4 ms·

> Garages that have 20% empty spaces pretty much all the time ,give me the confidence to rely on them. I plan around it being available (and am happy to pay for

> Garages that have 20% empty spaces pretty much all the time ,give me the confidence to rely on them. I plan around it being available (and am happy to pay for it). By contrast if it's full 20% of the time then that feeds me with doubt. My impression the that people who complain about "too much parking," actually don't want to you have the "confidence to rely on" parking being available. They want to "feed you with doubt" until you get rid of your car.

bruce511 4y ago
>> They want to "feed you with doubt" until you get rid of your car. I guess if I lived in NY or London I might get rid of the car. But to be honest that's never entered my head here. I need the car to get to work. And yeah, there's parking there. But if there was no parking there, I'd still need car for everything else. I get the point, there are cities where you can work,play, shop, school, all on public transport. Where ironically the streets are full of cars all the time. But alas, I don't live in one of those cities.
- antisthenes 4y ago
  > I get the point, there are cities where you can work,play, shop, school, all on public transport. Do any of those cities exist in the US (except for NY)?
  - aeruder 4y ago
    Chicago
  - cafard 4y ago
    Washington, kind of. I rarely drive to work. I see kids going to school on public transport all the time. I don't exactly play: I run, and needn't drive to good running areas; but there are public tennis courts, a public swimming pool, and athletic fields in easy walking distance. Shopping is tricky. In theory, we could manage our shopping with walking or transport, in practice it's a lot easier to drive.
- tablespoon 4y ago
  > I guess if I lived in NY or London I might get rid of the car. But to be honest that's never entered my head here. I need the car to get to work. And yeah, there's parking there. But if there was no parking there, I'd still need car for everything else. Those types seem to want you to endure whatever hardship is necessary to use public transit and/or a bike for everything, or at least loudly head disdain on the suburbs wish you could join them in some car-less urbanist paradise. They're not really interested in you maintaining whatever lifestyle you have that requires a car, because they disdain cars and the lifestyles that need them.
  - giraffe_lady 4y ago
    > They're not really interested in you maintaining whatever lifestyle you have that requires a car, because they disdain cars and the lifestyles that need them. Pretty close to correct! I can entertain a lot of nuance about the current necessity of car use given the century or so we've spent prioritizing it above all other forms of transportation. But I have no respect for a vision of the future that seeks to maintain car dominance, or the will to a lifestyle that depends on a frankly suicidal dependence on fossil fuels in the face of climate change.
  - fknorangesite 4y ago
    > they disdain cars and the lifestyles that need them. No, I disdain city planning and architecture that requires nearly everyone to have one.
  - marssaxman 4y ago
    Or... maybe it's not about you! Maybe it's about the fact that people in the US and Canada who do want a suburban lifestyle already have a continent full of car-centric developments to choose from, whereas people who would prefer a "car-less urban paradise", if they could find one, generally can't get it; they have to settle for something they are less happy with, because 20th century urban planning re-engineered almost all cities around the automobile.
    - tablespoon 4y ago
- earthling8118 4y ago
  You can love your car all you want, but you really shouldn't look at cities with good transit and call it "ironic" that they still have cars. Of course they still have cars: the fact that so many take transit makes traveling by car a better experience than without. If you saw the same city with everyone taking cars it'd be absolutely miserable.

bruce511 4y ago

>> They want to "feed you with doubt" until you get rid of your car. I guess if I lived in NY or London I might get rid of the car. But to be honest that's never entered my head here. I need the car to get to work. And yeah, there's parking there. But if there was no parking there, I'd still need car for everything else. I get the point, there are cities where you can work,play, shop, school, all on public transport. Where ironically the streets are full of cars all the time. But alas, I don't live in one of those cities.

antisthenes 4y ago
> I get the point, there are cities where you can work,play, shop, school, all on public transport. Do any of those cities exist in the US (except for NY)?
- aeruder 4y ago
  Chicago
- cafard 4y ago
  Washington, kind of. I rarely drive to work. I see kids going to school on public transport all the time. I don't exactly play: I run, and needn't drive to good running areas; but there are public tennis courts, a public swimming pool, and athletic fields in easy walking distance. Shopping is tricky. In theory, we could manage our shopping with walking or transport, in practice it's a lot easier to drive.
tablespoon 4y ago
> I guess if I lived in NY or London I might get rid of the car. But to be honest that's never entered my head here. I need the car to get to work. And yeah, there's parking there. But if there was no parking there, I'd still need car for everything else. Those types seem to want you to endure whatever hardship is necessary to use public transit and/or a bike for everything, or at least loudly head disdain on the suburbs wish you could join them in some car-less urbanist paradise. They're not really interested in you maintaining whatever lifestyle you have that requires a car, because they disdain cars and the lifestyles that need them.
- giraffe_lady 4y ago
  > They're not really interested in you maintaining whatever lifestyle you have that requires a car, because they disdain cars and the lifestyles that need them. Pretty close to correct! I can entertain a lot of nuance about the current necessity of car use given the century or so we've spent prioritizing it above all other forms of transportation. But I have no respect for a vision of the future that seeks to maintain car dominance, or the will to a lifestyle that depends on a frankly suicidal dependence on fossil fuels in the face of climate change.
- fknorangesite 4y ago
  > they disdain cars and the lifestyles that need them. No, I disdain city planning and architecture that requires nearly everyone to have one.
- marssaxman 4y ago
  Or... maybe it's not about you! Maybe it's about the fact that people in the US and Canada who do want a suburban lifestyle already have a continent full of car-centric developments to choose from, whereas people who would prefer a "car-less urban paradise", if they could find one, generally can't get it; they have to settle for something they are less happy with, because 20th century urban planning re-engineered almost all cities around the automobile.
  - tablespoon 4y ago
earthling8118 4y ago
You can love your car all you want, but you really shouldn't look at cities with good transit and call it "ironic" that they still have cars. Of course they still have cars: the fact that so many take transit makes traveling by car a better experience than without. If you saw the same city with everyone taking cars it'd be absolutely miserable.