25 ms·
So much of what is toxic about cars and car culture could be fixed by downsizing and slowing them. Primarily, less injuries and deaths - but also lower overall
by kennywinker 6y ago
So much of what is toxic about cars and car culture could be fixed by downsizing and slowing them. Primarily, less injuries and deaths - but also lower overall energy consumption and less pedestrian and cyclist hostility. I wish north america would fully get on board with these small EVs
- grp000 6y agoAmerica has the fundamental problem of large size, little EV infrastructure and poor public transit outside metro areas.
- Google234 6y agoI don’t want to drive slower so I will vote against this.
- stouset 6y agoI don’t want to pay taxes for schools since I don’t have children. But I’m an adult capable of understanding that what I personally want isn’t necessarily what’s best for society at large, so I suck it up and do it anyway without complaining.
- gameswithgo 6y agoMore than just what is best for society at large, paying to educate the kids you don't have, in the long run, makes the world better for you too.
- Google234 6y agoI wonder what percentage of people would vote for the OPs idea in the US. 10%? Maybe 15% :)
- stouset 6y agoPerhaps one of the biggest problems with this country right now is that people are too damn selfish, and vote “in their own best interest” to the detriment of not only everyone else but—ironically—to the detriment of themselves as well.
- Ericson2314 6y agoMost "selfish Americans" people would be more "wounded animal" selfish than "position of power" selfish. That's a big difference.
- noobermin 6y agohuh?
- Ericson2314 6y agoOne consequence is that we're in a low trust <-> bad social safety net feedback loop, rather than an innate consequence of a fixed "American disposition". Jam one thing like through like Healthcare or Federal Rerserve accounts for all, and the feedback loop might find a markedly different equilibrium.
- throwaway0a5e 6y agoOn an issue that boils down to social consensus such as how much selfishness is reasonable or what the speed limits should be it's impossible for the overwhelming majority of people to be wrong since they form the consensus.
- teclordphrack2 6y agoSlavery?
- kennywinker 6y agoop here! I definitely do believe that regulation is the path forward to shrinking and slowing cars. But that's not actually what I suggested. I just want the ability to PURCHASE one of these in north america - and for them to catch on
- R0b0t1 6y agoYou can buy similar things already, just not EV.
- kennywinker 6y agoEV part is pretty critical, since I'm trying to avoid fossil fuels whenever possible - but what are my options? A fiat 500 starts at $16,500, smartcars were not much less, and are no longer sold in the usa anyway.
- noobermin 6y agoYou actually can't anymore. Car sellers have stopped selling them to Americans because they make more profit out of SUVs.
- giancarlostoro 6y agoCar salesman will sell you anything just to get some of that commission. Not everyone wants to drive an SUV. You make it sound like people will only buy what a car salesman wants them to buy, if that were so we would all be driving luxury cars and severely in debt. Maybe the majority just prefer SUVs instead. There is a lot more comfort in larger cars. I personally prefer an SUV to a mini van which turns funny in my experience.
- stale2002 6y agoMaybe out in the countryside, the votes would be on your side, but that is not that big of a deal, because the issues of cars are not as bad there. But in the city, there are many more people who may not even have a car, or be bothered by reduced speedlimits. In these cities, we can outvote you. Speed limits, and the like, are controlled locally.
- Swenrekcah 6y agoIndeed, and I would even say that I want to pay my taxes if I know most of it goes to societally useful activities even though I may not utilize all of them now, or some even ever.
- Koshkin 6y agoHistorically taxes were (and theoretically still should be) collected to finance the government (and, during a war, the military) and not for the redistribution of wealth. Socialism is a different theory, of course...
- rsynnott 6y agoThe concept of free schooling emerged before socialism, and would not generally be thought of as socialist (or redistributive) by most people.
- ben_w 6y agoReally? If I remember correctly it was mentioned in The Communist Manifesto.
- rsynnott 6y agoNoted Communist Thomas Jefferson proposed it rather before the Communist Manifesto was written (not that he came up with the idea, of course), and some US states and various other places started introducing it from the early 19th century on. Just because Marx was in favour of something doesn’t necessarily make it inherently socialist.
