6 ms·

Not sure why so many people here are almost virtue signaling the act of not owning a drivers license. I agree—It's perfectly okay to not own a car if it doesn'

Not sure why so many people here are almost virtue signaling the act of not owning a drivers license. I agree—It's perfectly okay to not own a car if it doesn't make sense to your life situation. That being said, the ability to drive is nevertheless a useful skill and asset and at least in the United States, does not have a very high barrier to entry (for better or worse). There is so much in the United States that a car gives you access to (most National Parks or wilderness in general are not accessible by public transport). And I don't see human-driven cars disappearing from our world for the next 20–30 years at least.

ghaff 9y ago
It sort of blows my mind. I get that people have different interests and hobbies but the idea that people would live in San Francisco or Seattle and be "I'm fine with mostly just hanging around the city and looking at the mountains from here" is a bit hard for me to digest. And, as I said in another comment, renting a car has frequently been the obvious approach to get to places I need to get to on business trips.
- phil21 9y ago
  > I'm fine with mostly just hanging around the city and looking at the mountains from here That statement is very strange to me. If you really enjoy nature, I think the last possible thing you'd do is buy a car solely to go see said nature. Seems entirely wrong to me. Best thing you can do for those mountains if you love them is not purchase a vehicle.
  - s0rce 9y ago
    Best thing you can do to reduce your environmental impact is probably to kill yourself, or if you are not morally against it, probably kill as many people as you can. Baring this, you could just sit around and do nothing all the time. This isn't very fulfilling. Some people, myself included, want to enjoy the mountains and driving to them, while maybe not ideal, is the only way at the moment and for some can be worth the environmental cost. I'd wager the best thing you can do for the mountains is to rally for their future protection and educate the public on the importance of saving our public lands.
- megy 9y ago
  So instead buy a car and add to pollution, thus helping to destroy the nature you covet so much? And that makes sense to you?
  - rimliu 9y ago
    Yes, because that Lyft car you are using to get around does not pollute a bit.
    - jsemrau 9y ago
      Car companies assume that by 2030 they sell half the cars
- carlmr 9y ago
  Exactly. Seattle is lovely, if you get out on the weekend.
- kidsil 9y ago
  I suppose HN users tend to be people who don't like to go outdoors too much, not THAT surprising. It's likely that people who like to stay indoors, spend more time on the computer, perhaps coding... perhaps working as a developer...
verylittlemeat 9y ago
It's just a hassle. For you the cost in time and money is worth it. For other people like myself it's just not. I know "virtue signaling" is the hot new way to disagree with people on the internet but you should use it in a more discriminating manner. Getting a permit is not free in terms of time or money. Getting a license takes even MORE time (pointless outdated mandatory education classes) and MORE money (lessons). That's not even considering taking the written and driving tests themselves. Or going to the DMV. Yeah I know, all of this is super easy, look at the kind of people who drive, how hard could it be? But you know what I could be doing with my TIME and with my MONEY instead? All the things I want to do that I value more than driving. Obviously this thinking is just amplified when you take into consideration gas/insurance/maintenance. And this doesn't even get into the psychological impact of driving a car. You know what one of my favorite things in the world is? Reading a book on my 2 hour commute home on the train. My sister just recently got her license and I can honestly say (no virtue signaling I promise) that it has taken a psychological toll on her. She would admit herself that being a driver has made her a more angry and on edge person than she was before. Also it's pretty rosy speculation to suggest access to national parks has anything to do with motivation for car ownership. I think it's safe to say that can be covered almost entirely by "I need it for my job."
- msrpotus 9y ago
  Driving isn't easy. You can kill someone with a car if you don't know what you're doing. If anything, it should take more time and more classes/lessons to get a driver's license.
- romwell 9y ago
  >All the things I want to do that I value more than driving. This paints you as a very limited person if you are living in the US, because the "things that you want to do" exclude: -pretty much all the great outdoor activities and nature that the US has to offer (National/State Parks); -getting to know your own country and traveling within it -going to any place or event outside the city (for most people, shelling out $100+ on Uber each way is a barrier) I know where you're coming from, I used to live in NYC and didn't drive. I got my license when I moved to TX for grad school at the age of 24 - and I didn't even need it to get to work (I've been biking to campus for 7 years). But I did use the car for all the "rosy" things, and with that came the realization of how much I was missing out on. The thing is, you don't even know what you are missing out on. You are a person who doesn't travel, and says they don't want to. You are practically tied to your community. How often do you get beyond the 50-mile radius of your home? 100-mile radius? Now, if you were living in Europe, that wouldn't be the case. You would be able to travel without owning a car. Owning a car there has smaller marginal benefits. But you don't live in Europe. Public transportation in the US is horrible, even when you add a hefty dose of Uber/Lyft to it. It's a sad state of affairs, and I wish it weren't that way. I support public transport initiatives when I can. Choosing not to have a license is voluntarily confining oneself to a very small subset of the country. Uber won't get you to the Rockies. A rental will (so you don't need to own a car), but you still need to drive it. Yes, it's a hassle (at first; after some time, people start to enjoy it). Yes, it takes effort, time and money. But to say that you don't WANT to have the benefits it gives you in this country, one must at least somewhat be aware of what they are. Of course, to each - their own. But I got to see the total solar eclipse. And you might read how amazing it was in a book on a train one day. PS: I apologize for the somewhat-deliberately provoking tone. On a softer note, have you read "On The Road" by Jack Kerouac? If so, do you honestly say that you want none of that? If not, you're in luck, because reading it is a marvelous experience: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Road https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Road This book is culturally significant; but as a side effect, it might change how you see driving.
