4 ms·

It's also simply not feasible for people who don't live in metropolitan areas. Should we just leave rural folk to go back to the horse and buggy? What does Joe

It's also simply not feasible for people who don't live in metropolitan areas. Should we just leave rural folk to go back to the horse and buggy? What does Joe Blow in Wyoming do if he lives 2 miles from his nearest neighbor and 25 miles from town? There's a giant class of people that will be left behind if we get rid of cars, and they're being continually ignored by the anti-car movement. The pro bike / anti-car people have a point, but they will have to address this problem if they want to reach their end goals.

jobs_throwaway 4y ago
Rural folk are already a relatively small portion of the population in developed countries (<15% in the US) and that trend will only continue. We should be optimizing for the areas where the vast majority of people live, and where car-free lifestyles are absolutely feasible with proper infrastructure.
- LeftHandPath 4y ago
  I do agree that we can optimize for the cities, but the general attitude towards the people who are going to be worst affected by the ban of ICEs is to look down at them and laugh - as Colbert exclaimed, "I don't care if gas goes to $15 a gallon, because I drive a Tesla!" That's not a healthy approach (and note, I'm not accusing you of doing this, I'm just explaining the way this issue is being approached by the upper class at large). 15% of the US is about 50,000,000 people. To reduce the fraction, that's 3 in 20 Americans. That's a lot of people to just hand-wave away and leave behind. These are people, not dinosaurs. They also control our food supply. I think it's in our best interest to account for them in our plan for the future, and treat them well.
- dylan604 4y ago
  I think Texas continues to defy this, especially in politics. Dallas, Houston, Austin/San Antonio all tend to be more liberal and are the larger concentration of population, however they always get out voted by the rural populations. (gerrymandering has really done a number here) So in this case, the rural adds up to be large enough numbers to not be ignored. The sheer size of Texas is unique though, so it is kind of an edge case, but definitely not one to be ignored.
jabl 4y ago
But we don't need a one-size-fits-all solution. If the 80%(?) (and steadily but surely rising) part of the population that lives in urban areas in developed nations switch to public transportation, cargo bikes, the occasional car-for-hire use, and whatnot, it makes the problem of scaling up EV battery production, synthetic fuel production, or CO2 release from using fossil fuels for the remaining 20% that much easier.
- LeftHandPath 4y ago
  I agree with that. I do question what my life would look like in that case - for the past 5 years I lived about 7 miles from work. I am currently in a college town while I am finishing up at university, and so I'm now: 3 miles from school, ~40 miles from work. I use pseudo-public transport (a shuttle that my apartment complex provides / runs privately) to get to school every day. However, that situation works because there is a large group of people that need to go to exactly the same place (campus) at approximately the same time every day. I still need a car, because I often have to go to school late in the evening to use lab equipment when the shuttles don't run. For work, it's even more important to have a car - a public transport route would likely take ~45 minutes compared to the ~12 minute drive on my old 7 mile commute. For the 40+ mile commute I have now, I'd likely have to jump between several different busses (go from my town to the town my company is at, then a bus from there to the regional airport where my office is). That would probably be at least an hour and a half, each way -- if you could even get the city to run a route from a hub to that regional airport. All of this is not to mention trips I take just to explore, or to go hiking, or to see friends or family in distant towns, grocery shopping, or visiting a specific specialty store. From what I've seen so far, the only people whose quality of life wouldn't be decimated by a lack of a car are the most privileged - young elites in major cities who live close to work (and can cycle there), who can afford the fees for an uber or taxi when they need one, or who work entirely remotely. The people in the lower and middle class who commute to work and want to go grab beers with friends a few miles away on their friday night - well, they're either forgotten, or mocked when they're remembered. It leaves a bad taste in the mouth for the whole thing.

jobs_throwaway 4y ago

Rural folk are already a relatively small portion of the population in developed countries (<15% in the US) and that trend will only continue. We should be optimizing for the areas where the vast majority of people live, and where car-free lifestyles are absolutely feasible with proper infrastructure.

LeftHandPath 4y ago
I do agree that we can optimize for the cities, but the general attitude towards the people who are going to be worst affected by the ban of ICEs is to look down at them and laugh - as Colbert exclaimed, "I don't care if gas goes to $15 a gallon, because I drive a Tesla!" That's not a healthy approach (and note, I'm not accusing you of doing this, I'm just explaining the way this issue is being approached by the upper class at large). 15% of the US is about 50,000,000 people. To reduce the fraction, that's 3 in 20 Americans. That's a lot of people to just hand-wave away and leave behind. These are people, not dinosaurs. They also control our food supply. I think it's in our best interest to account for them in our plan for the future, and treat them well.
dylan604 4y ago
I think Texas continues to defy this, especially in politics. Dallas, Houston, Austin/San Antonio all tend to be more liberal and are the larger concentration of population, however they always get out voted by the rural populations. (gerrymandering has really done a number here) So in this case, the rural adds up to be large enough numbers to not be ignored. The sheer size of Texas is unique though, so it is kind of an edge case, but definitely not one to be ignored.

jabl 4y ago

But we don't need a one-size-fits-all solution. If the 80%(?) (and steadily but surely rising) part of the population that lives in urban areas in developed nations switch to public transportation, cargo bikes, the occasional car-for-hire use, and whatnot, it makes the problem of scaling up EV battery production, synthetic fuel production, or CO2 release from using fossil fuels for the remaining 20% that much easier.

LeftHandPath 4y ago
I agree with that. I do question what my life would look like in that case - for the past 5 years I lived about 7 miles from work. I am currently in a college town while I am finishing up at university, and so I'm now: 3 miles from school, ~40 miles from work. I use pseudo-public transport (a shuttle that my apartment complex provides / runs privately) to get to school every day. However, that situation works because there is a large group of people that need to go to exactly the same place (campus) at approximately the same time every day. I still need a car, because I often have to go to school late in the evening to use lab equipment when the shuttles don't run. For work, it's even more important to have a car - a public transport route would likely take ~45 minutes compared to the ~12 minute drive on my old 7 mile commute. For the 40+ mile commute I have now, I'd likely have to jump between several different busses (go from my town to the town my company is at, then a bus from there to the regional airport where my office is). That would probably be at least an hour and a half, each way -- if you could even get the city to run a route from a hub to that regional airport. All of this is not to mention trips I take just to explore, or to go hiking, or to see friends or family in distant towns, grocery shopping, or visiting a specific specialty store. From what I've seen so far, the only people whose quality of life wouldn't be decimated by a lack of a car are the most privileged - young elites in major cities who live close to work (and can cycle there), who can afford the fees for an uber or taxi when they need one, or who work entirely remotely. The people in the lower and middle class who commute to work and want to go grab beers with friends a few miles away on their friday night - well, they're either forgotten, or mocked when they're remembered. It leaves a bad taste in the mouth for the whole thing.