- teclordphrack2 6y agoBut something can be socialist even if it came about before the idea of socialism was put forth. Remote villages have lived in communistic systems but have no idea about the concept of communism.
- rsynnott 6y agoAre you using ‘socialism’ to mean ‘doing anything for the common good’? I mean, free education seems completely orthogonal to socialism as normally defined.
- sfblah 6y ago... but you literally are on here complaining.
- valuearb 6y agoIf society deems it’s better off with out free speech, can we ride our straw horses together?
- giancarlostoro 6y agoSo long as its only the speech of those I disagree with thats banned then sure. ;)
- rootusrootus 6y ago> what’s best for society at large The idea that simply slowing cars down is best for society at large is a big claim. It might help in some ways, but it will hurt in others.
- noobermin 6y agoIt doesn't help society for everyone to travel at 90mph. Faster speeds are deadlier full stop, denial of this sort of thing is as asinine as climate denial or creationism, it's an already established fact accepted by anyone who studies traffic statistics.
- rwmj 6y agoUnfortunately the relationship between speed and energy is unintuitive (square rather than linear). Increasing speed from 60mph to 70mph doesn't sound like much but it increases energy by over a third. In an unachievable ideal world instead of a speedometer and speed limits we would have an "energy meter" and energy limits, which would also take into account the mass of your car.
- pclmulqdq 6y agoHigher speeds mean less time wasted in cars, so presumably more time to work
- mint2 6y agoNot that simple. Higher speeds mean commutes over longer distance are feasible. People simply move further out for cheaper bigger houses and drive further.
- rootusrootus 6y agoYou are only considering safety and discounting everything else. The capacity of the road network is absolutely related to speed. Slowing down transportation across the board amounts to slowing the economy, which has it's own health impacts. It's not obvious what the ideal balance is. For certain, 1 fatality about every 100 million miles driven is pretty low, especially compared to the sheer amount of utility we get from all of these cars.
- aeternum 6y agoA motorcycle is a good option then. You reduce the risk to others.
- Google234 6y agoIt also increases risk for me.
- Koshkin 6y agoI love motorcycles. But they are noisy and, frankly, dangerous. (Motor scooters, in comparison, are almost ideal, low-speed, tiny, urban vehicles.)
- sudosysgen 6y agoWell, there is such a thing as a silent motorcycle. Also, ebikes are awesome alternatives to motor scooters. I've built one for a very low price not too long ago, it was very fun.
- kevin_thibedeau 6y agoModern motorcycles have to deal with increasingly stringent european noise regs. Many manufacturers have been discontinuing models to avoid the bother of updating them for compliance. They are all dramatically quiet in stock configuration. The loud ones are modified by their owners or one of the relatively few old machines on the road. All cars were loud and belching unburned hydrocarbons 40 years ago. Comparing motorcycles to modern cars is missing the gains in street life impact that have actually been made.
- tgsovlerkhgsel 6y ago> The loud ones are modified by their owners I really wish the standard penalty for that would be "you lose your motorcycle license for 5+ years and the motorcycle is crushed into a cube before your eyes". Not "here's a 100 EUR fine and you have to undo the modifications, show us that you did it, and then put them back on". It's completely unnecessary, hard to do accidentally, and a great way for one single person to affect thousands of others in a single day.
- kennywinker 6y agoHow badly do you want it? There are 30,000 deaths per year from cars in the USA, and many many more injuries. It's not clear what the relationship between that number and the speed/size of cars is, but I'd be willing to bet we could cut that number in half by reducing cars to a max speed of 40mph. Is your desire to drive fast worth 15,000 lives every year? Over your lifetime that could be a million lives saved.
- tgsovlerkhgsel 6y agoEuropean here. My desire to be able to get to places is definitely strong enough to accept the risks inherent in it. Slithering around at 40 mph means almost doubling many trip lengths. That's a lot of lifetimes unnecessarily spent on roads.
- iso947 6y agoDoing 130kph or even 150 on a motorway is fine. Those are safe roads. Dropping urban speed limits to 25kph makes sense. It might make short trips a few minutes longer, but long trips shorter.
