3 ms·
> You argue from a value system, in which cars for personal transportation, are an axiomatic condition. Not only that, cars, no matter their size, going as fast
by throwaway894345 5y ago
> You argue from a value system, in which cars for personal transportation, are an axiomatic condition. Not only that, cars, no matter their size, going as fast as geometry allows it, are an inherent fixture. ... However, since this is not in your value system, it does not occur to you. ... You cannot even imagine these other solutions
You're making so many baseless and incorrect assumptions about my value system and thought process that it's very hard to assume you're arguing in good faith. You're welcome to try again without making assumptions about my beliefs or capacity for imagination.
- chii 5y agoI think the original poster is arguing the point that having personal vehicles is the wrong solution, and that the life style of the typical american cannot imagine that as a solution. I think it is impossible to put the personal vehicle genie back into the lamp. Any future climate solution cannot involve decreasing the quality of life for the typical american (or western person, i'm using american as a catch-all term). EV is the compromise already.
- throwaway894345 5y agoI generally agree, but cars are fully integrated into even the most non-western countries regardless of wealth or poverty. I admittedly can't imagine solutions that also help us meet our (time constrained) climate objectives or which don't cost trillions of dollars, but I think it's pretty rhetorically crumby to criticize someone's "ability to imagine an alternative" without proffering one's own proposal.