3 ms·
Seems like an inability to store private vehicles for free on public property would reduce cars and traffic.
by pkulak 7y ago
Seems like an inability to store private vehicles for free on public property would reduce cars and traffic.
- C1sc0cat 7y agoNo did you not see the TG special where they tried to drive through a big African city. And do you think the fact that in third world countries there is a market for poop bags you carry in the car to shit into - might support my position.
- BubRoss 7y agoHow would getting rid of street parking mean third world traffic jams where people have to go to the bathroom in their cars? Are you 100% sure that street parking is the only difference between these two situations?
- vonmoltke 7y agoStreet parking doesn't need to be free.
- PunksATawnyFill 7y agoIt does for people who already live there and don't have parking on their property.
- Spivak 7y agoIt’s not ‘free’ it’s paid for by property taxes. Just because in certain areas it’s not worth it to actually enforce permits doesn’t mean the city won’t at the request of the homeowners or businesses.
- timerol 7y agoFree here means free at point of use. I pay property taxes and don't own a car. You pay property taxes and do park a car. We both pay the same toward parking, therefore it makes sense to say parking is free.
- jayd16 7y agoWithout alternatives it will simply reduce commerce in that area which, sure, will reduce traffic. When these suggestions are made HN seems to forget people still need to live the time between when this pain is enforced and if/when a solution arises.
- PunksATawnyFill 7y agoSo you're going to go back in time and create parking where none was built?