- noobermin 6y agoSorry but that requires a big citations needed flag. And don't say "because 40 mph is half of 80 mph" because I submit you aren't travelling for 80mph long enough throughout the trip to justify it unless you go across statelines everyday.
- SteveGerencser 6y agoMy desire to drive fast (my sweet spot is 78mph on the highway) is based solely on how far I have to drive when I do drive. I travel off of the farm less than once a week. But when I do leave the farm I can easily put 150 miles on the truck getting everything done that needs doing. And the bulk of that is on the freeway, once I get to it. Or travelling to see my sick mother once a month (1200+ mile round trip) or my daughter as often as possible (1600+ mile round trip). Add to that I am on the large side of the equation at over 6'3" tall and near 300 pounds, and getting my v8 powered truck (20+ mpg) away from me will be a challenge.
- ColanR 6y agoIt sounds like you speak for the half of the population that lives near and in metro areas. I think if you were used to the scale of the less-populated areas, where a 'short' drive is 30 minutes, you might realize that what you hope for is laughably out of touch with about half of the US.
- thatfrenchguy 6y agoHa the typical "but think of the country side". 80% of americans live in a urban area.
- toomuchtodo 6y agoAutomakers will still market to where the dollars are: people who buy cars (17 million/year in the US, 60 million/year globally). Outside of NYC, Chicago, and SF, there’s very little mass transit to speak of, even in urban areas. Texas and Florida have significant population centers where car ownership is required, and that’s where folks are moving to.
- Ericson2314 6y agoNothing but their own egos requires monster vehicles. It's not like Dallas and Orlando are full of unpaved roads.
- toomuchtodo 6y agoTrue! But they’re spending the dollars, so their preference is what will be built for (see: Ford’s vehicle lineup, all trucks and SUVs). And if you attempt to regulate against them, you’ll get voted out (just like NIMBYs).
- kennywinker 6y agoThere are a lot of personal preferences we regulate away. I prefer to drive drunk home from the bar, but that's illegal. I prefer to build buildings without obeying fire safety building codes, but apparently that's also illegal. 30k / year die in car accidents in the USA. This is a real problem with a huge human toll, akin to drunk driving or building codes. Step 1 is slow the vehicles down. As soon as they slow down, one of the main drivers of size - fear of an accident with a bigger vehicle - will be greatly decreased and we can do step 2: shrink them.
- Waterluvian 6y agoThis makes me wonder what it’s like being a small car European family with three young kids trying to do something with their weekend. I wanted to dismiss this saying how my suv is packed for a day at the beach. But surely they do stuff too.
- rsynnott 6y agoA normal hatchback will accommodate two adults and three kids. Also, of course, few families actually _have_ three kids: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Household_composition_statistics https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php... Larger cars, SUVs and people carriers do exist in Europe, but the average family won't need one. And you can take kids on the bus/train.
- Waterluvian 6y agoI want to see three car seats in a hatchback.
- pwinnski 6y agoNow you're talking about three kids within a very short window of time, which is even less common. But... my own youngest and oldest are almost exactly three years apart, so I can tell you that even a Toyota Camry was incapable of handling three American-standard carseats side-by-side. However, in countries with lower speed limits, less bulky carseats are required to keep kids safe even in the unusual case of three closely-spaced kids.
- baybal2 6y agoEgo: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Od2baRZA-YY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Od2baRZA-YY
- spullara 6y agoMost accidents are at low speed, especially when you are talking about hitting pedestrians and cyclists. Your suggestion is non-sensical.
- ben_w 6y agoMost harm occurs with high-speed collisions. I was hit while cycling, by a car which pulled out of a minor junction as I was turning into it. As it was an extremely low speed collision, there was no real harm to me, although the (cheap) bike was not worth repairing. The worst I can say about my injury was not having any memory between being in contact with the bonnet at 45 degrees while thinking “oh no”, and finding myself horizontal looking up to a bunch of strangers insisting I didn’t get up. I didn’t even have any grazing. If a pedestrian is struck by a car at 40 mph, there is an 85% chance of death. This percentage drops to 45% at 30 mph and 5% at 20 mph. - https://mdot.ms.gov/safetyeducation/parents/facts-and-stats/ https://mdot.ms.gov/safetyeducation/parents/facts-and-stats/ I was probably hit at 5-10 mph.
