4 ms·

> think of how many Americans buy giant cars who don't need giant cars. I hesitate to comment since I’m nitpicking a parenthetical, but this weird little bit o

• lmm 3y ago
  > this weird little bit of classism totally broke my immersion in an article I was otherwise really enjoying. Middle class people overwhelmingly can’t afford housing, but let’s shame them for trying to find at least one kind of affordable luxury in life? A giant car is probably the most harmful-to-others luxury indulgence you could pick (and a significant factor in why people can't afford housing). I'm all for having a hobby and spending money on your hobby, but maybe pick one that doesn't kill other people's kids so much. And I'm baffled that you're calling this classism and then talking about middle class.
  • willcipriano 3y ago
    > A giant car is probably the most harmful-to-others luxury indulgence you could pick International travel. People need to get to work, nobody needs to backpack through Europe to "find themselves" (besides perhaps Europeans).
    • rbanffy 3y ago
      More people, Americans mostly, really should backpack through Europe, not just to find themselves, but to also discover the wonders of universal healthcare and a welfare state.
    • njharman 3y ago
      > People need to get to work, nobody needs to backpack through Europe That is why American capitalism/consumerism is bad. Our society would be far, far better served if people exposed themselves to different cultures, beliefs, experienced world first hand instead of through talking head media. If more "found themselves" they'd know life isn't about work and money.
    • lmm 3y ago
      > International travel. Probably less harmful; the per-year CO2 emissions are similar (depending how long your commute is and how much travel you do), and travel has fewer of the other negative externalities (taking up road space and city space, killing people directly). > People need to get to work, nobody needs to backpack through Europe Perhaps, but I don't see how putting out an extra n tonnes of CO2 by driving an unnecessary giant car to work is any better than putting out an extra n tonnes of CO2 on things that are more directly self-indulgent. (If anything I'm more sympathetic to wasteful consumption if the consumer is at least enjoying themselves)
      • willcipriano 3y ago
        If the co2 emissions are similar and both are just for fun I don't see how you ethically justify the one and not the other. This looks elitist and classist.
        • lmm 3y ago
          Because, as I said, the CO2 emissions are not the only negative externality cars impose on other people.
  • jhawleypeters 3y ago
    > A giant car is probably the most harmful-to-others luxury indulgence you could pick Some people are simply refusing to harm themselves when they choose a large vehicle. Getting in and out of a "regular" sized car routinely injures me. The injuries are painful, immobilize me for weeks at a time, and occur several times per year. I also know several people for whom being in a compact car causes anxiety or panic. Do cases like this enter into your calculus, or do you just assume everybody you see in a large vehicle doesn't much care for the rest of humanity?
    • dijit 3y ago
      > Getting in and out of a "regular" sized car routinely injures me. The injuries are painful, immobilize me for weeks at a time, and occur several times per year. Seek medical assistance, immediately. This is not a joke, I am not intending to offend you- you genuinely should seek medical assistance as in: right now. > I also know several people for whom being in a compact car causes anxiety or panic. Now I will intend to offend: Yes, lets make the problem worse! Humans without cars should feel even more anxiety and panic! Especially tiny ones which you can't even see.
      • jhawleypeters 3y ago
        > Humans without cars should feel even more anxiety and panic! I mean, pedestrians do, right? I guess it depends on the local driving culture. My best friend is blind, and this is precisely how he feels trying to navigate the world. But yeah, living in America, car ownership seems unavoidable for most people in most areas.
      • jhawleypeters 3y ago
        > Seek medical assistance, immediately. It's not a medical problem. I'm just tall and small cars are the wrong size for my body. Like choosing a piece of clothing, the solution is to choose a vehicle that fits my body. I mean, I could try to have surgery to change my height, but that's wrongheaded, right?
        • 3y ago
• DanielVZ 3y ago
  As an owner of a normal sized car, oversized cars are unnecessarily aggressive towards other people. Both because of the drivers attitude and the design. Some examples: Lights always blind me, they block almost all vision, and have very poor vision themselves.
  • fifticon 3y ago
    and chrush any pedestrians they hit.
    • rbanffy 3y ago
      At least here in Ireland, they’ll stop if you look like you want to cross the street, regardless of there being a crossing or not.
• ryukafalz 3y ago
  Those giant cars are pretty expensive themselves though, both to buy and to fuel. If you have a huge truck or SUV but can't afford housing... well, you probably could afford more housing without the huge car. This isn't "avocado toast" style criticism, cars are a significant expense - typically your second largest expense after housing.
• imtringued 3y ago
  The big car owner has ab unquestionable license to bully others, got it.