zlacker

[return to "How to quit cars"]
1. poomer+le2[view] [source] 2023-05-19 03:28:12
>>amathe+(OP)
I find this article to be too high-minded. Most Americans don't own cars or support car-friendly policies due to some notion of car=freedom or some other culture wars nonsense.

Americans own cars because most of them live in single-family houses on large plots of land, and that doesn't make public transit for daily commuting a realistic possibility. In Paris car ownership is very low, maybe 1/3 of adults, but in rural France the car ownership rate is easily 95%+. I haven't seen a single developed area in the world that has violated the rule that low density = high car ownership and vice versa.

The other rule that I have never seen violated is that the large majority of middle and upper income people do not want to live near low income people, due to crime or other reasons. In Europe, poor people live in the suburbs, so the middle income live in the city with high density housing. In the US and some other places (south asia), low income people live near the business center, so the middle income live in low density housing in the suburbs. These are for historical reasons and cannot be easily changed.

◧◩
2. Retric+Ef2[view] [source] 2023-05-19 03:41:12
>>poomer+le2
America actually has a huge public transportation system servicing most homes in the US. It’s the bus system for public schools. Running local loops to pick people up in moderately high density neighborhoods with 1 acre per house or less every half hour or so is actually pretty easy. Just read up on the old trolly networks before cars took off.

The real reason Americans own cars is because we’re rich enough to afford a more expensive and more convenient system. Public Transit at scale is surprisingly cheap when compared to all the costs associated with car ownership * 10’s of thousands of people in even a fairly small community.

◧◩◪
3. scott_+vp2[view] [source] 2023-05-19 05:23:36
>>Retric+Ef2
That’s not quite true. The simple reason Americans drive cars is because it’s impossible to live without one. I spent a week in Austin and the difference between its suburban layout and that of any European city is stark.

It’s really hard for someone who hasn’t lived it to really understand what it means to be able to walk to the shop. Then compare to when that’s not physically possible.

◧◩◪◨
4. pandam+7h3[view] [source] 2023-05-19 13:02:25
>>scott_+vp2
>It’s really hard for someone who hasn’t lived it to really understand what it means to be able to walk to the shop. Then compare to when that’s not physically possible.

I got you, friend. I grew up in the USSR, where private cars were luxury and public transit was so abundant that people referred to locations by the subway stations. The cities were designed for the citizens without cars (no parking anywhere, "microdistricts" in the newly built areas). It objectively sucks. I now live in the USA and can compare, if you have any questions I will be glad to explain what the life without a car is really like.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. scott_+7j3[view] [source] 2023-05-19 13:14:23
>>pandam+7h3
Until 2 years ago, I lived without a car and walked to work until 2018 (when I switched to remote working). I know the pros and cons. The USSR being shit doesn't make living without a car shit.

Even now, owning a car, I typically walk or ride. If I tried to do this in the USA, I'd be getting scraped off a stroad.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. pandam+4C3[view] [source] 2023-05-19 14:56:10
>>scott_+7j3
I imagine that if you work at home, have no children and have other people driving cars for you (delivery, taxi etc) it's not that bad. Not many people can afford this lifestyle though.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. scott_+dX3[view] [source] 2023-05-19 16:47:00
>>pandam+4C3
You didn’t read what I said: I only started WFH in 2018. I used to commute on foot before that.

My fiancé’s mother can’t drive and managed to raise 3 children by herself without a car, too. In the right environment, yes it is possible. No, she’s not rich by any stretch.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. pandam+Hh4[view] [source] 2023-05-19 18:31:37
>>scott_+dX3
I did read it, I don't know what you wanted this to express but I understood it as the admission that walking to work became untenable. 2018 is not 2020, WFH then had a great income/career progression penalty.

And a whole lot of people managed to raise even more children before cars were invented or even horses were domesticated. Eg my gran-gran raised 3 children without running water and electricity (and obviously no horse or car), that does not mean she enjoyed it.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
9. scott_+Dk4[view] [source] 2023-05-19 18:47:04
>>pandam+Hh4
> I understood it as the admission that walking to work became untenable

I don't understand how you inferred that unless you chose to.

> And a whole lot of people managed to raise even more children before cars were invented or even horses were domesticated.

What on earth are you talking about? Either you've never been to London, or any major European city, or you're making spurious comparisons in bad faith.

[go to top]