5 ms·

What everyone who has done this and does not have a car does. Why do people pretend there are situations they can't live without a car, when most people in the

What everyone who has done this and does not have a car does. Why do people pretend there are situations they can't live without a car, when most people in the world do it, and even a lot of people in your city do it.

afarrell 7y ago
I live without a car and prefer living without a car. I can easily do this because I’m an able bodied person in London. I’m a Software Engineer, so my wife can afford to take Uber and cabs to/from public transport in a pinch. The thing that I like about this particular change they implemented in manhattan is that it notably increases the bus-accessibility of the city. But if we’re widening the conversation to “just ban cars”, we really should look at what impact that would have on plumbers, drummers, and the elderly.
cagenut 7y ago
my theory is its rooted in this: https://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/13/science/when-the-brain-says-don-t-get-too-close.html https://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/13/science/when-the-brain-sa... people who spend an hour+ a day for years on end in their car have mentally expanded their subconscious definition of themselves, their corporal being, with the skin of the car. this is a necessary mental process to prevent them from clipping mailboxes and 'rubbing paint' with other drivers that they then can't really "turn off". its why road-rage reactions are on a par with being physically assaulted or threatened, and its why whenever we talk about shifting public space and roads from cars to anything else they feel personally threatened and attacked.
- ed312 7y ago
  That is an absolutely brilliant explanation of the "personal attack" feeling of road rage. After commuting by foot/subway/bike/scooter for a few years its shocking to see the reactions of my own (educated, professional) friends when someone dares to walk through a sidewalk! Don't even get them started about "those damn bikers".
  - specialist 7y ago
    u/cagenut's theory reminds me of Marshall McLuhan's potentially complementary "autoamputation" thesis. His attempt to example how a car (for example) feels like an extension of ourselves. IIRC: Overstimulation of some senses simultaneously shuts down those senses (autoamputation) and makes us hyper aware of other senses.
- MereInterest 7y ago
  There's an interesting related study which was looking for causes of road rage, and found a correlation with the number of bumper stickers [1]. The content of the bumper stickers didn't matter, just whether or not there were bumper stickers. The conclusion was in how people interpreted the space of a car. More bumper stickers indicated that somebody viewed the car and the space that it occupied as personal space, rather than as transportation, or as a way to use a shared resource. [1] https://www.nature.com/news/2008/080613/full/news.2008.889.html https://www.nature.com/news/2008/080613/full/news.2008.889.h...
maxsilver 7y ago
> Why do people pretend there are situations they can't live without a car, Because 95% of Americans truly can't live without a car. If you banned cars today, I could never get to work, never see my family, my child could never attend school, we could never get groceries, and within two weeks we would all become broke and homeless. This situation described 94% of the people in my city (population around 1 million) > even a lot of people in your city do it. Yep. ~3% of the population of my city take public bus transit instead of the public car transit everyone else uses. The bus folks spend 2+ more hours commuting every day, and have access to only about 15% of the MSA (by population), or 10% of the MSA (by land). They also pay higher rent than everyone else, for this privilege. And the cost to provide this service to them, has a TCO higher than just providing them a 'free' car in the first place. (And, to clarify, I don't even consider this a bad thing. I get it, for kids, or elderly folks, disabled people, people who just don't want a car or whatever. It's good that the general public makes sure everyone has transportation, and it's good to spend tax money to ensure this happens. But it is by no means more "efficient" or "greener" than driving is) -------- Could we "fix" this? Sure! If everyone was a super wealthy millionaire, like in Manhattan, it would be no problem. Build a whole bunch of luxury condo buildings, make everyone live in them, ban all existing public car transportation and make everyone take some LRT train/bus that only goes to the few places you allowed, is often late or broken or screwed up in some way (at the same rate that MTA is, for example). Soft-ban parenting and children while you are at it, everyone will be so busy paying off their rent they won't be able to afford kids anyway. Force everyone to re-wire their whole lives to live in your box. And we have that in my city too. About 3% of people here are wealthy enough that they can judiciously rewire their entire life to support "car-free" living. They are hyper wealthy, so they can afford to live in the heart of downtown, in a glass condo, living right on top of their satellite office, where they pretend "banning cars is so amazing and eco-friendly" as they pay to get their shopping delivered (by a poor person in a car), get their groceries delivered (by a poor person in a car), eat at restaurants (staffed by poor people driving in via cars), and drink at bars (staffed by poor people driving in via cars). ----- This is why most Americans are looking to renewable energy and EV vehicles. It's realistically the only shot non-wealthy Americans have at living any sort of sustainable lifestyle. The financial pollution from cities is just too much to handle, and has no functional workaround for real people.
jhayward 7y ago
You haven't answered the question, you've merely attacked the questioner.

