10 ms·

Sorry, no. Cars are the problem. The reason why other transit modes are a solution isn't because they in particular are the best option, generally it's because

Sorry, no. Cars are the problem. The reason why other transit modes are a solution isn't because they in particular are the best option, generally it's because they aren't cars. Cars aren't individual choices. They are a societal choice that costs a trillion dollars a year to make work. The issue is cars. No matter which way you slice it, we need to remove cars, and that will necessarily mean making driving a car worse. I don't think that hiding your goals or intentions is politically a good option. Don't argue something you don't believe in. If you (correctly) identify that cars and car-supporting infrastructure is one of the biggest problems in North America, you have to call it like it is. We don't actually want other options. We want better other options. The only way to get that is to de-incentivize cars. That's the reason why cars suck to begin with, the proliferation of cars makes every other mode of transport worse, except for inter-city rail, if only by sheer mass effect. Now I agree that we shouldn't other people by putting them in categories and identifying them with the car. That doesn't mean that we stop opposing the real policies that make cars a good personal option and counter them with policies that make alternatives better, generally at their expense in some way or another. I agree that inter-personally the matter can be approached better, but that does not carry to changing your policy positions or goals, and that should never justify lying about what those are.

sfvisser 5y ago
Not all car usage is a problem. I’m from the Netherlands which is incredibly bicycle friendly. Small country, highly urban, great cycling infra, great public transport, nearly everyone walks or cycles whenever it makes sense. Still, cars are everywhere. There are just tons of trips where the alternative doesn’t really make sense. Municipalities try everything to make the life of car owners miserable to force them into using alternatives. The only outcome is miserable drivers. They are in the car for a reason and won’t just switch.
- bartvk 5y ago
  > Still, cars are everywhere. There are just tons of trips where the alternative doesn’t really make sense. The obvious alternative is a car sharing platform. I've got a couple in my neighborhood and they work for the kind of trip you're describing.
  - varjag 5y ago
    That's an alternative only if you don't need a car regularly. You still have to book a vehicle (availability can vary), get to the collection lot, get back home if you need to pick up someone for the trip, take the trip, deliver the passengers, clean up and fuel/charge the vehicle, deliver it back to the parking lot and get back home.
    - bartvk 5y ago
      Yes, that's correct. I'd have to hedge my previous statement and say it's only viable for regular car usage if there are multiple shared cars within walking distance. For instance in my street, there's one. And another two in the next street. I've got an 8 year old and it works fine and I book up to three trips per week. But if they weren't within walking range (for a kid) then indeed, it wouldn't be an alternative to owning a car.
  - Toutouxc 5y ago
    There's one thing that car sharing proponents still seem to miss, even on HN, which is interesting, HN being a community where everyone apparently runs Arch with i3, vim and custom dotfiles on a Thinkpad. My car is MY car. There is no more dust or dirt in it than in my living room. The cabin filter has been recently replaced and there is no mold in the condenser. I know the single other person who drives it an exactly how she drives it. The brake pads are okay. The steering is okay. The wishbone bushings are okay and the car won't pull anywhere even under heavy braking. I've driven this car for thousands of kilometers and hundreds of hours, fast and slow, in rain and snow. If I ever need to evade an obstacle doing 130 kph on a highway in a split second, just by muscle memory, without flipping the car over and hurting myself or my girlfriend, I want it to be in this car. People die driving cars. Cars are heavy machinery (!) operated by mostly incompetent, distracted, sometimes aggressive clothed monkeys and as long as this is true, I simply refuse to drive a vehicle I know nothing about and can't rely on. I'm not even going to mention covid, thank god for my own car. (Btw I do use shared cars for short trips around the city and the cars, despite being almost brand new, are mostly dirty poor banged up things driven like fucking go karts by other people.)
- lucideer 5y ago
  > Still, cars are everywhere. I don't think cars will ever disappear, they're useful in many ways. But saying "cars are everywhere" in NL seems a bit of an overstatement, no? Cars are so much less dominant in NL than in other European countries (even Denmark). > try everything to make the life of car owners miserable Are they miserable because of inherent challenges of car ownership that other countries try to mitigate or is it really municipalities actively causing their misery?
  - baud147258 5y ago
    > Are they miserable because of inherent challenges of car ownership that other countries try to mitigate or is it really municipalities actively causing their misery? Can't really talk for the NL, but for Paris, it really seems like the municipality is trying to make drivers miserable, while not improving the situation for everyone else
    - lucideer 5y ago
      Can you expand on this? What are the municipality doing exactly that is causing misery? If it's just removing an amenity that was previously taken for granted, then I really don't think that necessarily applies.
  - aequitas 5y ago
    > But saying "cars are everywhere" in NL seems a bit of an overstatement, no? Except for cities with pedestrian only centers, cars are everywhere here. In some bigger cities there are certainly some people that go around without cars as they have everything they need close by and good public transport. But most of they (especially just outside of the city center) have at least one car in their household. Car ownership is even growing faster than population: https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/nieuws/2020/10/autopark-groeit-sterker-dan-bevolking https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/nieuws/2020/10/autopark-groeit-ster...
- dalbasal 5y ago
  At least in the Netherlands, you guys have other options. I live in Ireland. We also make life miserable for drivers, and basically unaffordable for young, or poor people. But here, about 50% of the population doesn't have access to any alternatives.
- yuri91 5y ago
  But your public transport is not great, really. It is pretty expensive, to the point that renting a car is cheaper than taking the train if you are 2 people. And trains are painfully slow too. Public transport inside cities is better (but still expensive), but less needed because biking infrastructure is really really good.
- sudosysgen 5y ago
  I agree that we will still have cars. At some point, yes, we will have to accept the level of car use we get to, and at that level making drivers miserable won't really help, I agree. We're just very far from that level. Also, the Netherlands while amazing is not perfect, we can still do better, though it is great.
thereisnospork 5y ago
>Cars aren't individual choices. They are a societal choice that costs a trillion dollars a year to make work. The issue is cars. No matter which way you slice it, we need to remove cars, and that will necessarily mean making driving a car worse. Where is the better option? Most of what I ever hear proposed or implemented are fair weather or inflexible solutions that don't replace my need for a car[0], and thereby only serve to make my transit experience worse. [0]And this is having lived in a variety of minor to major urban centers in the States.
- thayne 5y ago
  I can see replacing cars in major urban cities with high population density. And I'd love to see more options for long distance travel in the US (like fast trains). However, arguments for getting rid of cars seem to ignore the fact that public transit just isn't economical in areas with low population density. And even in urban areas, there are situations where having a car is very beneficial, such as grocery shopping. If you're a single individual it's probably manageable without a car, but for a family of four, you probably can't carry enough food for more than two or three days. If there were no cars in the city, I have no idea how you would purchase larger items like furniture. Every anti-car argument I've seen has assumed a particular lifestyle. If you really want to get rid of cars, you'll need replacements that can solve the problems of almost everyone.
  - tonyedgecombe 5y ago
    Grocery and furniture delivery is a thing. >Every anti-car argument I've seen has assumed a particular lifestyle. Yes, a no car lifestyle.
    - thayne 5y ago
      > Grocery and furniture delivery is a thing. But doesn't the delivery driver use a car? Also, grocery delivery/pickup might work for some people, but my experience has not been good. For one thing, the store employee won't pick produce the same way I would. And if something is out of stock, I may want to change other items as well, rather than substitute it or omit it. Store employees often substitute differently than I would, which is especially problematic with a food allergy. > Yes, a no car lifestyle. I mean an urban lifestyle without kids.
paulddraper 5y ago
> Cars aren't individual choices. But they are. There are number of individualized transport options. And yet, year after year people really, really like cars.
- masklinn 5y ago
  > There are number of individualized transport options. That is not actually true. In almost all of the US, as well as in most of europe (outside of large urban centers with good public transport) there is no viable alternative to cars. The netherlands is one of the few places where avoiding cars is an actual option, elsewhere it requires heavy compromission, and imposes significant restrictions on various life choices. If giving up cars means giving up living or having to seriously compromise on your ability to achieve things, it’s as much a choice as “cake or death”. I’ve lived without owning a car for 20-odd years (with the odd rental / borrowing), it’s only an option because I’m a very non-social person and don’t have children (so my need to move around day-to-day are extremely limited), and I’ve selected my living locations largely around the ability to not have a car, which would leave about 90% of the area unlivable if everybody made the same choices, because there simply is not enough car-free infrastructure for that to be anywhere near a universal option.
  - paulddraper 5y ago
    > there is no viable alternative to cars Well, there I agree. Mopeds, motorcycles, electric bikes...alternatives, but not viable for most people.
  - guerrilla 5y ago
    > outside of large urban centers with good public transport Maybe in Eastern Europe or something but most of Western Europe has no such problem, especially in the North. > The netherlands is one of the few places where avoiding cars is an actual option, elsewhere it requires heavy compromission, and imposes significant restrictions on various life choices. Not even close to true in Scandinavia, Belgium, Germany or even poor ass Portugal. I'm not sure how you got to these conclusions. Maybe you're underestimating just how bad the US as a European is or maybe you've never lived in Europe.
okokwhatever 5y ago
I adore how your moral position is more important than the opinion of those who believe the contraire.

sfvisser 5y ago

Not all car usage is a problem. I’m from the Netherlands which is incredibly bicycle friendly. Small country, highly urban, great cycling infra, great public transport, nearly everyone walks or cycles whenever it makes sense. Still, cars are everywhere. There are just tons of trips where the alternative doesn’t really make sense. Municipalities try everything to make the life of car owners miserable to force them into using alternatives. The only outcome is miserable drivers. They are in the car for a reason and won’t just switch.

bartvk 5y ago
> Still, cars are everywhere. There are just tons of trips where the alternative doesn’t really make sense. The obvious alternative is a car sharing platform. I've got a couple in my neighborhood and they work for the kind of trip you're describing.
- varjag 5y ago
  That's an alternative only if you don't need a car regularly. You still have to book a vehicle (availability can vary), get to the collection lot, get back home if you need to pick up someone for the trip, take the trip, deliver the passengers, clean up and fuel/charge the vehicle, deliver it back to the parking lot and get back home.
  - bartvk 5y ago
    Yes, that's correct. I'd have to hedge my previous statement and say it's only viable for regular car usage if there are multiple shared cars within walking distance. For instance in my street, there's one. And another two in the next street. I've got an 8 year old and it works fine and I book up to three trips per week. But if they weren't within walking range (for a kid) then indeed, it wouldn't be an alternative to owning a car.
- Toutouxc 5y ago
  There's one thing that car sharing proponents still seem to miss, even on HN, which is interesting, HN being a community where everyone apparently runs Arch with i3, vim and custom dotfiles on a Thinkpad. My car is MY car. There is no more dust or dirt in it than in my living room. The cabin filter has been recently replaced and there is no mold in the condenser. I know the single other person who drives it an exactly how she drives it. The brake pads are okay. The steering is okay. The wishbone bushings are okay and the car won't pull anywhere even under heavy braking. I've driven this car for thousands of kilometers and hundreds of hours, fast and slow, in rain and snow. If I ever need to evade an obstacle doing 130 kph on a highway in a split second, just by muscle memory, without flipping the car over and hurting myself or my girlfriend, I want it to be in this car. People die driving cars. Cars are heavy machinery (!) operated by mostly incompetent, distracted, sometimes aggressive clothed monkeys and as long as this is true, I simply refuse to drive a vehicle I know nothing about and can't rely on. I'm not even going to mention covid, thank god for my own car. (Btw I do use shared cars for short trips around the city and the cars, despite being almost brand new, are mostly dirty poor banged up things driven like fucking go karts by other people.)
lucideer 5y ago
> Still, cars are everywhere. I don't think cars will ever disappear, they're useful in many ways. But saying "cars are everywhere" in NL seems a bit of an overstatement, no? Cars are so much less dominant in NL than in other European countries (even Denmark). > try everything to make the life of car owners miserable Are they miserable because of inherent challenges of car ownership that other countries try to mitigate or is it really municipalities actively causing their misery?
- baud147258 5y ago
  > Are they miserable because of inherent challenges of car ownership that other countries try to mitigate or is it really municipalities actively causing their misery? Can't really talk for the NL, but for Paris, it really seems like the municipality is trying to make drivers miserable, while not improving the situation for everyone else
  - lucideer 5y ago
    Can you expand on this? What are the municipality doing exactly that is causing misery? If it's just removing an amenity that was previously taken for granted, then I really don't think that necessarily applies.
- aequitas 5y ago
  > But saying "cars are everywhere" in NL seems a bit of an overstatement, no? Except for cities with pedestrian only centers, cars are everywhere here. In some bigger cities there are certainly some people that go around without cars as they have everything they need close by and good public transport. But most of they (especially just outside of the city center) have at least one car in their household. Car ownership is even growing faster than population: https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/nieuws/2020/10/autopark-groeit-sterker-dan-bevolking https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/nieuws/2020/10/autopark-groeit-ster...
dalbasal 5y ago
At least in the Netherlands, you guys have other options. I live in Ireland. We also make life miserable for drivers, and basically unaffordable for young, or poor people. But here, about 50% of the population doesn't have access to any alternatives.
yuri91 5y ago
But your public transport is not great, really. It is pretty expensive, to the point that renting a car is cheaper than taking the train if you are 2 people. And trains are painfully slow too. Public transport inside cities is better (but still expensive), but less needed because biking infrastructure is really really good.
sudosysgen 5y ago
I agree that we will still have cars. At some point, yes, we will have to accept the level of car use we get to, and at that level making drivers miserable won't really help, I agree. We're just very far from that level. Also, the Netherlands while amazing is not perfect, we can still do better, though it is great.

thereisnospork 5y ago

>Cars aren't individual choices. They are a societal choice that costs a trillion dollars a year to make work. The issue is cars. No matter which way you slice it, we need to remove cars, and that will necessarily mean making driving a car worse. Where is the better option? Most of what I ever hear proposed or implemented are fair weather or inflexible solutions that don't replace my need for a car[0], and thereby only serve to make my transit experience worse. [0]And this is having lived in a variety of minor to major urban centers in the States.

thayne 5y ago
I can see replacing cars in major urban cities with high population density. And I'd love to see more options for long distance travel in the US (like fast trains). However, arguments for getting rid of cars seem to ignore the fact that public transit just isn't economical in areas with low population density. And even in urban areas, there are situations where having a car is very beneficial, such as grocery shopping. If you're a single individual it's probably manageable without a car, but for a family of four, you probably can't carry enough food for more than two or three days. If there were no cars in the city, I have no idea how you would purchase larger items like furniture. Every anti-car argument I've seen has assumed a particular lifestyle. If you really want to get rid of cars, you'll need replacements that can solve the problems of almost everyone.
- tonyedgecombe 5y ago
  Grocery and furniture delivery is a thing. >Every anti-car argument I've seen has assumed a particular lifestyle. Yes, a no car lifestyle.
  - thayne 5y ago
    > Grocery and furniture delivery is a thing. But doesn't the delivery driver use a car? Also, grocery delivery/pickup might work for some people, but my experience has not been good. For one thing, the store employee won't pick produce the same way I would. And if something is out of stock, I may want to change other items as well, rather than substitute it or omit it. Store employees often substitute differently than I would, which is especially problematic with a food allergy. > Yes, a no car lifestyle. I mean an urban lifestyle without kids.

paulddraper 5y ago

> Cars aren't individual choices. But they are. There are number of individualized transport options. And yet, year after year people really, really like cars.

masklinn 5y ago
> There are number of individualized transport options. That is not actually true. In almost all of the US, as well as in most of europe (outside of large urban centers with good public transport) there is no viable alternative to cars. The netherlands is one of the few places where avoiding cars is an actual option, elsewhere it requires heavy compromission, and imposes significant restrictions on various life choices. If giving up cars means giving up living or having to seriously compromise on your ability to achieve things, it’s as much a choice as “cake or death”. I’ve lived without owning a car for 20-odd years (with the odd rental / borrowing), it’s only an option because I’m a very non-social person and don’t have children (so my need to move around day-to-day are extremely limited), and I’ve selected my living locations largely around the ability to not have a car, which would leave about 90% of the area unlivable if everybody made the same choices, because there simply is not enough car-free infrastructure for that to be anywhere near a universal option.
- paulddraper 5y ago
  > there is no viable alternative to cars Well, there I agree. Mopeds, motorcycles, electric bikes...alternatives, but not viable for most people.
- guerrilla 5y ago
  > outside of large urban centers with good public transport Maybe in Eastern Europe or something but most of Western Europe has no such problem, especially in the North. > The netherlands is one of the few places where avoiding cars is an actual option, elsewhere it requires heavy compromission, and imposes significant restrictions on various life choices. Not even close to true in Scandinavia, Belgium, Germany or even poor ass Portugal. I'm not sure how you got to these conclusions. Maybe you're underestimating just how bad the US as a European is or maybe you've never lived in Europe.

okokwhatever 5y ago

I adore how your moral position is more important than the opinion of those who believe the contraire.