- spullara 6y agoSo if you slow the cars down to 40 mph you are still probably dead. Pedestrian / cyclists don't get hit where cars are actually going fast.
- ben_w 6y agoPedestrians were 16% in of US RTA fatalities in 2017: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_...
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- zozin 6y agoWhat if I have a large family? What if I need to crate my large dog in the car? What if I want to go to Costco and buy a bunch of groceries and supplies and bring them home? What if I like visiting national parks and the speed limit en route is in excess of 70MPH?
- srtjstjsj 6y agoDelivery service, rental car, and a few cases actually need all the space.
- ben_w 6y agoCars which the American market describes as “superminis” can fit five people, and if have more family than that then sure nothing shops stop you buying a bigger car, but most people don’t. Shopping can go in the passenger section if you really are bulk-buying too much for just the boot. 70 MPH is the upper limit, not the lower limit, but even if it was a lower limit I believe the suggestion is to lower the limit. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opel_Corsa https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opel_Corsa
- valuearb 6y agoMy state has 75 MPH speed limits, which effectively allows 85 MPH in real use. I’ve driven my family tens of thousands of miles across the American West, and seen posted limits as high as 85 MPH. Nothing like seeing a police car pass you by without a second glance while you are doing 92 MPH in the right lane.
- ben_w 6y agoThe police (and everyone else) ignoring the rules does not change the fact that you would save a lot of money on fuel if you obeyed the speed limit, nor the fact that you could be fined for speeding. I’ve never understood the drive to go so fast. I knew a guy in the UK who, when I asked him why he was doing 98 mph (speed limit was 70, we were one of two cars going to a stag do, the other car was obeying the speed limit and therefore arrived 25 minutes later), gave me the answer of “If I was going faster and was caught, I would have to waste time going to court to prove I wasn’t driving dangerously” rather than slowing down. (He got a lot of speeding tickets and penalty points before this; penalty points are a UK road law thing, get enough and you lose you licence).
- andrepd 6y agoMore specifically, slowing them in zones where they share space with pedestrians (and bicycles). You can go 150kph in highway and its still safe (as safe as 120). But in a city, speed limits of 30 would slash pedestrian and cyclist fatalities. Accidents, when they happen, would be mostly nonfatal.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- rtpg 6y agoIt’s untrue that highways are “just as safe at 150”. There are a couple studies looking at the results of various states upping the speed limit on highways. The conclusion is the intuitive one: more accidents and more likelihood of fatalities.
- rasz 6y agoIs that a car problem or people problem tho? Compare those statistics to Germany Autobahns. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_limits_in_Germany#Accident_statistics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_limits_in_Germany#Accide... Maybe joke driver licenses, no vehicle inspections and joke technical requirements are to blame? You can get a license after self declaring doing the "course" with your dad and taking 10 minute round around School parking lot, and them go ahead and legally register LS engine strapped to a shopping cart. Mah freeeedums etc.
- Igelau 6y agoMaybe in your state it's that easy. Not in this one.
- rasz 6y agoAre there state border crossings doing additional inspections I am unaware of? Just to make a more concrete example, washing out salvage title in Oklahoma comes down to showing up at the DMV and getting a stamp. >Change of classification. Vehicles over 10 model years old may go in to, or come out of, salvage at any time. _No inspection is required to bring such vehicles out of salvage_. >Out-of-state salvage titles. Vehicles over 10 model years old entering Oklahoma with an out-of-state salvage title may receive either a salvage title or standard (green) title with a salvage date listed. For comparison in Germany you can lose registration title for mounting non TÜV certified spoiler/bumper/hood.
- mempko 6y agoWe need public transport more than anything. Much better pollution wise and much greener.
