580
submitted 1 year ago by eya@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/fuck_cars@lemmy.ml
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 107 points 1 year ago

You forgot the homeless people, forced to live under that interchange because you know, america, freedom etc...

[-] taladar@sh.itjust.works 20 points 1 year ago

If they are lucky enough that nobody installed some hostile architecture there to keep them out.

[-] NENathaniel@lemmy.ca 17 points 1 year ago

I could be wrong but iirc, Italy also has a lot of homelessness

[-] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 75 points 1 year ago

According to wikipedia, 8.4/10k for italy vs 17.5/10k for the US. So while the US is the richest country in the world they have twice as many homeless people per capita :/

[-] NENathaniel@lemmy.ca 19 points 1 year ago

I see thanks for clarification

[-] LazaroFilm@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Counted in the population.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 71 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

This isn't a great argument. There is so much open undeveloped space in the US that could be used to house people. This interchange isn't taking space away from anyone. There are lots of good reasons to reduce cars, but this isn't one of them.

[-] gregorum@lemm.ee 100 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That’s not really true here though. This is in the middle of an urban area, not in some big open empty space that’s unoccupied, like Montana, or North Dakota. This is in the middle of Houston, Texas, a very populous city.

[-] schmidtster@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago

And? If they need space they expand elsewhere. If this interchange was at the edge of town, middle of town, north or south. The town is still the same size. America is large, lots of “empty” space.

[-] itslilith 53 points 1 year ago

And that's how you get sprawling cities that are completely untraversable on foot, bike or bus. Urban planning is important, even when space is abundant

[-] Sanctus@lemmy.world 40 points 1 year ago

Which expands the total travel distance on average, exacerbating all car use in the area. Things need to be closer, not further. That will only encourage car dependent infrastructure.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] gregorum@lemm.ee 24 points 1 year ago

that’s not how urban development works, like, at all, lol.

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 19 points 1 year ago

Cities should avoid becoming nightmare, sprawling hellscapes. Dense cities with multi-use buildings, public transit, and walkable infrastructure are where its at.

[-] schmidtster@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Dense, ugly cities, with no character, where people trip over each other isn’t the solution.

Those can be a part of the larger city, why can’t everyone have what they want instead of just a small portion of people who only think of themselves?

Its great to know this community is open to discussion instead of just perpetuating the same tropes and downvoting people!

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 17 points 1 year ago

Dense and ugly are not synonyms, same with lacking character. If you go to sprawling suburbia, you'll find that there's exactly no character, you can drive for 30 minutes and think you went in a circle.

Do you genuinely believe people want sprawling hellscapes where they have to sit in traffic forever to get to the nearest Walmart, destroying the environment and further atmozing individuals and alienating themselves, or do you think it makes more sense to address population needs, environmental needs, and efficiency via smarter urban planning that isn't so car-centric?

Car-centric infrastructure takes up for more space and far more time is spent on commuting than well-planned urban infrastructure with public transit, and costs the environment far more, and is far more economically expensive. It's disastrous and should be stopped entirely.

load more comments (20 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Anarch157a@lemmy.world 27 points 1 year ago

I think OP's argument is that the interchange is a symptom of low density urban sprawl and all the associated maladies that come with it.

[-] LovesTha@floss.social 13 points 1 year ago

@Anarch157a @BradleyUffner Yeah, it'd suck trying to walk to a friends house on the other side of the interchange.

[-] vexikron@lemmy.zip 50 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Duh, moron, the future is you just live in the car.

You cant legally park it anywhere near anything useful for survival, and gas is expensive and so is car insurance.

But thats fine because cars and car companies have more rights than people! Or something...

What I am saying is anyone who walks to the grocery store /deserves/ to get run over.

Natural Selection mannnnn!

inhales

Alright, feelin good, got beer in the glove compartment, time to film my magnum opus:

DeathRace 2024.

YEEEEEHAAAWWW!!!

immediately peels out, doesnt see other driver blowing a red light until too late, swerves to avoid and crashes into the weed dispensary, paralyzing himself from the legs down and killing 4 others

[-] greybeard@lemmy.one 15 points 1 year ago

In many cities, people are literally living in cars that don't run, in public parking spaces, because it's the only enclosed place they can afford to live in.

