3 ms·

>Yet people still find use in horses in rural parts of the country. that's why the title says "as rare as owning horses" Many people will own cars, but not ne

by chr1 8y ago

>Yet people still find use in horses in rural parts of the country. that's why the title says "as rare as owning horses" Many people will own cars, but not nearly as many as now.

moate 8y ago
>>Many people will own cars, but not nearly as many as now. This is a meaningless prediction without context or specificity provided by the author. The author is saying that cars will be owned by .6% of the population (current horse ownership is aprox 2 million) in her lifetime. "Many" but "less than now" could mean that we go 263.6 to 240 and meet your criteria wall falling miles short of what this insane article is positing. No. As countless responses have pointed out, the amount of infrastructural challenges for non-urban hubs is staggering. We already have buses and cabs, and we even have "smart" buses and cabs with APPS and there still isn't a way that you can expect rural Alabama or Suburban Wisconsin to be able to deal with this non-car type existence.
- apendleton 8y ago
  This is getting pointless quibble-y, but they said "not nearly as many as now" not "less than now." 263.6 is nearly as many as 240 by any sensible definition; I took them to be suggesting a significant decrease for some common-sense definition of "significant."
ehnto 8y ago
My point was that it isn't quaint, it's practical and useful. A unique tool for a unique requirement of our modern society. Calling it quaint is showing how out of touch the author is. Don't get me wrong. I hope she is right. I hope cars go away. But I just don't see how they could for rural citizens. Maybe part of her prediction requires that people move closer to the cities. A real possibility.
- aidenn0 8y ago
  A lot of horse ownership is quaint. Just given the fact that 2/3 of the population of the US lives on 1/30th of the land area, the tiny fraction of the urban and dense-suburban population that quaintly own horses will dwarf the rural population that owns working horses.

by chr1 8y ago

>Yet people still find use in horses in rural parts of the country. that's why the title says "as rare as owning horses" Many people will own cars, but not nearly as many as now.

moate 8y ago

>>Many people will own cars, but not nearly as many as now. This is a meaningless prediction without context or specificity provided by the author. The author is saying that cars will be owned by .6% of the population (current horse ownership is aprox 2 million) in her lifetime. "Many" but "less than now" could mean that we go 263.6 to 240 and meet your criteria wall falling miles short of what this insane article is positing. No. As countless responses have pointed out, the amount of infrastructural challenges for non-urban hubs is staggering. We already have buses and cabs, and we even have "smart" buses and cabs with APPS and there still isn't a way that you can expect rural Alabama or Suburban Wisconsin to be able to deal with this non-car type existence.

apendleton 8y ago
This is getting pointless quibble-y, but they said "not nearly as many as now" not "less than now." 263.6 is nearly as many as 240 by any sensible definition; I took them to be suggesting a significant decrease for some common-sense definition of "significant."

ehnto 8y ago

My point was that it isn't quaint, it's practical and useful. A unique tool for a unique requirement of our modern society. Calling it quaint is showing how out of touch the author is. Don't get me wrong. I hope she is right. I hope cars go away. But I just don't see how they could for rural citizens. Maybe part of her prediction requires that people move closer to the cities. A real possibility.

aidenn0 8y ago
A lot of horse ownership is quaint. Just given the fact that 2/3 of the population of the US lives on 1/30th of the land area, the tiny fraction of the urban and dense-suburban population that quaintly own horses will dwarf the rural population that owns working horses.