- twblalock 6y agoPublic transit is unusable during pandemics, and natural disasters. I like trains more than most people do, but I'm really glad I also own a car, and I'm not going to get back on a train, or any other form of public transit, until the pandemic is over.
- ralph84 6y agoYet China already has these small EVs, and their traffic-related death numbers are abysmal compared to North America. Yes, even when adjusted for population.
- emmelaich 6y agoWith the advent of self-driving, you could keep the speed or even raise it.
- kennywinker 6y agoIt's still unclear to me that self-driving cars will EVER arrive, much less if they'll arrive in the next 10 years. There are a lot of today's problems that will no longer be problems if some future technology arrives - but that doesn't mean we should stop trying to fix today's problems.
- veilrap 6y agoI don't know, I see self-driving cars being tested on roads all the time, and they generally seem like they're making a lot of progress every year.
- zaroth 6y agoSo much of what is beautiful about cars is the ability to choose one that fits your needs, desires, and lifestyle. Whether you are commuting 40 miles each way to work, hauling large loads for work everyday, bringing your ATV to the trail, or your trash to the dump. Being able to hit the road in your own private vehicle is a great joy of life, and an essential liberty in America. So much so it’s quintessential of the “American Dream”. Some people look at these things, and then decide they personally don’t like them, and only see a massive opportunity to regulate or tax them out of existence. Or they see the negative first order effects (e.g. traffic fatalities or pollution) and don’t consider both the first order benefits, nor the second-order costs of eliminating the thing itself. I doubt I’ll convince anyone, but at least here is my alternative thinking on this. It is extremely important to reduce traffic fatalities, and reduce pollution per mile. Likewise it is also extremely important to allow people to choose their preferred modes and means of transportation. It is merely a lack of creativity to pit these two goals against each other. We are on the cusp of a clean energy and clean vehicle revolution, as well as what will arguably be one of the greatest technological accomplishments of humanity; a self driving car. Dreams of regulating away SUVs or the right of private car ownership are over. Preferences will not be shaped by excessive gasoline taxes much longer. And passenger vehicles will only continue to become safer and cleaner from here on out. Ultimately the war against private passenger transport will be lost to the Robotaxi. The marginal cost per mile will be lower than public transit, so they will be left to compete on point-to-point speed, safety, and convenience. And by safety I mostly am referring to safe from crime and safe from viruses, not collisions which will be exceedingly rare. Some cities might have a public transport system that can compete, but most will not.
- tshaddox 6y agoAnother way of looking at it is that no matter how beautifully you describe American car culture or how much you romanticize it, it has immense externalities. The externalities don’t depend on how much people enjoy using cars however they please.
- kennywinker 6y ago> It is merely a lack of creativity to pit these two goals against each other. Exactly. Lightweight, low-speed electric vehicles still allow you to hit the open road, haul a load of trash to the dump, or commute in from the burbs. There is nothing about that freedom that is dependent on being able to go from 0-60 in a specific time, or having a specific top speed.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- hourislate 6y ago>So much of what is toxic about cars and car culture could be fixed by downsizing and slowing them I could see myself, my wife, two kids and the mother inlaw in something that small going to Costco. Yeah, that would be awesome....
- tjr225 6y agoWhy do you want, let alone need, to do that? Is shopping with your entire family really that fun? Anyway, even if it is, I don’t see why the whole world should suffer so you can get your rocks off at Costco with your nuclear family. For the record; I have a family. I don’t go shopping with them. That sounds like a waste of energy.
- hourislate 6y agoI go to help my wife (I enjoy looking around). We take my mother inlaw because she has macular degeneration and can't see that well to drive. The kids like to come for a slice of pizza or a hotdog and we enjoy being with them. I'm sorry that offends you.
- zaroth 6y agoNo one should be offended because you enjoy different things in life than they do. Perhaps if they somehow first convince themselves that the “whole world is suffering” because someone has a vehicle which can fit their nuclear family in it, and second convince themselves that condescending you on a message forum is an appropriate way to somehow lessen that behavior... But no, that comment is just out of order. I saw an interesting article today “Joe Rogan World vs NPR World” [1] which describes our current political environment, and it seems to me this type of interaction is emblematic of it. [1] - https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/joe-rogan-world-npr-world-one-country-two-nations/ https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/joe-rogan-wor...
