4 ms·

I don't think its a hatred of cars. Its just cars are so entrenched in western cultures that its easy to overlook all the problems. All those things you cited

I don't think its a hatred of cars. Its just cars are so entrenched in western cultures that its easy to overlook all the problems. All those things you cited are all exacerbated by the car. Electric cars will solve the pollution issue, but they are still cars, with all the issues they bring.

lazyjones 8y ago
> I don't think its a hatred of cars. Its just cars are so entrenched in western cultures that its easy to overlook all the problems. They are entrenched for a reason: because they are extremely useful. Without cars and the individual transport methods they superseded, many of our cities wouldn't even exist. What this and many other articles do, is to decide first what the problem should be and then build a case around it to show it in a bad light. That's not how you improve life in cities, it's just how you get rid of cars and with them all the benefits you've overlooked. Proof: you can get all the benefits of cars without the drawbacks by putting all the infrastructure for cars underground and using EV. None of these "visionaries" consider that, because they hate cars.
- benj111 8y ago
  I don't think there are any cities that wouldn't exist without cars, the shape of cities would change yes, but that is one of the problems of cars. Cars are useful yes, doesn't mean we shouldn't question them. Just like we should question trains, bikes etc. Re putting cars underground. Yes you could, are you going to support the taxes to pay for it? "What this and many other articles do, is to decide first what the problem should be and then build a case around it to show it in a bad light." Why don't you decide on the merits of the argument rather than perceived motivation?
LoSboccacc 8y ago
those utopia still haven't solve some basic problems: if one looks for work accessible to his housing without cars and relying only to transit, he'll be disadvantaged on the marked compared to one with a car that can choose his working environment freely. "but one can just relocate near the new job!" - yes, if you are a single income family, otherwise the partner has to change job too (and even then changing school to children mid year isn't optimal) and the dual applies: want to grow your family? you cannot switch home freely, you're limited to pick those on some transit to both the couple existing jobs.
- benj111 8y ago
  I didn't mention utopia. I did say "Its just cars are so entrenched in western cultures that its easy to overlook all the problems" Eg in a society dominated by cars, there are going to be people without cars that can't easily get to work. You didn't have that problem pre car, and no one complains about not being able to get to work easily because they don't have a helicopter. Cars create sprawl, and create a situation where you need a car.
  - lazyjones 8y ago
    > in a society dominated by cars, there are going to be people without cars that can't easily get to work. You didn't have that problem pre car, "pre car" people would walk or ride horses/bicycles for hours to work. You can still do that now, or go faster by bus. > Cars create sprawl, Growing cities create sprawl. Necessary infrastructure for large cities (yes, you need fire trucks, garbage trucks, buses) as well as parking space for convenient door-to-door transport slightly increases it.
    - benj111 8y ago
      You'll find that commuting time has stayed fairly stable, we just travel further now. Poor policies and the car create sprawl, not growth. Visit a city that developed pre car, no sprawl. New York was designed with massively wide streets, space for all the things you cite and didn't suffer from sprawl. "parking space for convenient door-to-door transport slightly increases it." Slightly? I can't think of any shop with dedicated parking where the shop is bigger than the car park. Then think of all the houses with a driveway that you pass on the way to work. Each drive is an extra 8ft of frontage, that's an extra 8ft road to be built, and that you need to drive back and forth every day, and that's just the ones you can see.
      - azeotropic 8y ago
        I find the assertion that NYC didn't sprawl somewhat odd. Weren't all the city's parks on the frontier of the city when Olmstead laid them out? (and, in the process, invented the "parking space") "Slightly? I can't think of any shop with dedicated parking where the shop is bigger than the car park." WalMart? Home Depot? Kroger? IKEA? I can show google maps if desired, but that's definitely not uncommon in the U.S. That extra 8ft of frontage is also extra backyard, which many people enjoy. I don't think people choose to live so far apart because they have cars, they live so far apart because they want to, and the car makes it possible. I suspect many would love to live even further apart if they could.
Kaiyou 8y ago
Even with all their problems, they are still the best and often only solution. They move on your schedule, they stop on your schedule, they make it easy to move more stuff than you can otherwise carry from your house to wherever you want to move it. And their cheaper than public transport, too.
- benj111 8y ago
  Agreed. You can make other options less bad in this regard though. And do things to reduce the problems. You assertion on public transport costs is heavily dependent on unstated assumptions though.

