3 ms·

> That doesn’t make any sense and those two things aren’t related at all Sure it does, if you have a normal sized house, then you have space in front of the ho

by ars 4y ago

> That doesn’t make any sense and those two things aren’t related at all Sure it does, if you have a normal sized house, then you have space in front of the house, on the street where you can park. You also might have a driveway. And there are no "giant surface lots" needed. > you’d see tree-lined streets, beautiful large houses And in front of those houses is a place to park. If the house is properly separated from the neighbor you can even park along the side of the house (if you always put two driveways together from neighboring houses, then driveways save space relative to parking on the road). > It’s funny because we would literally have more space if cars and their infrastructure took up less of it. The car is far to useful a tool to get rid of. Why do you think that even people in dense European "utopia car-free cities" still have cars? I've tried it both ways - I'll never go back. I'll never live in a dense city.

ericmay 4y ago
> Sure it does, if you have a normal sized house, then you have space in front of the house, on the street where you can park. Yes. That’s not really under debate here. > You also might have a driveway. You could do that so long as you wanted to waste that space on your lot, but you don’t need that because you can park on the street near your house instead or in your garage behind your house (where the alley is). Personally I’d rather have more green space, or just to have a bigger house since I live at my house and my car is just some random machine that is fine sitting out all day and night in all weather conditions. > And there are no "giant surface lots" needed. Right… yet that’s what mandatory minimums and car-first public transit are creating. That’s what we are complaining about. > The car is far to useful a tool to get rid of. Why do you think that even people in dense European "utopia car-free cities" still have cars? I’m confused about this statement. Where did I suggest we needed to get rid of cars? > I've tried it both ways - I'll never go back. I'll never live in a dense city. I think that’s great! You can totally live in the country. I find it very appealing myself. Just stop the continuous public transit subsidies of highways when we already have more than enough for all future needs for the next 50 years. It doesn’t make sense for people who live 5 miles outside of downtown to have to drive a quarter mile down the road each way to get a gallon of milk. We can’t afford it and we are going to bankrupt ourselves and the planet with this asinine waste of energy. It also has personal benefits for you living in the country because you’ll have fewer people driving.

by ars 4y ago

ericmay 4y ago

> Sure it does, if you have a normal sized house, then you have space in front of the house, on the street where you can park. Yes. That’s not really under debate here. > You also might have a driveway. You could do that so long as you wanted to waste that space on your lot, but you don’t need that because you can park on the street near your house instead or in your garage behind your house (where the alley is). Personally I’d rather have more green space, or just to have a bigger house since I live at my house and my car is just some random machine that is fine sitting out all day and night in all weather conditions. > And there are no "giant surface lots" needed. Right… yet that’s what mandatory minimums and car-first public transit are creating. That’s what we are complaining about. > The car is far to useful a tool to get rid of. Why do you think that even people in dense European "utopia car-free cities" still have cars? I’m confused about this statement. Where did I suggest we needed to get rid of cars? > I've tried it both ways - I'll never go back. I'll never live in a dense city. I think that’s great! You can totally live in the country. I find it very appealing myself. Just stop the continuous public transit subsidies of highways when we already have more than enough for all future needs for the next 50 years. It doesn’t make sense for people who live 5 miles outside of downtown to have to drive a quarter mile down the road each way to get a gallon of milk. We can’t afford it and we are going to bankrupt ourselves and the planet with this asinine waste of energy. It also has personal benefits for you living in the country because you’ll have fewer people driving.