3 ms·
What data are you looking at? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_ra
by sandworm101 4y ago
What data are you looking at?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in...
There is a definite bump in the last couple years (likely covid-related) but we are still at about 1/2 the rate of the 60s/70s/80s, and roughly 1/3 the rate per-mile driven. Even by total deaths, fewer people died last year than in most every year of the 1960s. The increasing safety standards of the modern road system (cars and infrastructure) should be applauded as an engineered success story.
Roughly two or times as many people die each year of alcohol abuse. If we are going after dangerous evils there are better areas to attack.
- pas 4y agothe argument in the NYT piece[0] is that the US is not doing enough to protect pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists[1] compared to other rich nations. (obviously because they have less cars than the US, so the article just points out that "cars first" costs a lot of lives) > If we are going after dangerous evils there are better areas to attack. Absolutely, but ... I'm not saying "it's all connected" and all of it is due to suburban sprawl, but ... it's a common factor. If people were not driving, drinking, vaping, fentanyling in their little isolation cubes (ah, I mean cars, or houses with perfectly useless backyards, or tents), they might die less. Low population density does nasty things to communities. NIMBYs keep density low, commute times high, etc. [0] https://archive.ph/sEmh5 https://archive.ph/sEmh5 [1] usually "bigger car wins"
- sandworm101 4y agoSo all the ills of society are focused on the car. No wonder then that drivers feel so persecuted, which was the root of the yellow vests protests.