3 ms·
>But we need to understand. There are cases where the car is a must. Unavoidable. Imagine having toddlers, having to do heavy groceries, and living in a place w
by spyremeown 4y ago
>But we need to understand. There are cases where the car is a must. Unavoidable. Imagine having toddlers, having to do heavy groceries, and living in a place with difficult landscape or challenging weather. Imagine having a neurological disease or some other disability.
Bud, nobody is taking the car away from those kinds of use cases. It's very clear for most people that cars are necessary in those situations, and that's fine. What we're demonising is the car as the only way to go about getting from A to B. If you watch some of the urban planning videos on the topic, or lurk the r/f*cars subreddit you'll quickly see that most people also* want to make the driving experience better! And by better they don't mean to build one more lane, but sensible infrastructure that makes sense for everybody, not just the cars. The whole point is about inclusion: why isn't using a car unavoidable?
- kensai 4y agoBud, no. The demonising is complete and utter. To the point in some cities in Europe ecoterrorists attack parked cars. Some cases are so ridiculous, they've even attecked parked Teslas and other electric cars. Fact of the matter is the following: not everyone lives near a fantastic commuting infrastructure, let alone can physically achieve moving from A to B against the elements or their other problems.