afarrell 7y ago

I live without a car and prefer living without a car. I can easily do this because I’m an able bodied person in London. I’m a Software Engineer, so my wife can afford to take Uber and cabs to/from public transport in a pinch. The thing that I like about this particular change they implemented in manhattan is that it notably increases the bus-accessibility of the city. But if we’re widening the conversation to “just ban cars”, we really should look at what impact that would have on plumbers, drummers, and the elderly.

cagenut 7y ago

my theory is its rooted in this: https://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/13/science/when-the-brain-says-don-t-get-too-close.html https://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/13/science/when-the-brain-sa... people who spend an hour+ a day for years on end in their car have mentally expanded their subconscious definition of themselves, their corporal being, with the skin of the car. this is a necessary mental process to prevent them from clipping mailboxes and 'rubbing paint' with other drivers that they then can't really "turn off". its why road-rage reactions are on a par with being physically assaulted or threatened, and its why whenever we talk about shifting public space and roads from cars to anything else they feel personally threatened and attacked.

ed312 7y ago
That is an absolutely brilliant explanation of the "personal attack" feeling of road rage. After commuting by foot/subway/bike/scooter for a few years its shocking to see the reactions of my own (educated, professional) friends when someone dares to walk through a sidewalk! Don't even get them started about "those damn bikers".
- specialist 7y ago
  u/cagenut's theory reminds me of Marshall McLuhan's potentially complementary "autoamputation" thesis. His attempt to example how a car (for example) feels like an extension of ourselves. IIRC: Overstimulation of some senses simultaneously shuts down those senses (autoamputation) and makes us hyper aware of other senses.
MereInterest 7y ago
There's an interesting related study which was looking for causes of road rage, and found a correlation with the number of bumper stickers [1]. The content of the bumper stickers didn't matter, just whether or not there were bumper stickers. The conclusion was in how people interpreted the space of a car. More bumper stickers indicated that somebody viewed the car and the space that it occupied as personal space, rather than as transportation, or as a way to use a shared resource. [1] https://www.nature.com/news/2008/080613/full/news.2008.889.html https://www.nature.com/news/2008/080613/full/news.2008.889.h...

maxsilver 7y ago

> Why do people pretend there are situations they can't live without a car, Because 95% of Americans truly can't live without a car. If you banned cars today, I could never get to work, never see my family, my child could never attend school, we could never get groceries, and within two weeks we would all become broke and homeless. This situation described 94% of the people in my city (population around 1 million) > even a lot of people in your city do it. Yep. ~3% of the population of my city take public bus transit instead of the public car transit everyone else uses. The bus folks spend 2+ more hours commuting every day, and have access to only about 15% of the MSA (by population), or 10% of the MSA (by land). They also pay higher rent than everyone else, for this privilege. And the cost to provide this service to them, has a TCO higher than just providing them a 'free' car in the first place. (And, to clarify, I don't even consider this a bad thing. I get it, for kids, or elderly folks, disabled people, people who just don't want a car or whatever. It's good that the general public makes sure everyone has transportation, and it's good to spend tax money to ensure this happens. But it is by no means more "efficient" or "greener" than driving is) -------- Could we "fix" this? Sure! If everyone was a super wealthy millionaire, like in Manhattan, it would be no problem. Build a whole bunch of luxury condo buildings, make everyone live in them, ban all existing public car transportation and make everyone take some LRT train/bus that only goes to the few places you allowed, is often late or broken or screwed up in some way (at the same rate that MTA is, for example). Soft-ban parenting and children while you are at it, everyone will be so busy paying off their rent they won't be able to afford kids anyway. Force everyone to re-wire their whole lives to live in your box. And we have that in my city too. About 3% of people here are wealthy enough that they can judiciously rewire their entire life to support "car-free" living. They are hyper wealthy, so they can afford to live in the heart of downtown, in a glass condo, living right on top of their satellite office, where they pretend "banning cars is so amazing and eco-friendly" as they pay to get their shopping delivered (by a poor person in a car), get their groceries delivered (by a poor person in a car), eat at restaurants (staffed by poor people driving in via cars), and drink at bars (staffed by poor people driving in via cars). ----- This is why most Americans are looking to renewable energy and EV vehicles. It's realistically the only shot non-wealthy Americans have at living any sort of sustainable lifestyle. The financial pollution from cities is just too much to handle, and has no functional workaround for real people.

jhayward 7y ago

You haven't answered the question, you've merely attacked the questioner.