mostly work in the city. Those who NEED a car regardless of public transportation available are a cery small subset of those who have a car.

2

Cryptizard t1_j1vx20n wrote

The average American commutes 41 miles per day so you are just wrong about that. Maybe in your imaginary world people work where they live.

1

Kinexity t1_j1vypul wrote

>The average American commutes 41 miles per day

And that's the problem. That's way too much. Problem of cars isn't simply about cars but about all of the infrastructure that is built around them. You could fill those huge parking lots in the city centers with housing and cut down distance from work place by a lot. Those huge highways in the city centers also take a lot of space which could be better utilised. It's not about just about banning cars and saying "fuck everyone who needs them". It's about making sure that as little people as possible actually need them.

1

Cryptizard t1_j1vyzpu wrote

But you can’t make people move, I don’t understand what you are suggesting at this point. A lot of people don’t want to live in the city center. Or they do but their work is outside of the city. It is just how it is, no addition of public transit or regulations is going to make people do what you want.

1

Kinexity t1_j1w01nc wrote

You assume that people don't want to live in the city centers while also assuming they have a choice. They don't. You guys there cannot try out how it is to not have to have a car because most of your cities are hard to get around without one. If someone wants to live in the suburbs - ok, but make them pay according to the costs they generate. You'll see how quickly shit changes. Also "you can't people do x" - we have to make people do stuff because we have to unfuck the natural enviroment. The changes will take time but they are needed. Obviously best way would be to incentivize people instead of forcing them.

2

Cryptizard t1_j1w2xwl wrote

The best way to save the planet is for all of us to live in self-sustaining communes in rural areas. You going to volunteer to do that? Or are you just trying to force your lifestyle on others because it costs you nothing?

0

Kinexity t1_j1w7spi wrote

>The best way to save the planet is for all of us to live in self-sustaining communes in rural areas. You going to volunteer to do that?

I never proposed or supported that solution. What I propose is the middle ground between not fucking the planet anymore and not hindering our civilisation.

>Or are you just trying to force your lifestyle on others because it costs you nothing?

If choices of other people endanger my safety, safety of others or the enviroment I live in I have the right to demand them change their lifestyle because your freedom ends where my freedom starts. Cars don't have some God-given space in the city - they were allowed in and now they should be expelled out. People having freedom to choose isn't a good argument against this because people aren't known for choosing what's good for them and the fact that the pandemics has been going for almost 3 years is a good testament to this.

Edit: if someone gets here at some point - he blocked me.

1

Cryptizard t1_j1wlxvc wrote

Lol you literally just say you won't do the real solution because its too hard but you want other to give up things for your benefit. Nice, what a great person you are.

1

adamsky1997 t1_j1ttca3 wrote

Dude take a vacation to Barcelona, London, Berlin... you will see for yourself.

8

mocha_sweetheart OP t1_j1tu7wa wrote

Yeah, it’s extremely US-centric and acts like we haven’t had solutions for these things in other places

5

enilea t1_j1tvmcd wrote

I live in one of those cities and still rely on cars to take me to work because it's in another city and the nearest train station is still too far away. Plus having to take a combination of bus, metro and train ends up taking two and a half hours vs less than an hour on car. Around the city I use public transportation everywhere, but I'd rather have my own private space to transport myself, it's annoying being closely sorrounded by strangers and having to wear a mask inside.

A network of connected public self driving cars would be a good solution, just hop in any any of the empty cars and hop off when you arrive at your destination, leaving it available for someone else.

5

adamsky1997 t1_j1txt3f wrote

Yeah thats because you probably live in Croydon, not London proper lol

1

enilea t1_j1tzlq0 wrote

Opposite, I live in the city center and the offices are in some industrial area in the middle of nowhere.

2

adamsky1997 t1_j1ukiar wrote

If we're talking singularity offices will be obsolete to start with...

5

mocha_sweetheart OP t1_j1u4ra3 wrote

That's just bad car-based city planning which is exactly what I'm complaining about

1

Longjumping_Pilgirm t1_j27ncj7 wrote

I am not talking about the big cities. Setting up a alternative transportation system in the more sparsely populated areas of the US is what I am talking about. I have been to Paris and rode their subway everywhere and rode the train out to Versailles and the Musee De La Grande Guerre so I do see that a good train infrastructure could help because I could literally go anywhere I need to go using the train and my own two legs but most of the track and infrastructure to make that work in the US has long since been removed. A great many rail lines would need to be rebuilt and then expanded. This is a map of railroads in my current state in 1920, which is I think the height of railroads in Michigan. This is a map of railroads now, and most of those are freight only also - as far as I know, the only passenger lines left in Michigan are the Amtrak lines I just linked. It is clear to see that using, say, highspeed electric railroads, at the very least would require HUGE investment.

1