3 ms·
I agree. Cars are a solution to a (set of) problem. Remove the problem(s), remove the cars. Cars, also, not really that big of a problem in themselves. Comm
by linuxftw 8y ago
I agree. Cars are a solution to a (set of) problem. Remove the problem(s), remove the cars.
Cars, also, not really that big of a problem in themselves. Commuting is the problem. This is a symptom of depressed wages; people are willing to spend extra time (commute) in place of extra money (rent).
- bluGill 8y agoPeople are willing to spend time on the car commute because zoning won't allow you a good job to exist within walking distance of a house. Shopping isn't allowed within walking distance of either of the above either. We are back to square one: zoning won't allow anything other than car oriented lifestyles. It is a self reinforcing vicious cycle. You can break it anywhere. I recommend started with breaking zoning because it is least painful. If you eliminate cars people who currently depend on cars will be in trouble since they cannot live their life. Eliminate the need far cars is a much slower thing that won't have any noticeable affect for 20 years, but it is a much less painful transition.
- linuxftw 8y agoI think the system will eventually collapse under it's own weight. When enough people have 'had enough.' First step is to eliminate eminent domain. More infrastructure only begets more people using said infrastructure. When the many can't take from the few, they might actually have to give up some of their luxuries to have what they want (eg, a place to work).