4 ms·

This is a more polarizing opinion, but as someone who doesn't own a car I firmly support removing private cars from many cities altogether. Make anyone who want

by arijun 6y ago

This is a more polarizing opinion, but as someone who doesn't own a car I firmly support removing private cars from many cities altogether. Make anyone who wants to come in or out park outside the city and take public transport/bikes within the city. There are so many benefits including: - Greatly reduced air and noise polution - Much more pedestrian friendly, walkable streets - Put the enormous amount of land reserved for parking in these expensive areas to better use - Fewer pedestrian deaths If you look at experiments like Barcelona, these types of changes usually result in resounding success.

rimliu 6y ago
Do you have kids? Have fun moving them around without a car.
- adrianN 6y ago
  Me and my sister were raised without much trouble despite not having a car. The trick is living a city that is not built for cars with humans as an afterthought.
- DoingIsLearning 6y ago
  I think this is absolutely dependent on the transport network you have available in your residence area. I have lived in cities where I _needed_ a car to do anything or wait for hourly buses + walking several miles. I've been living in a city where I just use public transport (with a baby + wife) and I have only rented a car twice in 3 years, once to do a house move and another time to visit friends in a remote countryside location. Demand more from local governments or move to a location that provides adequate transport as a service.
- dasil003 6y ago
  I lived in London when my daughter was aged 2-6 without a car and without a stroller and never thought twice.
  - stx 6y ago
    Its almost easier to get around large urban cities on foot then with a car. My strategy anytime I am in a large city is drop the car even if its not near my final destination.
eloff 6y ago
It might sound silly, but one of the main reasons I live in Vancouver is because I don't need a car. I enjoy walking or cycling everywhere. I'm healthier and happier. I don't ever sit in traffic, circle for parking, run out of money on the meter, get a ticket, pay $3000/year for insurance, have to take the car to the mechanic, or get pissed of at the moron who dinged my car with his door. I haven't had a car in 4 years now, and I'm loving it. Cities could be built for people first, a concept familiar in Europe but mostly alien in North America.
jstanley 6y ago
Both your comment and the one you're replying to are perfect examples of people advocating for the banning of things that they don't want to do, which I always find unconvincing. It's easy to advocate to ban a thing if you don't do the thing! You see all the negatives of other people doing it without receiving any of the positives of doing it yourself. You find it easy to ban because you would not be personally affected. Personally, as someone who doesn't own a pet, it would be easy for me to firmly support the banning of all pets from many cities on the basis that they poo in public and attack people. That would be easy to support not because it's the right thing to do (which it might be!), but because I don't own a pet.
- Theodores 6y ago
  It takes effort to not own a car. Not owning a dog requires no effort.
  - ourlordcaffeine 6y ago
    >It takes effort to not own a car Much less true in some European cities though. I don't have a car and I can't say it's taken effort to not have.
- globular-toast 6y ago
  I own car. It's a "hot hatch" so I pay a premium and consume more fuel for better performance. I drive right into towns. It's very convenient. But I strongly advocate banning cars from town centres and reducing the number of cars on the road in general. This should be done by making taxes proportional to actual road use (that is hours on the road and size and weight of vehicle, with discounts for people with greater needs, like disabled people). I see the benefits. I get it. But I'm prepared to sacrifice it all because it's completely unsustainable. But I'm not going to do it alone. We all have to do it.
- LordFast 6y ago
  "If everyone just live like I do the world will be perfect! What's your problem!?"
Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago
I can get behind movements like this. But, if it takes longer on public transit to get from a to b, even if it's an unusual, unpopular, or unprofitable route then I'll fight tooth and nail. I spent many years riding transit 6 days a week 90-120 minutes each way, sometimes 4 ways for work and school on terrible routes, on dirty, foul smelling, cramped transit filled with the forsaken and forgotten souls of my city. These 90-120m transit rides take a mere 5-15 minutes by car. Cycling and walking are even less practical in my area. In buying a vehicle I've spent more money, but saved something like 700 hours a year. I've also been able to enjoy my areas attractions, and amenities more. If you're going to get my support on a ballot initiative then you'll need to preserve those time savings and save me money. Fast, cheap mass transit is possible, but the large auto makers won't let it happen unless it's over their rotting corpses. Touting the benefits won't sway the opinions of people whose livelihood depends on them not understanding the wastefulness of car culture. We're talking about fast, safe, clean, cheap, sustainable, and rugged mass transit on a scale and timeline that our entire world has never come close to accomplishing. Entire cities would have to be remapped. We're talking tens of millions of skilled to highly skilled trades jobs backed by battalions of desk jockeys greasing the cogs at what would inevitably cost in the trillions. So, while I respect your opinion, it's not one based in reality. There's a lot of political and economic baggage to unwind before such massive projects that threaten so many massive balance sheets could ever gain major political support. National recreational drug legalization, regulation, and commercialisation is far more likely.

by arijun 6y ago

rimliu 6y ago

Do you have kids? Have fun moving them around without a car.

adrianN 6y ago
Me and my sister were raised without much trouble despite not having a car. The trick is living a city that is not built for cars with humans as an afterthought.
DoingIsLearning 6y ago
I think this is absolutely dependent on the transport network you have available in your residence area. I have lived in cities where I _needed_ a car to do anything or wait for hourly buses + walking several miles. I've been living in a city where I just use public transport (with a baby + wife) and I have only rented a car twice in 3 years, once to do a house move and another time to visit friends in a remote countryside location. Demand more from local governments or move to a location that provides adequate transport as a service.
dasil003 6y ago
I lived in London when my daughter was aged 2-6 without a car and without a stroller and never thought twice.
- stx 6y ago
  Its almost easier to get around large urban cities on foot then with a car. My strategy anytime I am in a large city is drop the car even if its not near my final destination.

eloff 6y ago

It might sound silly, but one of the main reasons I live in Vancouver is because I don't need a car. I enjoy walking or cycling everywhere. I'm healthier and happier. I don't ever sit in traffic, circle for parking, run out of money on the meter, get a ticket, pay $3000/year for insurance, have to take the car to the mechanic, or get pissed of at the moron who dinged my car with his door. I haven't had a car in 4 years now, and I'm loving it. Cities could be built for people first, a concept familiar in Europe but mostly alien in North America.

jstanley 6y ago

Both your comment and the one you're replying to are perfect examples of people advocating for the banning of things that they don't want to do, which I always find unconvincing. It's easy to advocate to ban a thing if you don't do the thing! You see all the negatives of other people doing it without receiving any of the positives of doing it yourself. You find it easy to ban because you would not be personally affected. Personally, as someone who doesn't own a pet, it would be easy for me to firmly support the banning of all pets from many cities on the basis that they poo in public and attack people. That would be easy to support not because it's the right thing to do (which it might be!), but because I don't own a pet.

Theodores 6y ago
It takes effort to not own a car. Not owning a dog requires no effort.
- ourlordcaffeine 6y ago
  >It takes effort to not own a car Much less true in some European cities though. I don't have a car and I can't say it's taken effort to not have.
globular-toast 6y ago
I own car. It's a "hot hatch" so I pay a premium and consume more fuel for better performance. I drive right into towns. It's very convenient. But I strongly advocate banning cars from town centres and reducing the number of cars on the road in general. This should be done by making taxes proportional to actual road use (that is hours on the road and size and weight of vehicle, with discounts for people with greater needs, like disabled people). I see the benefits. I get it. But I'm prepared to sacrifice it all because it's completely unsustainable. But I'm not going to do it alone. We all have to do it.
LordFast 6y ago
"If everyone just live like I do the world will be perfect! What's your problem!?"

Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago

I can get behind movements like this. But, if it takes longer on public transit to get from a to b, even if it's an unusual, unpopular, or unprofitable route then I'll fight tooth and nail. I spent many years riding transit 6 days a week 90-120 minutes each way, sometimes 4 ways for work and school on terrible routes, on dirty, foul smelling, cramped transit filled with the forsaken and forgotten souls of my city. These 90-120m transit rides take a mere 5-15 minutes by car. Cycling and walking are even less practical in my area. In buying a vehicle I've spent more money, but saved something like 700 hours a year. I've also been able to enjoy my areas attractions, and amenities more. If you're going to get my support on a ballot initiative then you'll need to preserve those time savings and save me money. Fast, cheap mass transit is possible, but the large auto makers won't let it happen unless it's over their rotting corpses. Touting the benefits won't sway the opinions of people whose livelihood depends on them not understanding the wastefulness of car culture. We're talking about fast, safe, clean, cheap, sustainable, and rugged mass transit on a scale and timeline that our entire world has never come close to accomplishing. Entire cities would have to be remapped. We're talking tens of millions of skilled to highly skilled trades jobs backed by battalions of desk jockeys greasing the cogs at what would inevitably cost in the trillions. So, while I respect your opinion, it's not one based in reality. There's a lot of political and economic baggage to unwind before such massive projects that threaten so many massive balance sheets could ever gain major political support. National recreational drug legalization, regulation, and commercialisation is far more likely.