4 ms·

>Try driving 3 hours in a wooded forest without roads or lane markers and see how you feel. >With my horse, I can trot around through trees and streams, and ev

>Try driving 3 hours in a wooded forest without roads or lane markers and see how you feel. >With my horse, I can trot around through trees and streams, and even let it graze on grass That's sincerely how irrelevant your example is to people like myself who don't drive 3 hours outside of cell reception or electricity, or ride horses through forests

Enginerrrd 4y ago
No it's not! ...because it's about not asserting your circumstances on others, and especially including regulation and policy in that which is where this attitude regularly ends up. I've actually got no doubt there are important jobs for which there is still no replacement for a horse. That's the whole point. OP couldn't understand why anyone wouldn't want an EV. I simply could not do the work that I do to help fix our streams and river to keep sediment & nutrients low and help rebuild the fish populations if I was forced to use an EV. This is a huge, common issue especially amongst that silicon valley / bay area culture. They do not consider anyone's needs outside their immediate experience. This is a big part of the push back from rural communities against urban politics.
- silicon2401 4y ago
  OP said > I don't understand why people would want a combustion car, let alone a manual transmission anymore. Then I said > That's sincerely how irrelevant your example is to people like myself who don't drive 3 hours outside of cell reception or electricity, or ride horses through forests reply Neither of us said anything about imposing anything on others, we strictly talked about our own circumstances, for which there is neither a need for horses nor a need for combustion vehicles. I am also against california "progressivism" but frankly you seem to have reacted reflexively to something neither of us was doing, just because we don't need combustion vehicles

Enginerrrd 4y ago

No it's not! ...because it's about not asserting your circumstances on others, and especially including regulation and policy in that which is where this attitude regularly ends up. I've actually got no doubt there are important jobs for which there is still no replacement for a horse. That's the whole point. OP couldn't understand why anyone wouldn't want an EV. I simply could not do the work that I do to help fix our streams and river to keep sediment & nutrients low and help rebuild the fish populations if I was forced to use an EV. This is a huge, common issue especially amongst that silicon valley / bay area culture. They do not consider anyone's needs outside their immediate experience. This is a big part of the push back from rural communities against urban politics.

silicon2401 4y ago
OP said > I don't understand why people would want a combustion car, let alone a manual transmission anymore. Then I said > That's sincerely how irrelevant your example is to people like myself who don't drive 3 hours outside of cell reception or electricity, or ride horses through forests reply Neither of us said anything about imposing anything on others, we strictly talked about our own circumstances, for which there is neither a need for horses nor a need for combustion vehicles. I am also against california "progressivism" but frankly you seem to have reacted reflexively to something neither of us was doing, just because we don't need combustion vehicles