zlacker

>>amathe+(OP)
The issue of quiting cars is nowadays far from just a matter of values as the article seems to be implying.

Cars are by now a hard to reverse environmental and urban planning disaster across the world. We are stuck with them. As a mode of transport it has grown uncontrollably at the expense of all others (except the airplane) and practically everything has been shaped to accomodate it.

Reversing that development, limiting car traffic to where its really needed is like trying to perform a complete heart and arteries transplant on a living person. Even if there was a will (which there is not) it is not clear if there is a way.

In the best scenario it will be an excruciatingly long transformation (~50 yr) as car oriented cities (or city sections) get slowly deprecated and the car-free or car-lite segments become more desirable, more livable.

>>nologi+Mz1
It's not really "remove cars" problem tho. Cars are fine and are needed, you can't move anything big with tram or bike easily. It's make other forms of transport more viable for day to day stuff

You still need vans and trucks delivering stuff to people and businesses. Bus is far more flexible form of transport than tram. Just... if you need to wait ages for one and there is no stop nearby nobody will want to wait.

>>ilyt+wH1
> Cars are fine and are needed, you can't move anything big with tram or bike easily

What’s the percentage of cars on the road you see moving big stuff that could not be moved by other means? (Aka not people).

>>loloqu+KM1
Do you have kids?

Are you affluent and lucky enough to live near their school?

https://www.greencarcongress.com/2019/07/20190730-school.htm...

>>cscurm+DP1
Yes, kids. Not affluent. Lucky enough to live in a place where they assign you a nearby school. There are 5 within walking distance. Maybe 20 within cycling distance (and I mean a 20-minute ride, not a 1-hour backbreaker).