rootusrootus 9y ago
I have noticed this very strongly just in the last few weeks alone. Anytime a conversation begins that has to do with cars, a whole bunch of people immediately jump in to point how owning a car is immoral, how it destroys the environment, how it kills innocent children, how you should feel ashamed for owning one, etc. Maybe I've missed it before but with the recent spate of self-driving car stories it has become really stark how many people on HN have extremely narrow viewpoints.
- phil21 9y ago
  And I'd say your viewpoint is extremely narrow. The entire US is effectively "car culture" - and in my (and others) opinions, that car culture has effectively killed our society. Maybe permanently. You cannot have a functional society when the majority of productive people sequester themselves off from "the others" into little boxes set apart from each other, never interacting with anyone unless it's a planned social engagement. Typically that means extreme segregation - which we're seeing. The car - and the resulting car-based society (basically every single community/transportation project in the past 50+ years has been car-centric) - gives you the beginnings of the total social breakdown we are experiencing. That wouldn't be an entirely bad thing necessarily - it would mean people chose that. Unfortunately they didn't. Car culture (and the suburban culture it enabled) was subsidized by the rest of society practically from day one.
  - King-Aaron 9y ago
    I don't think the activity of driving cars is as socially segregating as you feel it is. I have no metrics to base this on, of course. However your comment seems slightly hyperbolic to me.
    - phil21 9y ago
      > However your comment seems slightly hyperbolic to me. Perhaps, and I will say I have no hard data either so it's simply anecdote. However the older I get and the more I travel and witness other cultures - I continue to come back to this conclusion. After being a hardcore car+suburban lifestyle sort of guy in my youth. It takes a village to raise a child and also have a functional community, and the US has very few villages left. The village empties out during the day and is basically a wasteland of people who barely know each other. I don't think it's so much cars necessarily, it's the ability for people to self-segregate and pretend they are not part of a larger whole or part of an actual functional community. The ability to remove yourself from social situations you helped create (by simply existing), but want to ignore and shove off on other people. There are a few suburbs that are socially functional, but they are in the extreme minority in my experience. This laughable trope that a nuclear family is a self-sufficient unit has to die.
fullshark 9y ago
It's not a virtue signal so much as a status signal. Having enough money to afford to live in densely populated urban areas where you don't need a car to live is a status symbol.
- rootusrootus 9y ago
  Except that the people who are making the argument for living in the city without a car constantly cite costs as justification. And besides, isn't it the other way around? Unless you're living in one of a few extremely narrow areas of very specific cities, the really wealthy people live outside the urban core.
- dashundchen 9y ago
  That's definitely not true. I live in a city where a third of households are carless, believe me, with the neglected state of transit and pedestrian infrastructure, it's not a choice for most. I wouldn't hesitate to say that's the case in almost every American city outside NYC. But we should be talking about designing our society around more bikes, transit and walking. Transportation should be accessible to everyone - those too young for a license, too handicapped to walk or drive, those unable to afford a car. I think our health, environment, liviability and community would all be done a great service by demphasizing the single passenger car and it's accessories (sprawl, acres of parking, endless noise, pollution and isolated commutes)
smelendez 9y ago
> That being said, the ability to drive is nevertheless a useful skill and asset and at least in the United States, does not have a very high barrier to entry (for better or worse). Definitely a useful skill but I disagree there's a low barrier to entry if you are in a dense city. Driving school is expensive (I got my license about a decade ago in Boston, and it was probably over $1,000 in classes) and time consuming. Most people you know don't have cars, and even your friends who do are justifiably wary of letting you practice your new skill in their most valuable profession, something they own because they need it to get to work. I have seen many of my friends get their permits in cities like SF, NY and Boston and never get their licenses, or get their licenses and never feel comfortable driving solo, and these are not people who shy away from learning new skills in general.
megy 9y ago
> There is so much in the United States that a car gives you access to (most National Parks or wilderness in general are not accessible by public transport). They are accessible by tours, and friends, and cycling, and many other ways. You car people really seem to have a limited understanding of the real world, everything revolves around cars. You can't imagine doing something without a car.
- joshuahughes 9y ago
  > You car people Incredible as it may seem, there are people in the world who have life experiences and perspectives that differ from yours. Unsurprisingly, that results in them also having different opinions and making different choices. Clearly you feel that you've reached some kind of moral high ground, but there's no need to sneer at the rest of us from it.
  - dang 9y ago
    Please don't respond to flamebait with flamewars. That's taking the bait. Instead, as the site guidelines ask, flag the comment (if you have > 30 karma) or email us at hn@ycombinator.com.
- dang 9y ago
  > You car people really Would you please not post flamebait to HN? It's against the guidelines and reliably wrecks discussion here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

