4 ms·

I understand that this might seem rational from an individual's perspective but to exclude your family from society in this way is a tragedy and does not seem l

by tmnvix 9y ago

I understand that this might seem rational from an individual's perspective but to exclude your family from society in this way is a tragedy and does not seem like any kind of solution to me.

yodon 9y ago
Moving out to the suburbs when you have kids is a tragedy? That’s some serious first world definition of tragedy.
- candiodari 9y ago
  I think they mean that blocking problems that would prevent the implementation of their favorite policy are the tragedies. Public transport does not work, and this is just one more reason why. Every few years the police feels the need to spend a month or two catching pickpockets (or worse) on public transport. Train stations in all the big cities are hotbeds of criminal activity. That is a major problem that is not, and probably won't ever be, solved. For me personally public transport fails in 3 massive ways: 1) public transport means I cannot do groceries, shopping for furniture, tvs or other big goods, move houses, ... so I still need a car, public transport or not. 2) governments just don't build out public transport. Even in places with "excellent" public transport, when I pass there (the Netherlands, for example), there are severe capacity problems that COULD have been solved, but aren't. In many places like London or New York, there aren't capacity problems, you're actually unlikely to NOT be delayed at some point. 3) it's not actually cheaper once you take into account that you have to bring 2 kids to school, then go to work. Taking the cost/inconvenience/risk of public transport doesn't even provide a monetary or time reward. This also means that using public transport for family trips is out : driving across Europe (e.g. Netherlands -> South of France) for a weekend or holiday ... train is a LOT more expensive than using a car. (That said, it can provide a big time advantage and I will use it in that case, but I still much prefer a car) Some reading on the subject: http://www.uwgb.edu/DutchS/PSEUDOSC/MassTransit.HTM http://www.uwgb.edu/DutchS/PSEUDOSC/MassTransit.HTM https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffmcmahon/2013/03/06/top-eight-reasons-people-give-up-on-public-transit/#2c059fe4fd84 https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffmcmahon/2013/03/06/top-eigh...
  - stuaxo 9y ago
    I don't recognise this version of public transport you talk about. I've never had a car and moved place many times, yes it means hiring a man with a van, but my things wouldn't fit in a car anyway. I haven't seen much crime in stations apart from fare dodging, yes there might be pickpockets, but probably not more than other places outside in London. You're pretty safe, there is good lighting and staffing and cameras everywhere.
    - ergothus 9y ago
      The public transport described seems very focused on American systems. Saying "public transport doesn't work" is far easier to defend if one only looks at America, where a number of elements (distance, jurisdictions, influence of car manufacturers, cultural perceptions, cultural priorities) are different than many other countries/regions.
  - TheCoelacanth 9y ago
    > shopping for furniture, tvs or other big goods Those things can be delivered. Often for free, almost always for less than it would cost to park a car in a city for a single month. > move houses You can't do that in a normal sized car. Are you suggesting that every person should own their own truck? Unless you are moving every month it makes more sense just to rent one.
  - RhysU 9y ago
    > Public transport does not work, and this is just one more reason why. For whom? Works surprisingly well for my family aside from the 23 going from Manhattan into Brooklyn on the weekends.
- tmnvix 9y ago
  No. I mean that abandoning the public domain is a tragedy.
mrep 9y ago
I agree that it is a tragedy and it is also a tragedy how much resources we devote towards computer/software security. There are tons of similar best practice inefficient solutions to society's problems in order to deal with the malicious actors because nobody has solved this problem and I doubt anyone ever will. Do you have an idea for how to stop people from acting maliciously? Considering how subjective that question is, I cannot think of one (for a democracy at least).
- true_religion 9y ago
  > Do you have an idea for how to stop people from acting maliciously? Yes,cultural homogeneity results in lower overall levels of malicious actors and free riders. However, in the USA the only way to get such homogeneity is to (a) wait a long time for communications and migration to turn soften differences or (b) create a culture out of whole cloth, and use propaganda to spread it to the young.
  - mrep 9y ago
    Oof, upvote because that might actually work but I feel like that is the type of idea that will get you damore'd [0] on the west cost. [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=16410740&goto=threads%3Fnext%3D16411266%26id%3Dmrep%2316410740 https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=16410740&goto=threads%...
    - dismantlethesun 9y ago
      I don't really support that solution however. I am the sort to allow for freedom at the cost of safety in most cases.
  - ulisesrmzroche 9y ago
    Lol
- tmnvix 9y ago
  Like with helicopter parenting, I think that by trying to avoid risk in this way you are giving up more than you are gaining - even though in isolation this might seem like the rational choice. If everyone took your approach we would end up as a sharply segregated society where the public domain becomes the preserve of 'malicious actors' and those without the ability to avoid it. That would be a classic dystopia. These places exist. Seattle should not be one of them. Better to stand your ground in the public domain despite the risks. Your presence will make it a better and safer place for everyone.

