6 ms·

I'm the oldest of 10 kids. My family needed a 15-passenger van to travel. Why can't the government stay out of my business?

gcapu 4y ago
Do you drive it on a private road?
- sfe22 4y ago
  Weird question, but they probably do from time to time.
  - frankbreetz 4y ago
    The question is implying if they use it on government funded roads, then the government should get a say on what is allowed.
    - gpt5 4y ago
      This is silly reasoning. Of course the government has the authority to dictate their life, even if they didn’t drive in public roads. This doesn’t mean that it’s good for them to do so in this case.
- rpmisms 4y ago
  Does the road being public mean that my family should have been forced to drive two cars, thus polluting more, all because of some people who can't stay out of other's business? I understand the argument here, but I think it's bad. Government does get a say in what is driven on roads: safe cars that are often inspected and pose less danger to those around and inside them. That's already a lot of restriction, now we let the gov't pick favorites too? Government is not your fairy godmother, things you don't like will happen.
  - happytoexplain 4y ago
    >my family should have been forced to drive two cars, thus polluting more, all because of some people who can't stay out of other's business You're depicting one side of a question with a practical example ("more pollution") and the other side as though they are simply assholes ("they just can't stay out of other's business"). There is a reasonable version of both sides.
    - rpmisms 4y ago
      This is true, but someone else telling you how to live your life with obviously zero practical experience in how you live your life will generally seem unreasonable to you. My bias is showing, but my bias is, I think, reasonable.
    - vorpalhex 4y ago
      The question didn't start with trying to take reasonable stock of both sides.
sbmthakur 4y ago
Why is van classified as a car? It's more like a mini-bus than a car.
- rpmisms 4y ago
  It's a private vehicle, not much larger than a pickup. The Ford Transit is excellent, by the way.
- kube-system 4y ago
  Technically, they're not. The SUVs that this article complains about are also technically not "cars". They're classified as trucks under many regulations.
HWR_14 4y ago
Maybe the government should have been more in your parents' business. I'm not usually one to think that the government has any place in the family, but 10 children seem like too many for 2 parents to wrangle well. Unless your family has more than two adults, how were you supervised?
- mbg721 4y ago
  They're offsetting the 30 other people who are hand-wringing about having kids.
  - rpmisms 4y ago
    Honestly, this is a weird thing to see. My parents just... did it, while so many people wait for the perfect time, have kids into their 40s, and then have to deal with teenagers in their 60s. Perhaps not for everyone, but there are perks.
    - mbg721 4y ago
      Most people's parents managed one way or another...
- abakker 4y ago
  "seems" is doing a lot of work here, and you are presuming your worldview to be more correct than the OP's parents? on what basis do you make that judgement? are you not the descendent of someone who once had more than a single child?
- rpmisms 4y ago
  So far the four of us who have turned 18 are doing great for ourselves, so it turned out pretty well. No neglect, great food, and an excellent education. Are you saying some of us should have been put in the notoriously abusive foster care system instead of having a great family?
  - HWR_14 4y ago
gfaster 4y ago
Ignoring the folly of the automobile being the only way to travel, and that independent mobility is all but dead in the United States, you are not the target of regulations like this. The target is needlessly large vehicles that do little but to stoke the ego of the owner, or maybe simply being another step up in the SUV safety arms race.
- AnimalMuppet 4y ago
  > Ignoring the folly of the automobile being the only way to travel... Thing is, if you drive 10 people, you drive one van. If ten people take the train or the bus, you buy ten tickets. Even if there were much better public transportation in the US, the economics push toward driving with larger family sizes. > ... and that independent mobility is all but dead in the United States... Not sure what you mean here?
- rpmisms 4y ago
  Yes, my family is not in the mind of the people asking for pickup trucks to be banned, but generally people with that mindset don't ask for narrow, tailored legislation. Source: we got burned by this plenty often.
LeanderK 4y ago
> Why can't the government stay out of my business? As I see it, the moment you leave your private property you are interacting with society and it's not your business anymore. Of course you need the option for a bigger van, but that doesn't mean that nothing can be done about the SUVs. You can't just drive around on public(!) roads and think you're not bound to the rules of society. Also, it's a private citizen proposing this and not "the government". Environmental legislation is a product of changing attitudes in society and not some deep-state, technocratic action.