ghaff 9y ago

It sort of blows my mind. I get that people have different interests and hobbies but the idea that people would live in San Francisco or Seattle and be "I'm fine with mostly just hanging around the city and looking at the mountains from here" is a bit hard for me to digest. And, as I said in another comment, renting a car has frequently been the obvious approach to get to places I need to get to on business trips.

phil21 9y ago
> I'm fine with mostly just hanging around the city and looking at the mountains from here That statement is very strange to me. If you really enjoy nature, I think the last possible thing you'd do is buy a car solely to go see said nature. Seems entirely wrong to me. Best thing you can do for those mountains if you love them is not purchase a vehicle.
- s0rce 9y ago
  Best thing you can do to reduce your environmental impact is probably to kill yourself, or if you are not morally against it, probably kill as many people as you can. Baring this, you could just sit around and do nothing all the time. This isn't very fulfilling. Some people, myself included, want to enjoy the mountains and driving to them, while maybe not ideal, is the only way at the moment and for some can be worth the environmental cost. I'd wager the best thing you can do for the mountains is to rally for their future protection and educate the public on the importance of saving our public lands.
megy 9y ago
So instead buy a car and add to pollution, thus helping to destroy the nature you covet so much? And that makes sense to you?
- rimliu 9y ago
  Yes, because that Lyft car you are using to get around does not pollute a bit.
  - jsemrau 9y ago
    Car companies assume that by 2030 they sell half the cars
carlmr 9y ago
Exactly. Seattle is lovely, if you get out on the weekend.
kidsil 9y ago
I suppose HN users tend to be people who don't like to go outdoors too much, not THAT surprising. It's likely that people who like to stay indoors, spend more time on the computer, perhaps coding... perhaps working as a developer...

