4 ms·

I don't disagree with you - and I've traveled Europe and agree there is a lot of car use. My challenge is "replace ICE with EV" doesn't solve the problem. The p

I don't disagree with you - and I've traveled Europe and agree there is a lot of car use. My challenge is "replace ICE with EV" doesn't solve the problem. The problem is that we have to rely on cars at all, fuel source doesn't matter. And we continue to perpetuate that reliance by continuing to build in car-first ways. You're definitely right, nothing will change overnight, but I don't think anything will change at all even with EVs. When Elon Musk talks about self-driving taxis. I lose sleep. It's a nightmare scenario where everybody just lives in a box, gets an automatic box on wheels to come pick them up and then take them to other boxes and then all they do is interact on the Internet. Oh, and we still have to maintain all of these vehicles, the road infrastructure, etc. and we continue to destroy natural habitats so we can spread out instead of just living a little bit closer (you can still have a yard) and designing for people instead of cars.

EdwinLarkin 6y ago
Car == freedom. I can literally get up in the middle of the night and be at my parents house in 30 minutes. With public transport I could barely make it in 3 hours.
- ericmay 6y ago
  Unfortunately I just can't get empathize much with this viewpoint. I mean it's fine if you want to own a car, but to the extent it means that we have to suck the planet dry of resources and live increasingly isolated lives to support car infrastructure - I just can't get on board with that. My tax dollars are being wasted over it.
  - EdwinLarkin 6y ago
    Your viewpoint is ideological.If you believe in preserving planet earth then what you want is rationing resources. And that inevitably leads to communism. I believe saving the earth is impossible with that kind of strategy.There's 3BN of people that will want the same kind of living standards like the rich west and you dont have any right nor influence on what they will do. It's very similar to what we have done during this pandemic with lockdowns.It just did not work and prolonged the inevitable.
    - ericmay 6y ago
      Ok that's fine, but then I may as well use as much resources as possible because fuck it? Let's build lots of unsustainable suburbs - I mean literally unsustainable as in we won't be able to pave the roads or repair bridges and then when that happens we'll just build some more and keep doing that over and over and to what end? I'm anti-communism because command economies suck. I'm capital C Capitalist. But what we're discussing here isn't an economic system, it's a public policy system. The government builds the roads, and creates the building standards, and creates zoning laws, and all of that. The military industrial complex (among other things) helps secure cheap oil to fuel this lifestyle - that costs money. This shit isn't cheap and that's not even taking into account the actual raw materials and resources. It's absurd that we've intentionally built societies around "one person gets in this 2,000 pound machine and uses it to drive a mile down the road" - you could just build cities better and walk. Hell you can do this and keep your car for these inconsequential use cases. The problem is you're defending the enforcement of car use. That's stupid. Sorry. The other 3bn people won't get to have the same living standards. The planet isn't big enough. We'll trend toward a median over time instead which will certainly lead to a quality of life change for the west. The question is do you want to be driving a car and paying $15/gallon for gas or would you rather spend $15/lb for a high-quality tuna steak from a local store you can walk to? I don't view cars as necessary for people to live. There's no reason to design an entire society such that they are necessary, except of course government subsidies to the construction industry (jobs program) and the automobile industry. You complain about communism yet are happy with the government subsidizing unnecessary jobs and construction projects, propping up industries that would otherwise die, and using tools like minimum parking requirements and building new roads to do it. You can call that ideological as if it's some sort of insult or bad thing. Doesn't really matter much. If I'm ideological and have a vision for how things could be, you're ideological and can't see past how things are today.
      - EdwinLarkin 6y ago
        I understand your viewpoint but you dont understand mine.And you probably never will.It's not your fault and I wont call you out on arrogance or ignorance or anything like that.It's impossible to re-live the experience. You see I was born to an Eastern European country to a poor family.It was not anything like the US centric media portrays it to be.Definitely not africa or super exaggerated levels of poverty. But we have not had the means to acquire wealth.My family did not have the opportunity to do so.My parents nor my grandparents or my grand-grand parents had that opportunity. You on the other hand were born to a country with excess.Excess abundance of resources and wealth. You have seen that excess yourself and it tainted you.It made you realize that you could live more sustainably. You see I was born to such country were "sustainable" was the default mode of living. You cant demand austerity from your experience of excess.
- tom_mellior 6y ago
  I can literally call a cab in the middle of the night and be at your parents' house in 30 minutes. That doesn't mean the average person needs to (or should) own a car.

