6 ms·

Cargo bikes are a thing. It's also why we have ebike so we don't have to be hyper fit. The need to haul weekly grocery is greatly reduced with proper urban pla

by kiba 3y ago

Cargo bikes are a thing. It's also why we have ebike so we don't have to be hyper fit. The need to haul weekly grocery is greatly reduced with proper urban planning like corner stores and walkable streets. Bad weather can be mitigated through proper clothing. In Finland, people ride their bikes through the winter.

briandear 3y ago
[flagged]
- hcurtiss 3y ago
  [flagged]
- fnimick 3y ago
  Your car gives you a private benefit at a public cost. That's the problem. Car infrastructure is ruinously expensive and the effects of driving harm everyone, either from the pollution generated in the long-term or in the short-term when statistically you are 100-300x more likely to kill someone than if you were on a bicycle.
  - hcurtiss 3y ago
    Maybe. It seems to me that the development of cars has coincided with radical improvement of human wellbeing on every conceivable measure. Yes, you would pollute less if you rode a bike. And even less if you walked. And even less if you never left the house. But having a car opens up a world of possibilities and luxuries that a hundred years ago were simply unimaginable. Most reasonable people would agree that those extraordinary benefits merit some trade-offs.
    - fnimick 3y ago
      > having a car opens up a world of possibilities and luxuries that a hundred years ago were simply unimaginable. [citation needed] Many wonderful cities and regions around the world are perfectly enjoyable with no need for cars. Or are you telling me that people living in central Paris, or London, or New York, or Valencia are suffering a substandard life because they use public transit and walk or bike to their destinations instead? Even regional travel can be easily done without a car - I recently traveled from Edinburgh, to Glasgow, all the way up to Fort William, then back from Skye all the way back to Edinburgh with no car. At no point did I wish I had one. Why is this so hard for us in the US to accomplish?
      - hcurtiss 3y ago
        Having just returned from both London and Paris -- yes, having the ability to tow my motorboat to the reservoir is awesome! And having the ability to just drive out of the city whenever I want is awesome! And having the ability to get to work in a/c without dressing for the weather is awesome. Traveling around without being in close proximity to sick people is awesome! Having cars, and the infrastructure to support them, is decidedly better in my assessment than relying on an e-bike, mass transit, and rental services. I think most people would agree with me.
        chasd00 3y ago
        > And having the ability to just drive out of the city whenever I want is awesome! This is what does it for me. And a rental just doesnt cut it. My family and I enjoy road trips, even just weekend getaways, and owning a vehicle makes that possible. Also, just regular things like getting kids to rowing practice after school makes all alternatives impractical. There’s no way to get them there on time with public transit and it’s def. too far for an e-bike to get there on time.
        jeffbee 3y ago
        The period of one's life during which one needs to drive the kids to rowing practice passes by fairly rapidly, in the course of the entire life. Structuring our entire society around the use cases of the very few isn't a good idea. Indeed, it would be highly beneficial to busy parents of busy kids if everyone else would get the hell off the road. Most of the people on the road have little reason to be there, other than that we've made it the default choice and outlawed everything else. If people could easily walk to the grocery store, or bicycle to the dentist, or ride a bus to their office, your trip to the boathouse would be ever so much easier.
        kiba 3y ago
        Why not long train ride in the countryside? Or a train tour through the mountain peak. If we're talking luxuries, it's possible to make trains luxurious. They have sleeper trains for example. A lot of thing are possible or the equivalent in a train oriented society.
  - zeroonetwothree 3y ago