- Thlom 6y agoSad that your mother in law can't go to Costco on her own because she can't drive anymore.
- chii 6y ago> toxic about cars and car culture what you don't realize is that it's not about the car.
- austincheney 6y agoThat line of thinking sounds incredibly beneficial to the tiny percentage of population that lives in urban areas not dependent upon freeways or long commutes. At any rate the US has already tried this with a national maximum speed limit of 55 and it was incredibly unpopular like prohibition.
- kennywinker 6y agoInstead of setting the speed limit, we could regulate the speed of cars off the production line. It's a lot more fun to drive a slow vehicle fast, than a fast vehicle slow.
- austincheney 6y agoIf people deliberately wanted a golf cart they would deliberately buy a golf cart.
- TeeMassive 6y agoI get it that you don't get outside of big cities often nor did you ever drive in snow. Laughs in Canadian.
- konjin 6y agoA really good take on cars I saw years ago is that they have two modes. One is high speed death machine which needs to be isolated from humans - e.g. the average highway. The other is a mechanical horse that you can out run if you try - e.g. how a forklift is normally used. The problem is where those two modes meet, e.g. anywhere where people and cars share the road and cars move faster than 30km/h, which is unfortunately every city in the last 80 years.
- Mupuff 6y agoI do wonder whether there should be laws limiting acceleration as there are speed limits.
- beezle 6y agoIf people here wanted to drive tiny cars they would. The only time there has been any interest is during oil shocks. Nobody enjoys or desires to drive a Yaris if they can avoid it
- Robotbeat 6y agoSo I wonder how true it is that smaller cars would have better efficiency. “Smart” electric cars get about 3.3 miles per kWh compared to about 4 miles per kWh for the Tesla Model 3. The gas versions also aren’t terribly efficient versus efficient gas cars. And that’s ignoring the lower passenger count, which will tend to lower the occupancy rate on average. I’m also unsure if they’re that much lighter once you make them safe in crashes. I’m not sure they’re better for pedestrians, either. You save parking space, which is nice, but at the expense of a lot of utility and without any benefit of efficiency that I can tell. Slowing them might help, but that directly impacts their utility. The utility of cars is making housing cheaper (by expanding the distance one can live from one’s job or school) and by expanding someone’s job opportunities both by expanding the area they can cover on a reasonable commute time but also as a resource for the job itself, ie as a courier or ride share driver or pizza delivery or just to haul stuff around for one’s own small business. And it’s also a sort of safety net in the case of housing insecurity in the US. Many homeless don’t sleep literally on the street but sleep in their cars. Also, flexibility in family size or ability to share the car with household members in a carpool if only one vehicle is available. You can save at least 20% on groceries by being able to buy in bulk and not have to buy at a nearby convenience store or order food delivered (and, the delivery person’s livelihood is enabled by their vehicle). Also, while flying has become cheaper in the last few decades (if traveling alone, not needing a car at your destination, planning months ahead of time, and traveling long distance), driving still allows optionality and greater flexibility for long distance travel and is cheaper with more than one occupant (Or if you need transport at the destination) plus allows vastly more cargo. If you need to evacuate or go to a nearby city for whatever reason, a regular sized and speed car gives you that flexibility. Cars offer a lot of agency to an individual. If you live in an area that isn’t so dense that parking is always a hassle, it’s an easy net win for almost everyone. I love the idea of more pedestrian and bike friendliness, but we shouldn’t underestimate the vast value and agency And flexibility that a car provides. I can, at any time of the day or night, travel to another state without checking anyone’s schedule and without breaking the bank. I can bring as much stuff as I’d need. If I can’t find a place to stay, I can just sleep in the vehicle. Even if there’s a terrorist attack, a strike, or a global pandemic. Rain or shine, cold or heat wave. I don’t have to be particularly fit or able (either than being sighted), either. The agency that even a really cheap car (a couple thousand used) gives almost anyone in the US is vast. Chinese cities may be much denser than in the US, limiting parking options, so I can see how smaller cars might be better there than here, but other than that, I don’t see why someone would voluntarily buy a much smaller & slower car.