verylittlemeat 9y ago

It's just a hassle. For you the cost in time and money is worth it. For other people like myself it's just not. I know "virtue signaling" is the hot new way to disagree with people on the internet but you should use it in a more discriminating manner. Getting a permit is not free in terms of time or money. Getting a license takes even MORE time (pointless outdated mandatory education classes) and MORE money (lessons). That's not even considering taking the written and driving tests themselves. Or going to the DMV. Yeah I know, all of this is super easy, look at the kind of people who drive, how hard could it be? But you know what I could be doing with my TIME and with my MONEY instead? All the things I want to do that I value more than driving. Obviously this thinking is just amplified when you take into consideration gas/insurance/maintenance. And this doesn't even get into the psychological impact of driving a car. You know what one of my favorite things in the world is? Reading a book on my 2 hour commute home on the train. My sister just recently got her license and I can honestly say (no virtue signaling I promise) that it has taken a psychological toll on her. She would admit herself that being a driver has made her a more angry and on edge person than she was before. Also it's pretty rosy speculation to suggest access to national parks has anything to do with motivation for car ownership. I think it's safe to say that can be covered almost entirely by "I need it for my job."

msrpotus 9y ago
Driving isn't easy. You can kill someone with a car if you don't know what you're doing. If anything, it should take more time and more classes/lessons to get a driver's license.
romwell 9y ago
>All the things I want to do that I value more than driving. This paints you as a very limited person if you are living in the US, because the "things that you want to do" exclude: -pretty much all the great outdoor activities and nature that the US has to offer (National/State Parks); -getting to know your own country and traveling within it -going to any place or event outside the city (for most people, shelling out $100+ on Uber each way is a barrier) I know where you're coming from, I used to live in NYC and didn't drive. I got my license when I moved to TX for grad school at the age of 24 - and I didn't even need it to get to work (I've been biking to campus for 7 years). But I did use the car for all the "rosy" things, and with that came the realization of how much I was missing out on. The thing is, you don't even know what you are missing out on. You are a person who doesn't travel, and says they don't want to. You are practically tied to your community. How often do you get beyond the 50-mile radius of your home? 100-mile radius? Now, if you were living in Europe, that wouldn't be the case. You would be able to travel without owning a car. Owning a car there has smaller marginal benefits. But you don't live in Europe. Public transportation in the US is horrible, even when you add a hefty dose of Uber/Lyft to it. It's a sad state of affairs, and I wish it weren't that way. I support public transport initiatives when I can. Choosing not to have a license is voluntarily confining oneself to a very small subset of the country. Uber won't get you to the Rockies. A rental will (so you don't need to own a car), but you still need to drive it. Yes, it's a hassle (at first; after some time, people start to enjoy it). Yes, it takes effort, time and money. But to say that you don't WANT to have the benefits it gives you in this country, one must at least somewhat be aware of what they are. Of course, to each - their own. But I got to see the total solar eclipse. And you might read how amazing it was in a book on a train one day. PS: I apologize for the somewhat-deliberately provoking tone. On a softer note, have you read "On The Road" by Jack Kerouac? If so, do you honestly say that you want none of that? If not, you're in luck, because reading it is a marvelous experience: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Road https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Road This book is culturally significant; but as a side effect, it might change how you see driving.

rootusrootus 9y ago

I have noticed this very strongly just in the last few weeks alone. Anytime a conversation begins that has to do with cars, a whole bunch of people immediately jump in to point how owning a car is immoral, how it destroys the environment, how it kills innocent children, how you should feel ashamed for owning one, etc. Maybe I've missed it before but with the recent spate of self-driving car stories it has become really stark how many people on HN have extremely narrow viewpoints.

