3 ms·

Well, the market has also spoken as to what kind of councils get elected and what kind of plans those councils approve. Of course, that's in large part because

Well, the market has also spoken as to what kind of councils get elected and what kind of plans those councils approve. Of course, that's in large part because car owners pay infrastructure taxes cyclists don't. But that's also precisely what the market is - the segment who's paying. If wishes built livable cities there'd probably be more of them.

fowkswe 4y ago
The market is rigged by an industry(ies) (auto, oil) to develop society in its favor. Without a major 'refactor', the US doesn't have a chance at efficient urban design that would support individual use transport.
- jcampbell1 4y ago
  It is rigged because people want high speed climate controlled transportation. Prior to oil and autos, there were enclosed carriages pulled by horses.
  - fowkswe 4y ago
    The market was rigged by oil and auto before cars were climate controlled.
    - jcampbell1 4y ago
      There are antique cast iron boxes that were filled with hot charcoal to keep carriages warm.
californical 4y ago
Cyclists have cars too and pay the same taxes, since it’s basically unavoidable in the US. But also bikes cause negligible damage to infrastructure and barely require any resources compared to cars, so the costs are usually much lower for bike infrastructure.
mschuster91 4y ago
The problem is that it's not just the people who decide who gets elected. Like it or not, the chances of winning an election highly correlate with advertising budgets, and the fossil fuel and car industry has sunk dozens of billions of dollars in campaign contributions, (S)PAC donations and other legal and illegal forms of bribery to make sure their interests were taken care of.
- dsfyu404ed 4y ago
  >Like it or not, the chances of winning an election highly correlate with advertising budgets, This is just BS/lies at the local level. Moneyed PACs aren't fighting it out over councilor, selectman and planner positions for random suburbs. Pretty much all the money these candidate dispense is either self raised or comes from an official political party who don't really doll out meaningful amounts to these elections
  - mikestew 4y ago
    As one who has run for local office in a Seattle-area suburb, yeah, there's no oil industry money sloshing around. At best one might get a few local businesses (at best), and some individuals for small amounts. If you're the big swinging genitalia incumbent, you might even be able to afford yard signs without dipping into personal funds! One would seem to win local elections by being the incumbent, and knocking on a lot of doors.
  - mikem170 4y ago
    Slightly different angle than the parent post: What about the state and federal subsidies for road infrastructure? A locality that wants to go a different (less car dependent) direction would be leaving that infrastructure money unspent, which isn't fair to the local voters who contributed tax money to the state/feds. They rigged it so that the locals paid for the roads via their tax money, their only choice is to take the money and build more roads, or kiss the money they sent to the state/feds goodbye. Wouldn't the above kind of hamstring local politicians? Would it be safe to assume that the pro-car lobbyists at those higher level of government want to keep it this way?
comte7092 4y ago
The issue is that you have path dependence in what gets built and the resulting constituencies. When everyone already drives cars (the US), there’s significant opposition to investment in other types of infrastructure/built in support for investments in car infrastructure. Whereas there are plenty of cities around the global where such constituencies exist for other modes.

fowkswe 4y ago

The market is rigged by an industry(ies) (auto, oil) to develop society in its favor. Without a major 'refactor', the US doesn't have a chance at efficient urban design that would support individual use transport.

jcampbell1 4y ago
It is rigged because people want high speed climate controlled transportation. Prior to oil and autos, there were enclosed carriages pulled by horses.
- fowkswe 4y ago
  The market was rigged by oil and auto before cars were climate controlled.
  - jcampbell1 4y ago
    There are antique cast iron boxes that were filled with hot charcoal to keep carriages warm.

californical 4y ago

Cyclists have cars too and pay the same taxes, since it’s basically unavoidable in the US. But also bikes cause negligible damage to infrastructure and barely require any resources compared to cars, so the costs are usually much lower for bike infrastructure.

mschuster91 4y ago

The problem is that it's not just the people who decide who gets elected. Like it or not, the chances of winning an election highly correlate with advertising budgets, and the fossil fuel and car industry has sunk dozens of billions of dollars in campaign contributions, (S)PAC donations and other legal and illegal forms of bribery to make sure their interests were taken care of.

dsfyu404ed 4y ago
>Like it or not, the chances of winning an election highly correlate with advertising budgets, This is just BS/lies at the local level. Moneyed PACs aren't fighting it out over councilor, selectman and planner positions for random suburbs. Pretty much all the money these candidate dispense is either self raised or comes from an official political party who don't really doll out meaningful amounts to these elections
- mikestew 4y ago
  As one who has run for local office in a Seattle-area suburb, yeah, there's no oil industry money sloshing around. At best one might get a few local businesses (at best), and some individuals for small amounts. If you're the big swinging genitalia incumbent, you might even be able to afford yard signs without dipping into personal funds! One would seem to win local elections by being the incumbent, and knocking on a lot of doors.
- mikem170 4y ago
  Slightly different angle than the parent post: What about the state and federal subsidies for road infrastructure? A locality that wants to go a different (less car dependent) direction would be leaving that infrastructure money unspent, which isn't fair to the local voters who contributed tax money to the state/feds. They rigged it so that the locals paid for the roads via their tax money, their only choice is to take the money and build more roads, or kiss the money they sent to the state/feds goodbye. Wouldn't the above kind of hamstring local politicians? Would it be safe to assume that the pro-car lobbyists at those higher level of government want to keep it this way?

comte7092 4y ago

The issue is that you have path dependence in what gets built and the resulting constituencies. When everyone already drives cars (the US), there’s significant opposition to investment in other types of infrastructure/built in support for investments in car infrastructure. Whereas there are plenty of cities around the global where such constituencies exist for other modes.