4 ms·

> The sad reality is that most people want cars The sad reality is that most people NEED cars Only the rich can afford to not need cars. Now back to your reg

> The sad reality is that most people want cars The sad reality is that most people NEED cars Only the rich can afford to not need cars. Now back to your regularly scheduled car hate.

ska 4y ago
> The sad reality is that most people NEED cars That was a choice, though. We (especially in North America) have decided collectively to build infrastructure in such a way that most people will have strong reasons to use cars, as a result most people want cars. We did not have to do that, or at least there was no compelling reason to do it to the degree that we have.
- seadan83 4y ago
  Well, there was a compelling reason. Massive funds from an auto and oil industry lobby rooted in excuses such as the american car tourist dream and a life in a segregated suburb. Where we arrived is IMO almost wholly corrupt, perhaps one of the biggest astro-turfing campaigns ever seen.
  - ska 4y ago
    That (roughly, with different emphasis) is a the choice I'm talking about. It was not based purely on rational planning, and it was a choice. That in turn made it compelling for individuals, often, but that's not the same thing.
asdff 4y ago
It depends on the city honestly. In LA county, cars save you time but you can get everywhere, eventually, on a bus. Again, the key word is eventually, so bring a book and it will be like teleporting. Ridership reflects this. If you can afford to buy convenience you do so. 70% of LA metro riders are very low income, median income for riders on the system is $19,000. In other words most riders can't even entertain the idea of affording a car. Even a 20 year old beater car in CA might be a few hundred alone just to register a year, whereas low income people can ride metro for free. https://www.nlc.org/article/2021/05/14/expanding-l-a-metros-fare-free-transit-for-kids-and-families/ https://www.nlc.org/article/2021/05/14/expanding-l-a-metros-...

> The sad reality is that most people want cars The sad reality is that most people NEED cars Only the rich can afford to not need cars. Now back to your regularly scheduled car hate.

ska 4y ago

> The sad reality is that most people NEED cars That was a choice, though. We (especially in North America) have decided collectively to build infrastructure in such a way that most people will have strong reasons to use cars, as a result most people want cars. We did not have to do that, or at least there was no compelling reason to do it to the degree that we have.

seadan83 4y ago
Well, there was a compelling reason. Massive funds from an auto and oil industry lobby rooted in excuses such as the american car tourist dream and a life in a segregated suburb. Where we arrived is IMO almost wholly corrupt, perhaps one of the biggest astro-turfing campaigns ever seen.
- ska 4y ago
  That (roughly, with different emphasis) is a the choice I'm talking about. It was not based purely on rational planning, and it was a choice. That in turn made it compelling for individuals, often, but that's not the same thing.

asdff 4y ago

It depends on the city honestly. In LA county, cars save you time but you can get everywhere, eventually, on a bus. Again, the key word is eventually, so bring a book and it will be like teleporting. Ridership reflects this. If you can afford to buy convenience you do so. 70% of LA metro riders are very low income, median income for riders on the system is $19,000. In other words most riders can't even entertain the idea of affording a car. Even a 20 year old beater car in CA might be a few hundred alone just to register a year, whereas low income people can ride metro for free. https://www.nlc.org/article/2021/05/14/expanding-l-a-metros-fare-free-transit-for-kids-and-families/ https://www.nlc.org/article/2021/05/14/expanding-l-a-metros-...