Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Cryptizard t1_j1vx20n wrote

Reply to comment by Kinexity in Driverless cars and electric cars being displayed as the pinnacle of future transportation engineering is just… wrong. Car-based infrastructure is inefficient, bad for the environment and we already have better technologies in other fields that could help more. An in depth analysis by mocha_sweetheart

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