phil21 9y ago
And I'd say your viewpoint is extremely narrow. The entire US is effectively "car culture" - and in my (and others) opinions, that car culture has effectively killed our society. Maybe permanently. You cannot have a functional society when the majority of productive people sequester themselves off from "the others" into little boxes set apart from each other, never interacting with anyone unless it's a planned social engagement. Typically that means extreme segregation - which we're seeing. The car - and the resulting car-based society (basically every single community/transportation project in the past 50+ years has been car-centric) - gives you the beginnings of the total social breakdown we are experiencing. That wouldn't be an entirely bad thing necessarily - it would mean people chose that. Unfortunately they didn't. Car culture (and the suburban culture it enabled) was subsidized by the rest of society practically from day one.
- King-Aaron 9y ago
  I don't think the activity of driving cars is as socially segregating as you feel it is. I have no metrics to base this on, of course. However your comment seems slightly hyperbolic to me.
  - phil21 9y ago
    > However your comment seems slightly hyperbolic to me. Perhaps, and I will say I have no hard data either so it's simply anecdote. However the older I get and the more I travel and witness other cultures - I continue to come back to this conclusion. After being a hardcore car+suburban lifestyle sort of guy in my youth. It takes a village to raise a child and also have a functional community, and the US has very few villages left. The village empties out during the day and is basically a wasteland of people who barely know each other. I don't think it's so much cars necessarily, it's the ability for people to self-segregate and pretend they are not part of a larger whole or part of an actual functional community. The ability to remove yourself from social situations you helped create (by simply existing), but want to ignore and shove off on other people. There are a few suburbs that are socially functional, but they are in the extreme minority in my experience. This laughable trope that a nuclear family is a self-sufficient unit has to die.

fullshark 9y ago

It's not a virtue signal so much as a status signal. Having enough money to afford to live in densely populated urban areas where you don't need a car to live is a status symbol.

rootusrootus 9y ago
Except that the people who are making the argument for living in the city without a car constantly cite costs as justification. And besides, isn't it the other way around? Unless you're living in one of a few extremely narrow areas of very specific cities, the really wealthy people live outside the urban core.
dashundchen 9y ago
That's definitely not true. I live in a city where a third of households are carless, believe me, with the neglected state of transit and pedestrian infrastructure, it's not a choice for most. I wouldn't hesitate to say that's the case in almost every American city outside NYC. But we should be talking about designing our society around more bikes, transit and walking. Transportation should be accessible to everyone - those too young for a license, too handicapped to walk or drive, those unable to afford a car. I think our health, environment, liviability and community would all be done a great service by demphasizing the single passenger car and it's accessories (sprawl, acres of parking, endless noise, pollution and isolated commutes)

smelendez 9y ago

> That being said, the ability to drive is nevertheless a useful skill and asset and at least in the United States, does not have a very high barrier to entry (for better or worse). Definitely a useful skill but I disagree there's a low barrier to entry if you are in a dense city. Driving school is expensive (I got my license about a decade ago in Boston, and it was probably over $1,000 in classes) and time consuming. Most people you know don't have cars, and even your friends who do are justifiably wary of letting you practice your new skill in their most valuable profession, something they own because they need it to get to work. I have seen many of my friends get their permits in cities like SF, NY and Boston and never get their licenses, or get their licenses and never feel comfortable driving solo, and these are not people who shy away from learning new skills in general.

megy 9y ago

> There is so much in the United States that a car gives you access to (most National Parks or wilderness in general are not accessible by public transport). They are accessible by tours, and friends, and cycling, and many other ways. You car people really seem to have a limited understanding of the real world, everything revolves around cars. You can't imagine doing something without a car.

joshuahughes 9y ago
> You car people Incredible as it may seem, there are people in the world who have life experiences and perspectives that differ from yours. Unsurprisingly, that results in them also having different opinions and making different choices. Clearly you feel that you've reached some kind of moral high ground, but there's no need to sneer at the rest of us from it.
- dang 9y ago
  Please don't respond to flamebait with flamewars. That's taking the bait. Instead, as the site guidelines ask, flag the comment (if you have > 30 karma) or email us at hn@ycombinator.com.
dang 9y ago
> You car people really Would you please not post flamebait to HN? It's against the guidelines and reliably wrecks discussion here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html