gcapu 4y ago

Do you drive it on a private road?

sfe22 4y ago
Weird question, but they probably do from time to time.
- frankbreetz 4y ago
  The question is implying if they use it on government funded roads, then the government should get a say on what is allowed.
  - gpt5 4y ago
    This is silly reasoning. Of course the government has the authority to dictate their life, even if they didn’t drive in public roads. This doesn’t mean that it’s good for them to do so in this case.
rpmisms 4y ago
Does the road being public mean that my family should have been forced to drive two cars, thus polluting more, all because of some people who can't stay out of other's business? I understand the argument here, but I think it's bad. Government does get a say in what is driven on roads: safe cars that are often inspected and pose less danger to those around and inside them. That's already a lot of restriction, now we let the gov't pick favorites too? Government is not your fairy godmother, things you don't like will happen.
- happytoexplain 4y ago
  >my family should have been forced to drive two cars, thus polluting more, all because of some people who can't stay out of other's business You're depicting one side of a question with a practical example ("more pollution") and the other side as though they are simply assholes ("they just can't stay out of other's business"). There is a reasonable version of both sides.
  - rpmisms 4y ago
    This is true, but someone else telling you how to live your life with obviously zero practical experience in how you live your life will generally seem unreasonable to you. My bias is showing, but my bias is, I think, reasonable.
  - vorpalhex 4y ago
    The question didn't start with trying to take reasonable stock of both sides.

sbmthakur 4y ago

Why is van classified as a car? It's more like a mini-bus than a car.

rpmisms 4y ago
It's a private vehicle, not much larger than a pickup. The Ford Transit is excellent, by the way.
kube-system 4y ago
Technically, they're not. The SUVs that this article complains about are also technically not "cars". They're classified as trucks under many regulations.

HWR_14 4y ago

Maybe the government should have been more in your parents' business. I'm not usually one to think that the government has any place in the family, but 10 children seem like too many for 2 parents to wrangle well. Unless your family has more than two adults, how were you supervised?

mbg721 4y ago
They're offsetting the 30 other people who are hand-wringing about having kids.
- rpmisms 4y ago
  Honestly, this is a weird thing to see. My parents just... did it, while so many people wait for the perfect time, have kids into their 40s, and then have to deal with teenagers in their 60s. Perhaps not for everyone, but there are perks.
  - mbg721 4y ago
    Most people's parents managed one way or another...
abakker 4y ago
"seems" is doing a lot of work here, and you are presuming your worldview to be more correct than the OP's parents? on what basis do you make that judgement? are you not the descendent of someone who once had more than a single child?
rpmisms 4y ago
So far the four of us who have turned 18 are doing great for ourselves, so it turned out pretty well. No neglect, great food, and an excellent education. Are you saying some of us should have been put in the notoriously abusive foster care system instead of having a great family?
- HWR_14 4y ago

gfaster 4y ago

Ignoring the folly of the automobile being the only way to travel, and that independent mobility is all but dead in the United States, you are not the target of regulations like this. The target is needlessly large vehicles that do little but to stoke the ego of the owner, or maybe simply being another step up in the SUV safety arms race.

AnimalMuppet 4y ago
> Ignoring the folly of the automobile being the only way to travel... Thing is, if you drive 10 people, you drive one van. If ten people take the train or the bus, you buy ten tickets. Even if there were much better public transportation in the US, the economics push toward driving with larger family sizes. > ... and that independent mobility is all but dead in the United States... Not sure what you mean here?
rpmisms 4y ago
Yes, my family is not in the mind of the people asking for pickup trucks to be banned, but generally people with that mindset don't ask for narrow, tailored legislation. Source: we got burned by this plenty often.

LeanderK 4y ago

> Why can't the government stay out of my business? As I see it, the moment you leave your private property you are interacting with society and it's not your business anymore. Of course you need the option for a bigger van, but that doesn't mean that nothing can be done about the SUVs. You can't just drive around on public(!) roads and think you're not bound to the rules of society. Also, it's a private citizen proposing this and not "the government". Environmental legislation is a product of changing attitudes in society and not some deep-state, technocratic action.