lazyjones 8y ago

> I don't think its a hatred of cars. Its just cars are so entrenched in western cultures that its easy to overlook all the problems. They are entrenched for a reason: because they are extremely useful. Without cars and the individual transport methods they superseded, many of our cities wouldn't even exist. What this and many other articles do, is to decide first what the problem should be and then build a case around it to show it in a bad light. That's not how you improve life in cities, it's just how you get rid of cars and with them all the benefits you've overlooked. Proof: you can get all the benefits of cars without the drawbacks by putting all the infrastructure for cars underground and using EV. None of these "visionaries" consider that, because they hate cars.

benj111 8y ago
I don't think there are any cities that wouldn't exist without cars, the shape of cities would change yes, but that is one of the problems of cars. Cars are useful yes, doesn't mean we shouldn't question them. Just like we should question trains, bikes etc. Re putting cars underground. Yes you could, are you going to support the taxes to pay for it? "What this and many other articles do, is to decide first what the problem should be and then build a case around it to show it in a bad light." Why don't you decide on the merits of the argument rather than perceived motivation?

LoSboccacc 8y ago

those utopia still haven't solve some basic problems: if one looks for work accessible to his housing without cars and relying only to transit, he'll be disadvantaged on the marked compared to one with a car that can choose his working environment freely. "but one can just relocate near the new job!" - yes, if you are a single income family, otherwise the partner has to change job too (and even then changing school to children mid year isn't optimal) and the dual applies: want to grow your family? you cannot switch home freely, you're limited to pick those on some transit to both the couple existing jobs.

benj111 8y ago
I didn't mention utopia. I did say "Its just cars are so entrenched in western cultures that its easy to overlook all the problems" Eg in a society dominated by cars, there are going to be people without cars that can't easily get to work. You didn't have that problem pre car, and no one complains about not being able to get to work easily because they don't have a helicopter. Cars create sprawl, and create a situation where you need a car.
- lazyjones 8y ago
  > in a society dominated by cars, there are going to be people without cars that can't easily get to work. You didn't have that problem pre car, "pre car" people would walk or ride horses/bicycles for hours to work. You can still do that now, or go faster by bus. > Cars create sprawl, Growing cities create sprawl. Necessary infrastructure for large cities (yes, you need fire trucks, garbage trucks, buses) as well as parking space for convenient door-to-door transport slightly increases it.
  - benj111 8y ago
    You'll find that commuting time has stayed fairly stable, we just travel further now. Poor policies and the car create sprawl, not growth. Visit a city that developed pre car, no sprawl. New York was designed with massively wide streets, space for all the things you cite and didn't suffer from sprawl. "parking space for convenient door-to-door transport slightly increases it." Slightly? I can't think of any shop with dedicated parking where the shop is bigger than the car park. Then think of all the houses with a driveway that you pass on the way to work. Each drive is an extra 8ft of frontage, that's an extra 8ft road to be built, and that you need to drive back and forth every day, and that's just the ones you can see.
    - azeotropic 8y ago
      I find the assertion that NYC didn't sprawl somewhat odd. Weren't all the city's parks on the frontier of the city when Olmstead laid them out? (and, in the process, invented the "parking space") "Slightly? I can't think of any shop with dedicated parking where the shop is bigger than the car park." WalMart? Home Depot? Kroger? IKEA? I can show google maps if desired, but that's definitely not uncommon in the U.S. That extra 8ft of frontage is also extra backyard, which many people enjoy. I don't think people choose to live so far apart because they have cars, they live so far apart because they want to, and the car makes it possible. I suspect many would love to live even further apart if they could.

Kaiyou 8y ago

Even with all their problems, they are still the best and often only solution. They move on your schedule, they stop on your schedule, they make it easy to move more stuff than you can otherwise carry from your house to wherever you want to move it. And their cheaper than public transport, too.

benj111 8y ago
Agreed. You can make other options less bad in this regard though. And do things to reduce the problems. You assertion on public transport costs is heavily dependent on unstated assumptions though.