3 ms·

I think the problem is that, because of historical quirks and social norms, cars are much bigger than they should be. That doesn't explain their popularity thr

I think the problem is that, because of historical quirks and social norms, cars are much bigger than they should be. That doesn't explain their popularity throughout the world, even the third world. As wasteful as cars are, they get you where you need to go faster than anything else, with the exception of dense city centers. If it was only about status, the poor wouldn't bother with them, since they are expensive to maintain. Owning a car allows you access to areas you wouldn't normally have access to. Jobs 70 miles away. Visiting your cousin's family three states over. Driving your father to the hospital because you don't have insurance and can't afford an ambulance. It can be done relatively easily, but there is a very hard cultural battle to fight with the likes of Jeremy Clarkson and his viewers. You're delusional if you think Top Gear viewers are the reason cities are clogged with cars. Car fans like clear, open roads with little traffic. The more bends the better. They also only take their performance cars out on the weekend once or twice a month and that's when the weather is nice. The rest of the time, they sit in the garage. My grandmother (of all people) is a huge fan of classic Chevrolets. Has a mint condition cherry red 1960 Chevy Impala. It sits in her barn on the farm. I've only seen it on the road once in my lifetime, for one last ride before my grandfather died. The rest of the time she drives a beat up truck. She works on a farm; she actually uses the truck to haul things every day.

toyg 11y ago
> That doesn't explain their popularity throughout the world Dude, sorry, you're going completely off on a tangent here. I'm not saying cars should be abolished; I'm saying cars are, on average, bigger than they should be, because of rich-world cultural constructs. In the third world, for example, cars are much smaller on average, exactly because function is preferred over form. That's perfectly fine. The roads of Asian cities are full of small one-person vehicles that simply cannot be replaced, that's fine. What is not fine is first-world metropolis being clogged with suburban 4-seaters with huge empty boots and powerful underused engines just because of cultural constructs. Honestly, you're arguing a strawman -- I've never said cars are bad, I said big wasteful cars are bad. I never said you should take the bus, I said that the vehicle you take to the city should be space-efficient. > with the exception of dense city centers. Which is what we were talking about. > You're delusional if you think Top Gear viewers are the reason cities are clogged with cars. I picked Top Gear but I could have picked a lot of other examples. What I meant is that there is a certain entrenched culture that despises small cars for no good reason. Consider the typical Clarkson line "would you pick up <some supermodel> in this car?" -- that's pushing a cultural view where you need a big-ass car to be successful and get laid. Why couldn't you pick up a supermodel in a cool and space-efficient city-car, why does it have to be a wide-ass affair? Because that's what "real men" do. That becomes a subliminal message that will work when you go and buy a car: you'll likely get the biggest one you can afford, because that's what real men do (not that women are oblivious -- they react to it as well, buying oversized SUVs "for protection" or huge sedans "for ambition"). I honestly don't care what goes on in the countryside; we are talking about efficiency in metropolitan settings here, where outdated cultural norms are clearly keeping us back.

toyg 11y ago

> That doesn't explain their popularity throughout the world Dude, sorry, you're going completely off on a tangent here. I'm not saying cars should be abolished; I'm saying cars are, on average, bigger than they should be, because of rich-world cultural constructs. In the third world, for example, cars are much smaller on average, exactly because function is preferred over form. That's perfectly fine. The roads of Asian cities are full of small one-person vehicles that simply cannot be replaced, that's fine. What is not fine is first-world metropolis being clogged with suburban 4-seaters with huge empty boots and powerful underused engines just because of cultural constructs. Honestly, you're arguing a strawman -- I've never said cars are bad, I said big wasteful cars are bad. I never said you should take the bus, I said that the vehicle you take to the city should be space-efficient. > with the exception of dense city centers. Which is what we were talking about. > You're delusional if you think Top Gear viewers are the reason cities are clogged with cars. I picked Top Gear but I could have picked a lot of other examples. What I meant is that there is a certain entrenched culture that despises small cars for no good reason. Consider the typical Clarkson line "would you pick up <some supermodel> in this car?" -- that's pushing a cultural view where you need a big-ass car to be successful and get laid. Why couldn't you pick up a supermodel in a cool and space-efficient city-car, why does it have to be a wide-ass affair? Because that's what "real men" do. That becomes a subliminal message that will work when you go and buy a car: you'll likely get the biggest one you can afford, because that's what real men do (not that women are oblivious -- they react to it as well, buying oversized SUVs "for protection" or huge sedans "for ambition"). I honestly don't care what goes on in the countryside; we are talking about efficiency in metropolitan settings here, where outdated cultural norms are clearly keeping us back.