    I accept that we should remove the subsidies to cars (but somehow the same people think it’s fine to subsidise public transport?). Car owners should pay for pollution and parking. Then we can let the market sort it out.
    - fnimick 3y ago
      Great! Now do roads. The same people who complain about subsidies to public transport don't bat an eye at hundreds of millions spent on extra highway lanes. The typical argument there is "the economic benefit of mobility pays for it!" Yet that same case doesn't apply to public transit, somehow, where the costs are lower and the number of people moved is higher. (and good luck on the parking, considering my neighbors are up in arms over a proposal to increase yearly parking sticker fees from $40ish to $70ish and the true cost of a parking space is more like $500...)
  - blq10 3y ago
    Point of order, all infrastructure in the United States is ruinously expensive. There are zero forms of transport infrastructure other than private shuttles that maintain fare box equilibrium
- kiba 3y ago
  [flagged]
- Nakroma 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - chasd00 3y ago
    And imagine if your laptop was made of chocolate. Live in reality.
- ElFitz 3y ago
  > The climate alarmists It never ceases to amaze me how these concerns about the climate can be so casually dismissed when other people half-way across the world are literally waiting for their homes to disappear forever. Whole countries, usually poor, that contributed peanuts to our greenhouse gas emissions, some of which (Nauru) have been transformed into a hellscape by foreign mining operations, will disappear underwater in the coming decades. Others, already economically fragile, will see most of their infrastructure and economic investment underwater in the next decades. And given the inertia of these phenomenon, nothing can be done anymore. Stopping all carbon and methane emissions wouldn’t change a thing. I totally get that we don’t have to agree with your so-called "climate alarmists" solutions and methods. But I cannot understand how one can dismiss the issue itself so casually. https://time.com/6217104/climate-crisis-pacific-islands-uninhabitable/ https://time.com/6217104/climate-crisis-pacific-islands-unin...
  - hcurtiss 3y ago
    And how many of them would leap immediately at the opportunity to drive around in cars?
    - ElFitz 3y ago
      Your point being? I fail to see the relevance. Is it supposed to be a rebuttal? How so?
      - hcurtiss 3y ago
        Even those suffering the largest consequences of carbon emissions are desperate to realize the profound benefits that accrue to an energy intensive lifestyle. Even when measured one directly against the other, the trade-offs are usually worth it.
        Eisenstein 3y ago
        Yes, everyone wants to be rich. It isn't sustainable without some kind of cheap and infinite on-demand clean energy source. Until we get that we need to cut back on doing some things. Can you help or are you too entitled and selfish?
- cycomanic 3y ago
  Ok then pay the proper cost for it and don't expect the cost to be externalised to society. That's the funny thing about the arguments of why should I care about everyone else (because that is what your argument boils down to, screw future generations, screw people concerned about car deaths, screw people who want liveable cities...), you still want everyone else to pick up the cost.
- breuleux 3y ago
  > Why do people insist on lowering the standard of living? As someone who lives in a dense city, other people's cars are lowering MY standard of living. Can't cross in the middle of the street. Can't enjoy that nice terrace to the fullest because of the traffic noise. Can't have room to bike safely because of the long line of metal boxes littering the curb and which are apparently more important than I am. These drivers don't even pay fully for the damn space, I'm subsidizing them with my taxes. You have to look beyond your own comfort a little bit and realize there are externalities to it. Cars require a ton of space that could be used for nice things like trees, terraces, bike lanes, gardens or extra housing. They cause a lot of noise pollution and they just make it a lot less pleasant for those of us who actually want to walk or bike.