EdwinLarkin 6y ago

Car == freedom. I can literally get up in the middle of the night and be at my parents house in 30 minutes. With public transport I could barely make it in 3 hours.

ericmay 6y ago
Unfortunately I just can't get empathize much with this viewpoint. I mean it's fine if you want to own a car, but to the extent it means that we have to suck the planet dry of resources and live increasingly isolated lives to support car infrastructure - I just can't get on board with that. My tax dollars are being wasted over it.
- EdwinLarkin 6y ago
  Your viewpoint is ideological.If you believe in preserving planet earth then what you want is rationing resources. And that inevitably leads to communism. I believe saving the earth is impossible with that kind of strategy.There's 3BN of people that will want the same kind of living standards like the rich west and you dont have any right nor influence on what they will do. It's very similar to what we have done during this pandemic with lockdowns.It just did not work and prolonged the inevitable.
  - ericmay 6y ago
    Ok that's fine, but then I may as well use as much resources as possible because fuck it? Let's build lots of unsustainable suburbs - I mean literally unsustainable as in we won't be able to pave the roads or repair bridges and then when that happens we'll just build some more and keep doing that over and over and to what end? I'm anti-communism because command economies suck. I'm capital C Capitalist. But what we're discussing here isn't an economic system, it's a public policy system. The government builds the roads, and creates the building standards, and creates zoning laws, and all of that. The military industrial complex (among other things) helps secure cheap oil to fuel this lifestyle - that costs money. This shit isn't cheap and that's not even taking into account the actual raw materials and resources. It's absurd that we've intentionally built societies around "one person gets in this 2,000 pound machine and uses it to drive a mile down the road" - you could just build cities better and walk. Hell you can do this and keep your car for these inconsequential use cases. The problem is you're defending the enforcement of car use. That's stupid. Sorry. The other 3bn people won't get to have the same living standards. The planet isn't big enough. We'll trend toward a median over time instead which will certainly lead to a quality of life change for the west. The question is do you want to be driving a car and paying $15/gallon for gas or would you rather spend $15/lb for a high-quality tuna steak from a local store you can walk to? I don't view cars as necessary for people to live. There's no reason to design an entire society such that they are necessary, except of course government subsidies to the construction industry (jobs program) and the automobile industry. You complain about communism yet are happy with the government subsidizing unnecessary jobs and construction projects, propping up industries that would otherwise die, and using tools like minimum parking requirements and building new roads to do it. You can call that ideological as if it's some sort of insult or bad thing. Doesn't really matter much. If I'm ideological and have a vision for how things could be, you're ideological and can't see past how things are today.
    - EdwinLarkin 6y ago
      I understand your viewpoint but you dont understand mine.And you probably never will.It's not your fault and I wont call you out on arrogance or ignorance or anything like that.It's impossible to re-live the experience. You see I was born to an Eastern European country to a poor family.It was not anything like the US centric media portrays it to be.Definitely not africa or super exaggerated levels of poverty. But we have not had the means to acquire wealth.My family did not have the opportunity to do so.My parents nor my grandparents or my grand-grand parents had that opportunity. You on the other hand were born to a country with excess.Excess abundance of resources and wealth. You have seen that excess yourself and it tainted you.It made you realize that you could live more sustainably. You see I was born to such country were "sustainable" was the default mode of living. You cant demand austerity from your experience of excess.
tom_mellior 6y ago
I can literally call a cab in the middle of the night and be at your parents' house in 30 minutes. That doesn't mean the average person needs to (or should) own a car.