by tmnvix 9y ago

I understand that this might seem rational from an individual's perspective but to exclude your family from society in this way is a tragedy and does not seem like any kind of solution to me.

yodon 9y ago

Moving out to the suburbs when you have kids is a tragedy? That’s some serious first world definition of tragedy.

candiodari 9y ago
I think they mean that blocking problems that would prevent the implementation of their favorite policy are the tragedies. Public transport does not work, and this is just one more reason why. Every few years the police feels the need to spend a month or two catching pickpockets (or worse) on public transport. Train stations in all the big cities are hotbeds of criminal activity. That is a major problem that is not, and probably won't ever be, solved. For me personally public transport fails in 3 massive ways: 1) public transport means I cannot do groceries, shopping for furniture, tvs or other big goods, move houses, ... so I still need a car, public transport or not. 2) governments just don't build out public transport. Even in places with "excellent" public transport, when I pass there (the Netherlands, for example), there are severe capacity problems that COULD have been solved, but aren't. In many places like London or New York, there aren't capacity problems, you're actually unlikely to NOT be delayed at some point. 3) it's not actually cheaper once you take into account that you have to bring 2 kids to school, then go to work. Taking the cost/inconvenience/risk of public transport doesn't even provide a monetary or time reward. This also means that using public transport for family trips is out : driving across Europe (e.g. Netherlands -> South of France) for a weekend or holiday ... train is a LOT more expensive than using a car. (That said, it can provide a big time advantage and I will use it in that case, but I still much prefer a car) Some reading on the subject: http://www.uwgb.edu/DutchS/PSEUDOSC/MassTransit.HTM http://www.uwgb.edu/DutchS/PSEUDOSC/MassTransit.HTM https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffmcmahon/2013/03/06/top-eight-reasons-people-give-up-on-public-transit/#2c059fe4fd84 https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffmcmahon/2013/03/06/top-eigh...
- stuaxo 9y ago
  I don't recognise this version of public transport you talk about. I've never had a car and moved place many times, yes it means hiring a man with a van, but my things wouldn't fit in a car anyway. I haven't seen much crime in stations apart from fare dodging, yes there might be pickpockets, but probably not more than other places outside in London. You're pretty safe, there is good lighting and staffing and cameras everywhere.
  - ergothus 9y ago
    The public transport described seems very focused on American systems. Saying "public transport doesn't work" is far easier to defend if one only looks at America, where a number of elements (distance, jurisdictions, influence of car manufacturers, cultural perceptions, cultural priorities) are different than many other countries/regions.
- TheCoelacanth 9y ago
  > shopping for furniture, tvs or other big goods Those things can be delivered. Often for free, almost always for less than it would cost to park a car in a city for a single month. > move houses You can't do that in a normal sized car. Are you suggesting that every person should own their own truck? Unless you are moving every month it makes more sense just to rent one.
- RhysU 9y ago
  > Public transport does not work, and this is just one more reason why. For whom? Works surprisingly well for my family aside from the 23 going from Manhattan into Brooklyn on the weekends.
tmnvix 9y ago
No. I mean that abandoning the public domain is a tragedy.

mrep 9y ago

I agree that it is a tragedy and it is also a tragedy how much resources we devote towards computer/software security. There are tons of similar best practice inefficient solutions to society's problems in order to deal with the malicious actors because nobody has solved this problem and I doubt anyone ever will. Do you have an idea for how to stop people from acting maliciously? Considering how subjective that question is, I cannot think of one (for a democracy at least).

true_religion 9y ago
> Do you have an idea for how to stop people from acting maliciously? Yes,cultural homogeneity results in lower overall levels of malicious actors and free riders. However, in the USA the only way to get such homogeneity is to (a) wait a long time for communications and migration to turn soften differences or (b) create a culture out of whole cloth, and use propaganda to spread it to the young.
- mrep 9y ago
  Oof, upvote because that might actually work but I feel like that is the type of idea that will get you damore'd [0] on the west cost. [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=16410740&goto=threads%3Fnext%3D16411266%26id%3Dmrep%2316410740 https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=16410740&goto=threads%...
  - dismantlethesun 9y ago
    I don't really support that solution however. I am the sort to allow for freedom at the cost of safety in most cases.
- ulisesrmzroche 9y ago
  Lol
tmnvix 9y ago
Like with helicopter parenting, I think that by trying to avoid risk in this way you are giving up more than you are gaining - even though in isolation this might seem like the rational choice. If everyone took your approach we would end up as a sharply segregated society where the public domain becomes the preserve of 'malicious actors' and those without the ability to avoid it. That would be a classic dystopia. These places exist. Seattle should not be one of them. Better to stand your ground in the public domain despite the risks. Your presence will make it a better and safer place for everyone.