by kiba 3y ago

briandear 3y ago

[flagged]

hcurtiss 3y ago
[flagged]
fnimick 3y ago
Your car gives you a private benefit at a public cost. That's the problem. Car infrastructure is ruinously expensive and the effects of driving harm everyone, either from the pollution generated in the long-term or in the short-term when statistically you are 100-300x more likely to kill someone than if you were on a bicycle.
- hcurtiss 3y ago
  Maybe. It seems to me that the development of cars has coincided with radical improvement of human wellbeing on every conceivable measure. Yes, you would pollute less if you rode a bike. And even less if you walked. And even less if you never left the house. But having a car opens up a world of possibilities and luxuries that a hundred years ago were simply unimaginable. Most reasonable people would agree that those extraordinary benefits merit some trade-offs.
  - fnimick 3y ago
    > having a car opens up a world of possibilities and luxuries that a hundred years ago were simply unimaginable. [citation needed] Many wonderful cities and regions around the world are perfectly enjoyable with no need for cars. Or are you telling me that people living in central Paris, or London, or New York, or Valencia are suffering a substandard life because they use public transit and walk or bike to their destinations instead? Even regional travel can be easily done without a car - I recently traveled from Edinburgh, to Glasgow, all the way up to Fort William, then back from Skye all the way back to Edinburgh with no car. At no point did I wish I had one. Why is this so hard for us in the US to accomplish?
    - hcurtiss 3y ago
      Having just returned from both London and Paris -- yes, having the ability to tow my motorboat to the reservoir is awesome! And having the ability to just drive out of the city whenever I want is awesome! And having the ability to get to work in a/c without dressing for the weather is awesome. Traveling around without being in close proximity to sick people is awesome! Having cars, and the infrastructure to support them, is decidedly better in my assessment than relying on an e-bike, mass transit, and rental services. I think most people would agree with me.
      - chasd00 3y ago
        > And having the ability to just drive out of the city whenever I want is awesome! This is what does it for me. And a rental just doesnt cut it. My family and I enjoy road trips, even just weekend getaways, and owning a vehicle makes that possible. Also, just regular things like getting kids to rowing practice after school makes all alternatives impractical. There’s no way to get them there on time with public transit and it’s def. too far for an e-bike to get there on time.
        jeffbee 3y ago
        The period of one's life during which one needs to drive the kids to rowing practice passes by fairly rapidly, in the course of the entire life. Structuring our entire society around the use cases of the very few isn't a good idea. Indeed, it would be highly beneficial to busy parents of busy kids if everyone else would get the hell off the road. Most of the people on the road have little reason to be there, other than that we've made it the default choice and outlawed everything else. If people could easily walk to the grocery store, or bicycle to the dentist, or ride a bus to their office, your trip to the boathouse would be ever so much easier.
        kiba 3y ago
        Why not long train ride in the countryside? Or a train tour through the mountain peak. If we're talking luxuries, it's possible to make trains luxurious. They have sleeper trains for example. A lot of thing are possible or the equivalent in a train oriented society.
- zeroonetwothree 3y ago
  I accept that we should remove the subsidies to cars (but somehow the same people think it’s fine to subsidise public transport?). Car owners should pay for pollution and parking. Then we can let the market sort it out.
  - fnimick 3y ago
    Great! Now do roads. The same people who complain about subsidies to public transport don't bat an eye at hundreds of millions spent on extra highway lanes. The typical argument there is "the economic benefit of mobility pays for it!" Yet that same case doesn't apply to public transit, somehow, where the costs are lower and the number of people moved is higher. (and good luck on the parking, considering my neighbors are up in arms over a proposal to increase yearly parking sticker fees from $40ish to $70ish and the true cost of a parking space is more like $500...)
- blq10 3y ago
  Point of order, all infrastructure in the United States is ruinously expensive. There are zero forms of transport infrastructure other than private shuttles that maintain fare box equilibrium
kiba 3y ago
[flagged]
Nakroma 3y ago
[flagged]
- chasd00 3y ago
  And imagine if your laptop was made of chocolate. Live in reality.
ElFitz 3y ago
> The climate alarmists It never ceases to amaze me how these concerns about the climate can be so casually dismissed when other people half-way across the world are literally waiting for their homes to disappear forever. Whole countries, usually poor, that contributed peanuts to our greenhouse gas emissions, some of which (Nauru) have been transformed into a hellscape by foreign mining operations, will disappear underwater in the coming decades. Others, already economically fragile, will see most of their infrastructure and economic investment underwater in the next decades. And given the inertia of these phenomenon, nothing can be done anymore. Stopping all carbon and methane emissions wouldn’t change a thing. I totally get that we don’t have to agree with your so-called "climate alarmists" solutions and methods. But I cannot understand how one can dismiss the issue itself so casually. https://time.com/6217104/climate-crisis-pacific-islands-uninhabitable/ https://time.com/6217104/climate-crisis-pacific-islands-unin...
- hcurtiss 3y ago
  And how many of them would leap immediately at the opportunity to drive around in cars?
  - ElFitz 3y ago
    Your point being? I fail to see the relevance. Is it supposed to be a rebuttal? How so?
    - hcurtiss 3y ago
      Even those suffering the largest consequences of carbon emissions are desperate to realize the profound benefits that accrue to an energy intensive lifestyle. Even when measured one directly against the other, the trade-offs are usually worth it.
      - Eisenstein 3y ago
        Yes, everyone wants to be rich. It isn't sustainable without some kind of cheap and infinite on-demand clean energy source. Until we get that we need to cut back on doing some things. Can you help or are you too entitled and selfish?
cycomanic 3y ago
Ok then pay the proper cost for it and don't expect the cost to be externalised to society. That's the funny thing about the arguments of why should I care about everyone else (because that is what your argument boils down to, screw future generations, screw people concerned about car deaths, screw people who want liveable cities...), you still want everyone else to pick up the cost.
breuleux 3y ago
> Why do people insist on lowering the standard of living? As someone who lives in a dense city, other people's cars are lowering MY standard of living. Can't cross in the middle of the street. Can't enjoy that nice terrace to the fullest because of the traffic noise. Can't have room to bike safely because of the long line of metal boxes littering the curb and which are apparently more important than I am. These drivers don't even pay fully for the damn space, I'm subsidizing them with my taxes. You have to look beyond your own comfort a little bit and realize there are externalities to it. Cars require a ton of space that could be used for nice things like trees, terraces, bike lanes, gardens or extra housing. They cause a lot of noise pollution and they just make it a lot less pleasant for those of us who actually want to walk or bike.