565
Fuck Cars Rule
(lemmy.blahaj.zone)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 21 Jun 2023
565 points (100.0% liked)
196
16574 readers
1793 users here now
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I can't say I agree. I could get by on public transportation but it would be a massive loss to my quality of life. Why would I support that?
I think the goal is to have public transport (where needed) to improve quality of life and to design cities/towns for people rather than cars. 15 minute cities, accessibility, walking paths, bike paths, etc. and public transport would be supplementary or for longer distances. There are some really good YouTube channels about urban design like Not Just Bikes and City Beautiful to name a couple that have some really great vids on the topic.
As someone who lives in a rural place with allergies I fully agree.
Yo you know of any good communities/magazines to subscribe to?
I wish lol. I just got here a few days ago, so I'm still trying to discover them.
I think it's kind of foolish to assume humans will ever orginize in a fashion that makes 15 minute cities practical. Does your version of 15 minute cities include taxing people for leaving their areas?
That is literally the issue. "While they suppress our medicine" refers to how lots of cities are designed car centric now.
Adam Something has an amazing video on this.
Because its a net benefit for the vast majority of daily use cases.
Why would literally anyone not support that.
And i dont mean nobody can ever drive anything again, its just silly to day "i dont support the extension of public transport"
Yeah I guess I just started to stop caring about socialism when I realized my country can't even supply people with affordable housing. If public transport is such a net benefit, fund it privately.
What I find silly is thinking you're owed something from your peers.
I think you're failing to take into account that literally everyone who works and takes part in our society pays taxes.
Paying taxes and asking municipalities for infrastructure to be built with those taxes ≠ "thinking you're owed something from your peers"
No I'm aware people pay taxes.
So let's split the taxes! Boom.
Some questions (some are a bit polemic but I kinda wanna find common ground in the end):
Do you drive on roads that you didn't pave yourself?
Do you maintain them yourself - if not, do you expect them to be generally connecting you to other places?
Do you use the public power grid?
Do you depend on water lines?
Have you ever taken a flight from a city's main airport?
Have you served, or support the military?
Do you consider any of these being publicly funded "socialism" or "demanding something of your peers"?
In general, the way things work in my home country - the district / city / county / state / federal government have funds to maintain things on their corresponding scale (ascending local to federal) that are deemed either publicly beneficial or even essential.
None of that is socialism, but in our case a "social democracy" i.e. making sure the bare, liveable minimum of life in this society functions through tax money and the federal budget in general.
So to me it looks.. weirdly disconnected to call any of these things "thinking you're owed something from your peers", just because one of these individual pieces might not be immediately relevant to your day to day routine.
Yes.
I wouldn't consider my position "weirdly disconnected". You could use your argument for anything. "What do you mean you don't support public strip clubs? You use public roads don't you?"
I have never in my life seen a publicly owned strip club or heard of governmental strip club subsidisations.
Is that a US thing?
A national or international rail network makes long distance travel safer, faster, more affordable, more sustainable and by those factors incredibly more accessible to lower income citizens.
You pay taxes regardless, wouldn't you want them to go towards something that benefits you and your peers?
You don't get the point of what I'm saying? You don't understand analogies?
Is this a commerical or a reply?
Not in this circumstance.
Analogies usually relate to the topic i guess.
Not a commercial, didn't know stating facts relevant to the discussion is frowned upon in your circles.
Guess we're done here, if you don't like to discuss anything, maybe just don't reply next time.
My analogy wasn't deep. If you don't understand how it relates to the topic 🤷♀️
Im perfectly happy with my replies.
you just seem so upset at me listing the benefits of a concept as basic as public transport without ever mentioning anything other than "but communism" and "irrelevant other thing should not be publicly funded so neither should this" :'D
Like sorry that it works in most of the western world
Once again you really don't seem to understand. If all you want to do is deflect, dismiss, and reframe what I'm saying without actually engaging with the points I've made that's not a discussion, that's just you pontificating. By all means that's your choice, but I'm going to respond to it as such.
You shouldn't be inferring tone.
Not your best slogan yet.
You have made one. "but socialism" but in your own words. That somehow it would mean feeling entitled to something from your peers. That imo is nothing but a feeling, which i guess you're entitled to feel.
"except in the US" would've been a bit too on the nose, i thought.
https://www.chronotrains.com/en
Oh look! More minimizing, and dismissal! Not an actual argument.
What are you going to do next? Call my perspective weird and detached again?
Oh you guuuuuess I'm entitled to feel 🤣 Thank you for being so gracious as to bestow onto me your blessing that I'm allowed to feel feelings about the world.
Anyways I'm done. You're incredibly transparent in the way you attempt to manipulate/provoke emotions, and I'm just done with that petty crap. If that's what you consider a discussion, I'll leave you to it.
🤘
I offered you many opportunities to present arguments, which you didn't take. Or maybe I just don't understand you.
Have a good one anyway.
what if you lived in a place that was designed right, such that it wouldn't be a massive loss to your quality of life if you went car-free or car-lite?
what if the place you live right now was designed right, such that it wouldn't be a massive loss to your quality of life if you went car-free or car-lite?
I think these are pipe dreams. Cars give a level of freedom that can't be replicated. Like Saturday I'm going skydiving and that's a 50 minute drive both ways to the middle of nowhere. Or yesterday I hit two stores in different areas of the city on the way home from work.
I actually have a few stores a 10 minute walk away, and like a Walmart, etc.. just a 15 minute walk away, and I've only walked to those places a handful of times over 9 years.
You can't beat walking outside your door to a vehicle.
There's plenty of places where you don't need a car so it's not exactly a pipe dream. I've never owned a car, just get everywhere by bike and public transit.
You're entitled to your preferences. There are places where people have to walk hours for fresh water everyday, personally that wouldn't fit my definition of practical.