846

I can't. I just can't.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] thoro@lemmy.ml 110 points 1 week ago

They will really do anything before investing in public transit

[-] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 41 points 1 week ago

Automobile-centric infrastructure was such a colossal societal fuck-up.

Bad for personal health, physical safety, household finances, and the environment. Automobiles are not a symbol of freedom, they are a symbol of dependence.

[-] innermachine@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago

While I agree about automobile centric structure, when rural living automobiles are absolutely the ticket to freedom. It's a shame more populace areas get designed around maintaining dependence on cars.

[-] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 15 points 1 week ago

I think the point is choice. Even those living in suburban and urban areas have a difficult time opting out of car-dependence.

If you choose to live rural, I would say that automobiles are part and parcel to that decision. It's just the nature of low population density.

[-] marxismtomorrow@lemmy.today 8 points 1 week ago

Except there is absolutely no reason it has to be like that in rural areas. Period. At all. Even a little. Look at China (or if you still believe the NED puts out legitimate stories, Denmark or Sweden or Norway) which has public transit to nearly all rural areas at least a couple times a week, and inter-village public transit in pretty much all villages that have more than a dozen people.

Busses are more efficient than independent vehicle ownership in all settings. All of them.

[-] atx_aquarian@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

More efficient, sure, but their argument was about freedom, which is just a different dimension. In an extreme example, private jets provide more freedom than public transportation does, even though it's obvious which one is worse for the environment, more expensive, more intrusive, etc.

[-] marxismtomorrow@lemmy.today 2 points 1 week ago

Except that's not freedom.

It is not freedom to have a, and this really isn't an exaggeration, more than 10,000x personal cost for transportation. It's freedom for the rich, but the rich aren't a part of society and cannot be generalized into society.

It is not freedom to have to personally rely on the US to do the right thing.

It is not freedom to take on the massive legal and financial risk that is driving a death machine.

It is only freedom in the most infantile, 'Anarkiddie' sense of the word freedom. The 'Hurr durr we'd all be more free if we had less laws' kind of idiocracy most humans abandon by the age of 15 when they learn about the concept of government.

[-] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 week ago

What anarchist supports car ownership bullshit in America?

[-] ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org 32 points 1 week ago

Yup, drunkards in a tram are annoying but they almost never kill people and cause tens of thousands in damage.

[-] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago

almost never

thank you for that almost. jackasses like me see words like always and never as challenges and this is not one i want to take

this post was submitted on 24 Apr 2026
846 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

84377 readers
3750 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS