4 ms·

I'm not optimistic that a significant number of people who need car transportation will give up personal vehicles. You would lose a lot of things: - Spontaneit

I'm not optimistic that a significant number of people who need car transportation will give up personal vehicles. You would lose a lot of things: - Spontaneity: You need to wait for the car to show up - Independence: I would rather be able to do it myself than hire/rent out for the task. - Personal crap storage: Everyone keeps their Very Precious Crap in their car. For certain trips, it's beneficial to have a car nearby to store things temporarily at a destination. - Self expression: In America, a huge number of people express their character through their cars. And not just through bumper stickers. What you drive says who you are. People aren't driving absurdly big pickup trucks because they're all contractors and landscapers. You can argue the practically of these points but that's just like, your opinion man. I think the only way to reduce cars and car problems is by making cars totally unnecessary for daily life: Denser living with local work or WFH work. Diverse zoning so you're walking around the corner for your cup of coffee rather than a mile away. Urban life should rightfully be the most efficient and economical approach. The suburbs are subsidized all to hell and the common sense approach is unrecognizable to most people now..

adventured 5y ago
> Denser living with local work or WFH work. Diverse zoning so you're walking around the corner for your cup of coffee rather than a mile away. None of which is going to happen in the US in the next 50+ years no matter what. We're not rebuilding the entire superstructure of the US anytime soon. We can't even agree to put together funds or routine taxes to properly maintain basic infrastructure. Should it happen? It'd be great if the US had dozens of nice cities that were inviting to live in. It doesn't. It never will. It's not going to happen. People often don't want to live in cities in the US, because have you seen the state of most major US cities? Europeans think American cities are close to being of third world condition and it's not far off as an assessment. That's going to get worse, not better, as the US gradually decays toward being a richer version of Brazil. We're not going to have more money to spend on making things nice in the future (education, housing, infrastructure, social programs, etc), we're going to have a lot less - our skyrocketing debt and entitlement obligations guarantee that inevitable outcome, the US will rot. The political class isn't going to suddenly become amazing problem solvers, they're going to get worse too, as the culture continues to also rot (all of this is a direct product of a severe cultural decline in the US spanning many decades now). The globally stretched superpower, pre-occupied with so many things that it shouldn't be, that now can't even maintain its bridges properly, isn't going to rationally reimagine and successfully rebuild its urban superstructures. It's obvious what the next 20-30 years will look like.
- Steltek 5y ago
  Whoa, easy there. I would caution against painting with too broad a brush. There are many nice cities in the US and yes, many are quite livable without owning a car. You are correct that the US has a major problem with a polarized and paralyzed political system though. But I think there's reason to be optimistic: smart solutions are also the cheapest. Effective transit, like bus lanes and signal priority, and safe biking infrastructure are phenomenally cheap compared to suburban highway and bridge construction, bordering on free. Housing affordability is, at its core, a zoning problem and we would make huge progress by simply letting people build houses and apartments.
  - raxxorrax 5y ago
    While the Netherlands are famous for their bike lanes, which do provide many benefits, they own as much cars as any other European country.
- landemva 5y ago
  If a particular city wants this for new development it can happen. Often starts from volunteering for the planning committees.
aqme28 5y ago
>Spontaneity: You need to wait for the car to show up Imagine not having to walk to your parking spot or trying to find parking at your destination though. It will actually be _more convenient_ to carshare than to own private.
- Steltek 5y ago
  Nah, we'll just mandate that every business provide 4 parking spots per expected customer instead /s. If people _need_ to drive somewhere, they will want their own car and they will demand that others cater to their choice. I still see making cars unnecessary and redundant as the key to healthier and economically resilient cities. If you can live a happy and full life without a car, it becomes a financial mistake to own one or to continue spending billions supporting their use.
- landemva 5y ago
  Many European cities are easy to live in without a car. I did it for years.
  - Steltek 5y ago
    Once you get past the acceptance of the premise, you'll find people objecting to adopting that lifestyle. For many Americans, the nearest city is not a desirable place to live so they don't know what they're missing. For the remainder that want to at least enable a car-free life, the best path forward is a matter of debate. Sadly what I think goes unrecognized is that the suburbs have forced their car-dependent lifestyle on cities for so long that trying to reverse all the bad history urban highways and transit defunding is exceptionally tough.
ericmay 5y ago
> I think the only way to reduce cars and car problems is by making cars totally unnecessary for daily life: Denser living with local work or WFH work. Diverse zoning so you're walking around the corner for your cup of coffee rather than a mile away. 100%! Everything comes down to building right. This is medium-density, mixed-use urban development. That means single family homes, small apartments (no more than 3 stories), gyms, places of worship, restaurants, shops, and stores all mixed together. 15 minute walk to anything you would need day-to-day. Then you have your personal car parked on the street or behind your house in a small garage for anything you need to do that requires a large vehicle or spontaneity or any of the other benefits that owning a car brings. But we get to avoid almost all of the damage. "How do I do this with kids etc. etc." the same way people all over the world do it.
raxxorrax 5y ago
> Personal crap storage That is a precise descriptor for my trunk. I believe you are correct with your assessment. Might depend if the "driver" would need a license. If so I believe people will still spend money on cars. I don't think denser living is attractive either for that matter. As a student I would have loved it, otherwise nature is quite soothing. I am amazed that it is the "green" parties that want to solve housing crisis with more urbanisation. I don't get how suburbs are subsidized. High density housing will be subsidized and only affordable by giants. You will not own anything here. I live in a high density house in a city. At some point I want out of here.
- Steltek 5y ago
  Examples of common and "hidden" car centric subsidies: - Roads are basically free to use, transit users must pay a fare. Gas tax and other fees do not come close to the listed or actual cost (e.g. missing DOT salaries, equipment) of road maintenance. - Number and magnitude of Federal and state grants for roads vs transit/bike capital projects - Parking minimums in zoning code - Public land allocated to highways and roads vs transit/bike/pedestrian - Public land allocated to free or massively discounted parking vs bike racks, bus stops, etc - In winter time, streets are plowed for free by the town but sidewalks must be cleared by private individuals. Bike lanes typically not cleared at all or are occupied with parked cars.

adventured 5y ago

> Denser living with local work or WFH work. Diverse zoning so you're walking around the corner for your cup of coffee rather than a mile away. None of which is going to happen in the US in the next 50+ years no matter what. We're not rebuilding the entire superstructure of the US anytime soon. We can't even agree to put together funds or routine taxes to properly maintain basic infrastructure. Should it happen? It'd be great if the US had dozens of nice cities that were inviting to live in. It doesn't. It never will. It's not going to happen. People often don't want to live in cities in the US, because have you seen the state of most major US cities? Europeans think American cities are close to being of third world condition and it's not far off as an assessment. That's going to get worse, not better, as the US gradually decays toward being a richer version of Brazil. We're not going to have more money to spend on making things nice in the future (education, housing, infrastructure, social programs, etc), we're going to have a lot less - our skyrocketing debt and entitlement obligations guarantee that inevitable outcome, the US will rot. The political class isn't going to suddenly become amazing problem solvers, they're going to get worse too, as the culture continues to also rot (all of this is a direct product of a severe cultural decline in the US spanning many decades now). The globally stretched superpower, pre-occupied with so many things that it shouldn't be, that now can't even maintain its bridges properly, isn't going to rationally reimagine and successfully rebuild its urban superstructures. It's obvious what the next 20-30 years will look like.

Steltek 5y ago
Whoa, easy there. I would caution against painting with too broad a brush. There are many nice cities in the US and yes, many are quite livable without owning a car. You are correct that the US has a major problem with a polarized and paralyzed political system though. But I think there's reason to be optimistic: smart solutions are also the cheapest. Effective transit, like bus lanes and signal priority, and safe biking infrastructure are phenomenally cheap compared to suburban highway and bridge construction, bordering on free. Housing affordability is, at its core, a zoning problem and we would make huge progress by simply letting people build houses and apartments.
- raxxorrax 5y ago
  While the Netherlands are famous for their bike lanes, which do provide many benefits, they own as much cars as any other European country.
landemva 5y ago
If a particular city wants this for new development it can happen. Often starts from volunteering for the planning committees.

aqme28 5y ago

>Spontaneity: You need to wait for the car to show up Imagine not having to walk to your parking spot or trying to find parking at your destination though. It will actually be _more convenient_ to carshare than to own private.

Steltek 5y ago
Nah, we'll just mandate that every business provide 4 parking spots per expected customer instead /s. If people _need_ to drive somewhere, they will want their own car and they will demand that others cater to their choice. I still see making cars unnecessary and redundant as the key to healthier and economically resilient cities. If you can live a happy and full life without a car, it becomes a financial mistake to own one or to continue spending billions supporting their use.
landemva 5y ago
Many European cities are easy to live in without a car. I did it for years.
- Steltek 5y ago
  Once you get past the acceptance of the premise, you'll find people objecting to adopting that lifestyle. For many Americans, the nearest city is not a desirable place to live so they don't know what they're missing. For the remainder that want to at least enable a car-free life, the best path forward is a matter of debate. Sadly what I think goes unrecognized is that the suburbs have forced their car-dependent lifestyle on cities for so long that trying to reverse all the bad history urban highways and transit defunding is exceptionally tough.

ericmay 5y ago

> I think the only way to reduce cars and car problems is by making cars totally unnecessary for daily life: Denser living with local work or WFH work. Diverse zoning so you're walking around the corner for your cup of coffee rather than a mile away. 100%! Everything comes down to building right. This is medium-density, mixed-use urban development. That means single family homes, small apartments (no more than 3 stories), gyms, places of worship, restaurants, shops, and stores all mixed together. 15 minute walk to anything you would need day-to-day. Then you have your personal car parked on the street or behind your house in a small garage for anything you need to do that requires a large vehicle or spontaneity or any of the other benefits that owning a car brings. But we get to avoid almost all of the damage. "How do I do this with kids etc. etc." the same way people all over the world do it.

raxxorrax 5y ago

> Personal crap storage That is a precise descriptor for my trunk. I believe you are correct with your assessment. Might depend if the "driver" would need a license. If so I believe people will still spend money on cars. I don't think denser living is attractive either for that matter. As a student I would have loved it, otherwise nature is quite soothing. I am amazed that it is the "green" parties that want to solve housing crisis with more urbanisation. I don't get how suburbs are subsidized. High density housing will be subsidized and only affordable by giants. You will not own anything here. I live in a high density house in a city. At some point I want out of here.

Steltek 5y ago
Examples of common and "hidden" car centric subsidies: - Roads are basically free to use, transit users must pay a fare. Gas tax and other fees do not come close to the listed or actual cost (e.g. missing DOT salaries, equipment) of road maintenance. - Number and magnitude of Federal and state grants for roads vs transit/bike capital projects - Parking minimums in zoning code - Public land allocated to highways and roads vs transit/bike/pedestrian - Public land allocated to free or massively discounted parking vs bike racks, bus stops, etc - In winter time, streets are plowed for free by the town but sidewalks must be cleared by private individuals. Bike lanes typically not cleared at all or are occupied with parked cars.