- MrBuddyCasino 6y agoSUVs don’t belong in cities, but this thing? Live in a pod, eat insects, drive the Hongguang MINI EV.
- tibbydudeza 6y agoUS gas prices is still very cheap though ... like the 70's oil crisis people only changed over to those smaller Honda's and Toyota's when they felt it in their pockets.
- notatoad 6y agoi think it's pretty telling that this comment seems to have gotten the same reaction as any comment suggesting people commute by biking, walking, public transit, or any other method beyond personal vehicle. most of the objections people have to giving up their car (my suburb was designed for cars...) would be perfectly solved by something like this. but the rabid defense of cars is out in force anyways.
- zeroimpl 6y agoThere are many situations where a car is infinitely more practical, such as when you need to transport goods (eg shopping). Before I had a car, I once bought a dumbbell set. Had to carry it 5 minutes to the bus stop. Box fell apart on the way. Bus driver wasn’t particularly patient with me needing multiple trips to get all pieces into and out of bus either. Since I own a car and pay insurance, why would I bother with other forms of transit when they are slower and bring their own set of problems?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- AniseAbyss 6y agoYou ignore human nature. The car is the extension of the penis. People want it big and shiny. Sure it was the US that invented SUVs and pickup trucks but they were embraced just as much in European towns as in rural Kentucky.
- peter303 6y agoMany compact cars were discontinued in the US in 2020 due to low sales- Toyota Yaries, Honda FIT, Chevy Sonic. sUVs and trucks account for 78% of new sales. Especialy with gasoline testing $2.00 a gallon.
- FooBarBizBazz 6y agoYes! Speeding things up just causes distances to increase and facilities to centralize. Game-theoretically, each individual does save time, but soon everyone has a car and the equilibrium shifts. It's like two income households, college degrees, or access to machine guns: Great when only you have it, bad when everyone does. Or like commute times: It doesn't matter where you are or what the distances are; people are willing to commute about 40 minutes. Increase speeds and they just move further out. The centralization brought by high speeds then destroys Main Street and shifts power to big box stores. Yes, the overall economy does get "more efficient", but in a way that the gains are captured by the Walton family. If infrastructure were changed to make higher speeds more difficult -- if we could blow up the damned highways -- then the equilibrium would shift again, and, within a few years, people would be spending no more time going back and forth to the grocery store, because smaller local stores, bodegas, would have popped up. If you go to "developing" countries you see more of this. There are villages and little shops. The roads are dirt, and you travel by moped/scooter at low speed. Sometimes cows wander on the road. The whole economy and transportation network fits together. And it's totally fine. This is closer to how we should live in America. Yes, outright poverty is bad -- you need food to eat. But once you reach the "middle income" bracket? Once you have a moped, a (not "smart") cellphone, two molded plastic chairs, a pair of flip flops, and a t-shirt? At that point, so long as the weather is warm, you're basically fine. You can't live like that in America. But if we all did, then (in many of our climates) you could. Now, you don't need to turn the US into Cuba to accomplish this. There are ritzy high end places that have made this trade too. There are a few suburbs built with networks of low speed paths, where everyone just drives golf carts (except to go outside the community). There are retirement communities in Florida that are basically Disney World. There are resort-town beach islands where cars are banned. People love these places. Something like 60% (remembered stat) of Americans now live in places administered by an HoA or condo association. We're turning into a weird feudal sprawl of gated communities. Which sucks. But it may also offer an opportunity: Those communities, being more self-contained, might be able to experiment more. And the experiment they should do is to look to the pre-industrial past, and the lower-income present. Money, cars, highways, McMansions, Whole Foods, corporations, "leaning in" -- they are a curse. They rob you of your happiness and of your grandchildren. Build villages. Grow food. Keep shops. Have families. Find better gods to worship. A civilization, a culture, a built environment -- they all fit together. They need to be conducive to life.