5 ms·

Its not been forced, driving is just more flexible and convenient and practical. This is especially true when get kids.

zip1234 7y ago
Especially when the full costs of it don't have to be paid right now. Most car dependent places in the US don't enough money to actually repair all of the roads and infrastructure that they have built out. Also, most places there is no option but to drive because of zoning practices effectively banning mixed use. Suburbs from the mid 20th century on are all designed for cars and cars alone. Giant consolidated schools are put far away instead of the traditional smaller schools closer to where people live so kids have to be driven by bus or by parents. It was not always this way but it has indeed been forced by a design choice in how suburbs are laid out.
bilekas 7y ago
I think the discussion is more focussing on is that 'flexibilty and convenience' from the car based on the fact we have designed and allocated our cities, suburbs and town in the way we have already.. Not so much, well this tool is right for the job, more a question of, did we make this job that requires a tool.
- bluGill 7y ago
  If you were the only person with a car, then all cities are more flexible and convenient with a car than without. It is only when somebody other than you has a car that you get gridlock and the other problems of cars.
- ThomPete 7y ago
  Even in Denmark where I am from originally and where they've gone to great lengths to improve public transportation it's not preferred. Denmark is a small country and the efforts are huge, yet even there people prefer the car. The issue is that you can't just build a solid infrastructure for everyone, it's impossibly expensive the further out you get.
astura 7y ago
All but the oldest of children lack the ability to drive themselves places. That's not flexible, convenient, or practical.
- ThomPete 7y ago
  That's not really how things work for many people. If you both have to go to work and pick up your kid at school or in kindergarden and go shopping or take them to practice etc. That's where the car is convenient. I can't send my kids with public transportation before they are 12 in NY. So yes it's ver flexible, convenient and practical with a car.
  - viklove 7y ago
    If the kindergarten is on a subway/bus stop, it's really not an issue. How do you think we can get more public transport near schools? Hint: fund public transit more than roads. Instead of driving your kid to school, you just take them with you on the subway/bus.
ezzzzz 7y ago
I guess it depends on where you live (hence the downvoting), but even in a place like NYC, I imagine managing small children on the subway would be pretty challenging.
- ThomPete 7y ago
  Yeah well I lived both in Denmark and now NY and all I can say is that a car greatly improved my life both places.
- sempron64 7y ago
  I live in Brooklyn in NYC and I purchased a car when we were expecting. It is impossible to take a baby on public transit to most places. Buses are not equipped for strollers. Train stations are crowded and inaccessible to strollers. It takes a lot of physical energy to move a child through public transit. Our family, friends, the doctor, babysitter, and schools are not all walking distance and not all at expensive real estate near the train. Having a vehicle is empowering for my family and most like it.
  - burfog 7y ago
    Although I'm all in favor of cars, taking just one baby on public transit isn't much different from going by yourself on public transit. The trick is a sling. Don't even buy a stroller. There are several types of slings for babies. You can use one with a padded pocket and strap, one with fancy parts, a big long strip of cloth, or even just a folded bed sheet with a knot behind your shoulder.
    - ThomPete 7y ago
      You can't do slings when the kids are older and you still need it if you are going to walk even if they can walk.

Especially when the full costs of it don't have to be paid right now. Most car dependent places in the US don't enough money to actually repair all of the roads and infrastructure that they have built out. Also, most places there is no option but to drive because of zoning practices effectively banning mixed use. Suburbs from the mid 20th century on are all designed for cars and cars alone. Giant consolidated schools are put far away instead of the traditional smaller schools closer to where people live so kids have to be driven by bus or by parents. It was not always this way but it has indeed been forced by a design choice in how suburbs are laid out.

bilekas 7y ago

I think the discussion is more focussing on is that 'flexibilty and convenience' from the car based on the fact we have designed and allocated our cities, suburbs and town in the way we have already.. Not so much, well this tool is right for the job, more a question of, did we make this job that requires a tool.

bluGill 7y ago
If you were the only person with a car, then all cities are more flexible and convenient with a car than without. It is only when somebody other than you has a car that you get gridlock and the other problems of cars.
ThomPete 7y ago
Even in Denmark where I am from originally and where they've gone to great lengths to improve public transportation it's not preferred. Denmark is a small country and the efforts are huge, yet even there people prefer the car. The issue is that you can't just build a solid infrastructure for everyone, it's impossibly expensive the further out you get.

astura 7y ago

All but the oldest of children lack the ability to drive themselves places. That's not flexible, convenient, or practical.

ThomPete 7y ago
That's not really how things work for many people. If you both have to go to work and pick up your kid at school or in kindergarden and go shopping or take them to practice etc. That's where the car is convenient. I can't send my kids with public transportation before they are 12 in NY. So yes it's ver flexible, convenient and practical with a car.
- viklove 7y ago
  If the kindergarten is on a subway/bus stop, it's really not an issue. How do you think we can get more public transport near schools? Hint: fund public transit more than roads. Instead of driving your kid to school, you just take them with you on the subway/bus.

ezzzzz 7y ago

I guess it depends on where you live (hence the downvoting), but even in a place like NYC, I imagine managing small children on the subway would be pretty challenging.

ThomPete 7y ago
Yeah well I lived both in Denmark and now NY and all I can say is that a car greatly improved my life both places.
sempron64 7y ago
I live in Brooklyn in NYC and I purchased a car when we were expecting. It is impossible to take a baby on public transit to most places. Buses are not equipped for strollers. Train stations are crowded and inaccessible to strollers. It takes a lot of physical energy to move a child through public transit. Our family, friends, the doctor, babysitter, and schools are not all walking distance and not all at expensive real estate near the train. Having a vehicle is empowering for my family and most like it.
- burfog 7y ago
  Although I'm all in favor of cars, taking just one baby on public transit isn't much different from going by yourself on public transit. The trick is a sling. Don't even buy a stroller. There are several types of slings for babies. You can use one with a padded pocket and strap, one with fancy parts, a big long strip of cloth, or even just a folded bed sheet with a knot behind your shoulder.
  - ThomPete 7y ago
    You can't do slings when the kids are older and you still need it if you are going to walk even if they can walk.