3 ms·

> that treats cars as one viable option among several Their writings hardly treat cars as one viable option as the majority of their writing is specifically ag

> that treats cars as one viable option among several Their writings hardly treat cars as one viable option as the majority of their writing is specifically against cars. How often do they criticize bicycles? Yet cars are criticized every chance they get. It isn’t about agreeing about cars or not, but to suggest they treat cars as just another “viable” option is to admit not having spent much time reading their writings. When have they ever proposed improving anything relating to cars? Their idea of an improvement is elimination. With the Wuhan virus, having good car infrastructure sounds pretty good right now. Yes, public transport, for sure, but the idea of ending cars is ridiculous — and CityLab promotes exactly that, albeit in couched terms. But ending cars completely would make them very happy.

TulliusCicero 7y ago
They're an American site, of course they want to reduce the use of cars, cars have been hideously overpromoted in the US, resulting in insane costs for the user, crazy high costs for the government, horrible health impacts, high fatality rates, tons of unnecessary pollution, etc. In most parts of the country, the car is literally the only viable way to make most trips. That's how much they've dominated every aspect of our transportation system. Taking the 'position' that such a monoculture is bad, is about as political as asserting that lack of racial or gender diversity in workplaces is bad. Do you feel bothered by sites that don't argue the other side too, that we should keep homogeneous workplaces around? Does it count as a pro-diversity 'bias' when they don't do that? > the idea of ending cars is ridiculous So wait, did you accuse me of not reading them because you haven't read them yourself? You see, they've never actually promoted this, and yet here you are, asserting that they have. Reducing the use of cars in favor of other, less harmful modes sure, and car bans in some select areas, yeah. You can't walk on the freeway usually either. It's the height of absurdity to equivocate that with a total ban, anymore than saying that people who don't want me biking on the interstate don't want me biking anywhere ever.
thethethethe 7y ago
> Their writings hardly treat cars as one viable option as the majority of their writing is specifically against cars. How often do they criticize bicycles? Yet cars are criticized every chance they get. Maybe this is the case because cars have far more negative externalities than other forms of transit. Like, can you even think of a legitimate thesis for an article about the negative externalities of a bike friendly community? > When have they ever proposed improving anything relating to cars? I find this ironic because many things they promote, such as improving transit and bike infrastructure, will actually make driving easier and more pleasant because there will be fewer cars in the road to create traffic
lotsofpulp 7y ago
You can’t optimize for both public transit and personal cars. It’s one or the other, otherwise everyone will opt for personal cars. Also, personal cars consume so much public resource such as land that it doesn’t leave any room for anything else.
icebraining 7y ago
> having good car infrastructure sounds pretty good right now Right now everyone who can should be at home, so the streets shouldn't need particularly good infrastructure to handle the rest.

TulliusCicero 7y ago

They're an American site, of course they want to reduce the use of cars, cars have been hideously overpromoted in the US, resulting in insane costs for the user, crazy high costs for the government, horrible health impacts, high fatality rates, tons of unnecessary pollution, etc. In most parts of the country, the car is literally the only viable way to make most trips. That's how much they've dominated every aspect of our transportation system. Taking the 'position' that such a monoculture is bad, is about as political as asserting that lack of racial or gender diversity in workplaces is bad. Do you feel bothered by sites that don't argue the other side too, that we should keep homogeneous workplaces around? Does it count as a pro-diversity 'bias' when they don't do that? > the idea of ending cars is ridiculous So wait, did you accuse me of not reading them because you haven't read them yourself? You see, they've never actually promoted this, and yet here you are, asserting that they have. Reducing the use of cars in favor of other, less harmful modes sure, and car bans in some select areas, yeah. You can't walk on the freeway usually either. It's the height of absurdity to equivocate that with a total ban, anymore than saying that people who don't want me biking on the interstate don't want me biking anywhere ever.

thethethethe 7y ago

> Their writings hardly treat cars as one viable option as the majority of their writing is specifically against cars. How often do they criticize bicycles? Yet cars are criticized every chance they get. Maybe this is the case because cars have far more negative externalities than other forms of transit. Like, can you even think of a legitimate thesis for an article about the negative externalities of a bike friendly community? > When have they ever proposed improving anything relating to cars? I find this ironic because many things they promote, such as improving transit and bike infrastructure, will actually make driving easier and more pleasant because there will be fewer cars in the road to create traffic

lotsofpulp 7y ago

You can’t optimize for both public transit and personal cars. It’s one or the other, otherwise everyone will opt for personal cars. Also, personal cars consume so much public resource such as land that it doesn’t leave any room for anything else.

icebraining 7y ago

> having good car infrastructure sounds pretty good right now Right now everyone who can should be at home, so the streets shouldn't need particularly good infrastructure to handle the rest.