[-] vexikron@lemmy.zip 8 points 1 year ago

Yep, and that is almost always illegal, and such people almost always end up having the car towed, having to pay for the car being towed, losing all their possessions and then becoming homeless.

Its just a matter of time until enough people report it and the police get around to it.

[-] hackris@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 year ago

Capitalist wet dream right here

[-] vexikron@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 year ago

cue America Fuck Yeah! song

[-] LovesTha@floss.social 22 points 1 year ago

@eya This is such a weird way to compare countries anyway, Italy has giant interchanges too: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.929109,12.7359436,1733m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu

[-] eya@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 points 1 year ago

Because it's not meant to compare countries, it's meant to compare sizes. That interchange could be replaced with any interchange of similar size.

[-] TheBat@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

That's not in the middle of the city, unlike Houston's.

[-] ChicoSuave@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yeah, but you can't get to the other side of Siena in 20 seconds? Efficiency isn't pretty.

/S (big a for big sarcasm)

[-] atro_city@fedia.io 14 points 1 year ago

bUt wE hAve EnoUGh sPaCE!

[-] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 14 points 1 year ago

Even better: Leaving that land undeveloped and natural, instead of cramming humans or cars on it

[-] mondoman712@lemmy.ml 33 points 1 year ago

People need to live somewhere, and if they live somewhere like Siena it leaves more space for nature.

[-] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 11 points 1 year ago

Yeah, and the nicer urbanists can make cities the more empty land there will be. And I can live in a pile of rocks with animals for my friends while you all enjoy the nice cities.

[-] Hildegarde@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago

Humans need land to live on. Constructng densely reduces the land needed for humans, leaving more undeveloped land.

Reducing human population is beyond the scope of urban planning.

[-] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

The last sentence could be argued as north american roads become more deadly.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] njordomir@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Hell Yeah! Deer and rabbits have to live somewhere too. I wish I lived 15 min. from undisturbed nature!

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] Maganra@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

Ah Houston, not a whole lot to like about living here.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] HotsauceHurricane@lemmy.one 10 points 1 year ago

Well damn start building apartments in the empty parts. Its not that difficult to understand.

[-] spacesatan@lemm.ee 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

With 6inch thick windows or intolerable noise pollution, sounds great. I wonder which one penny pinching developers are going to build.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 10 Jan 2024
580 points (100.0% liked)

Fuck Cars

9967 readers
1 users here now

This community exists as a sister community/copycat community to the r/fuckcars subreddit.

This community exists for the following reasons:

You can find the Matrix chat room for this community here.

Rules

  1. Be nice to each other. Being aggressive or inflammatory towards other users will get you banned. Name calling or obvious trolling falls under that. Hate cars, hate the system, but not people. While some drivers definitely deserve some hate, most of them didn't choose car-centric life out of free will.

  2. No bigotry or hate. Racism, transphobia, misogyny, ableism, homophobia, chauvinism, fat-shaming, body-shaming, stigmatization of people experiencing homeless or substance users, etc. are not tolerated. Don't use slurs. You can laugh at someone's fragile masculinity without associating it with their body. The correlation between car-culture and body weight is not an excuse for fat-shaming.

  3. Stay on-topic. Submissions should be on-topic to the externalities of car culture in urban development and communities globally. Posting about alternatives to cars and car culture is fine. Don't post literal car fucking.

  4. No traffic violence. Do not post depictions of traffic violence. NSFW or NSFL posts are not allowed. Gawking at crashes is not allowed. Be respectful to people who are a victim of traffic violence or otherwise traumatized by it. News articles about crashes and statistics about traffic violence are allowed. Glorifying traffic violence will get you banned.

  5. No reposts. Before sharing, check if your post isn't a repost. Reposts that add something new are fine. Reposts that are sharing content from somewhere else are fine too.

  6. No misinformation. Masks and vaccines save lives during a pandemic, climate change is real and anthropogenic - and denial of these and other established facts will get you banned. False or highly speculative titles will get your post deleted.

  7. No harassment. Posts that (may) cause harassment, dogpiling or brigading, intentionally or not, will be removed. Please do not post screenshots containing uncensored usernames. Actual harassment, dogpiling or brigading is a bannable offence.

Please report posts and comments that violate our rules.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS