3 ms·

I am one of those young, childless egoists and would argue, that most people do not need to own a car in cities. Renting from time to time when I actually need

I am one of those young, childless egoists and would argue, that most people do not need to own a car in cities. Renting from time to time when I actually need one works great for me. There are edge-cases and people living 40km away from their children, who are too young to use public transport, might be one of them. I am not saying it should not be allowed to own a car. There will always be edge cases, but if we optimize our rules a bit, many of the great reasons to own a car might go away. Often it is the other way round and people commute into the city to their workplace. I think we can quite easily work towards fixing this one. I do have an argument, though: Your CO2 footprint is unsustainably big, even with an EV car, and your children have to face the consequences. Climate aside, it is also ironic, that young children are the ones benefitting the most from carless environments, which is kind of the reason why young families often move out the the suburbs.

lazyjones 6y ago
> but if we optimize our rules a bit, many of the great reasons to own a car might go away. The reasons are mostly unaffected by your adjusted "rules" (read: prohibitions). It won't get any less convenient and time-saving because you make it more expensive. You can never replace my saved time with anything worthwhile. Especially when I don't believe in the "greater good", whatever it is for you today (apparently the CO2 footprint). > Your CO2 footprint is unsustainably big, even with an EV car, and your children have to face the consequences. No, it's not. And first and foremost I am responsible for spending as much time as possible with my children and to keep them safe. Sorry if it feels inconvenient and scary for you, but it's not a priority for me. > it is also ironic, that young children are the ones benefitting the most from carless environments, which is kind of the reason why young families often move out the the suburbs. Perhaps you don't know much about young families. Most leave to the suburbs because there are too many people in the cities (= high cost of living and housing). And you know what's essential in the suburbs? Yes, cars.
- allendoerfer 6y ago
  > Especially when I don't believe in the "greater good", whatever it is for you today (apparently the CO2 footprint). Ah, there it is. I get, why you are asking "for whom?" all the time. Talking about the planet here, based on scientific facts. If you don't believe in them, it's hard to argue. > I am responsible for spending as much time as possible with my children But leaving a better world behind for your children is not something you are responsible for? Since you are calling me all kind of things, I will start doing the same: I personally think, you have constructed yourself a reality where you are doing the right thing. From somebody citing a big word like responsibility, I would expect also thinking about the world he is leaving behind for his children. But it works for you this way, so you are doing it this way. That's okay, you are human. I do the same in a different area of life. I just want you to be taxed for it (or lets start with not being subsidized for it), so less people do it in that way. It is not my problem, that you are living 40km away from your children. If you wanted to use a rocket or a tank to drive to them, you could not do that either. I am btw. not saying that your lifestyle is the worst and I can also see that this is something that happened somehow and you did not plan it like this. It might be something that will always stay there. I just think it is not optimal. I think commuting to work by car (which many, many people are doing) is a way worse problem and also easier to improve.
  - lazyjones 6y ago
    > Talking about the planet here, based on scientific facts. If you don't believe in them, it's hard to argue. There are no "scientific facts" that prove cars in cities are "dumb". I get it that it's popular right now to scream something about science and then add some wild conjecture. By the way, "science" is not infallible. Still waiting for the islands to sink that people have been screaming about for almost 40 years now. > But leaving a better world behind for your children is not something you are responsible for? I believe I am doing that. > I just want you to be taxed for it (or lets start with not being subsidized for it), so less people do it in that way. That is fine with me! I am wealthy enough that it would not matter, it'll actually be better for me if cars are taxed heavily - less traffic, easier parking. > It is not my problem, that you are living 40km away from your children. If you wanted to use a rocket or a tank to drive to them, you could not do that either. Fine, but it is my problem and I have a smart solution that for some reason people with a totally different situation are calling "dumb" because they are ideologically opposed to it. ;-) > I think commuting to work by car (which many, many people are doing) is a way worse problem and also easier to improve. And by "improve" of course you mean "obstruct". When did we arrive at this mess where making things worse for people is somehow the preferred solution to finding something that is better for everyone?

lazyjones 6y ago

> but if we optimize our rules a bit, many of the great reasons to own a car might go away. The reasons are mostly unaffected by your adjusted "rules" (read: prohibitions). It won't get any less convenient and time-saving because you make it more expensive. You can never replace my saved time with anything worthwhile. Especially when I don't believe in the "greater good", whatever it is for you today (apparently the CO2 footprint). > Your CO2 footprint is unsustainably big, even with an EV car, and your children have to face the consequences. No, it's not. And first and foremost I am responsible for spending as much time as possible with my children and to keep them safe. Sorry if it feels inconvenient and scary for you, but it's not a priority for me. > it is also ironic, that young children are the ones benefitting the most from carless environments, which is kind of the reason why young families often move out the the suburbs. Perhaps you don't know much about young families. Most leave to the suburbs because there are too many people in the cities (= high cost of living and housing). And you know what's essential in the suburbs? Yes, cars.

allendoerfer 6y ago
> Especially when I don't believe in the "greater good", whatever it is for you today (apparently the CO2 footprint). Ah, there it is. I get, why you are asking "for whom?" all the time. Talking about the planet here, based on scientific facts. If you don't believe in them, it's hard to argue. > I am responsible for spending as much time as possible with my children But leaving a better world behind for your children is not something you are responsible for? Since you are calling me all kind of things, I will start doing the same: I personally think, you have constructed yourself a reality where you are doing the right thing. From somebody citing a big word like responsibility, I would expect also thinking about the world he is leaving behind for his children. But it works for you this way, so you are doing it this way. That's okay, you are human. I do the same in a different area of life. I just want you to be taxed for it (or lets start with not being subsidized for it), so less people do it in that way. It is not my problem, that you are living 40km away from your children. If you wanted to use a rocket or a tank to drive to them, you could not do that either. I am btw. not saying that your lifestyle is the worst and I can also see that this is something that happened somehow and you did not plan it like this. It might be something that will always stay there. I just think it is not optimal. I think commuting to work by car (which many, many people are doing) is a way worse problem and also easier to improve.
- lazyjones 6y ago
  > Talking about the planet here, based on scientific facts. If you don't believe in them, it's hard to argue. There are no "scientific facts" that prove cars in cities are "dumb". I get it that it's popular right now to scream something about science and then add some wild conjecture. By the way, "science" is not infallible. Still waiting for the islands to sink that people have been screaming about for almost 40 years now. > But leaving a better world behind for your children is not something you are responsible for? I believe I am doing that. > I just want you to be taxed for it (or lets start with not being subsidized for it), so less people do it in that way. That is fine with me! I am wealthy enough that it would not matter, it'll actually be better for me if cars are taxed heavily - less traffic, easier parking. > It is not my problem, that you are living 40km away from your children. If you wanted to use a rocket or a tank to drive to them, you could not do that either. Fine, but it is my problem and I have a smart solution that for some reason people with a totally different situation are calling "dumb" because they are ideologically opposed to it. ;-) > I think commuting to work by car (which many, many people are doing) is a way worse problem and also easier to improve. And by "improve" of course you mean "obstruct". When did we arrive at this mess where making things worse for people is somehow the preferred solution to finding something that is better for everyone?