4 ms·

> The only thing that's missing is the political will, and that's because US politics has been bought by the oil industry, which benefits from inefficient trans

> The only thing that's missing is the political will, and that's because US politics has been bought by the oil industry, which benefits from inefficient transportation. That's just not true, and I'm a bit tired of the tendency online to blame "big bad boogeyman conspiracy" whenever it's convenient. Yes, the auto and related industries have had huge impact on the design of our cities that now seems really unfortunate. But I don't think it was some big, evil master plan. People seem to forget that for a really long time people loved driving their cars. Just compare old vs. new cities in the US. Older cities (think NYC, Boston, Chicago) generally are a lot more dense with comparatively great (though unfortunately not always well maintained) public transportation. When other "post WWII" cities boomed, though, people wanted space out in the burbs, they wanted a private car. It's only relatively recently (last 30 years or so) that there has really been a re-evaluation of all the downsides to that sprawl and being trapped in long commutes. In Austin, TX, our public transportation is generally really bad and there has been a huge push to build more of it. At this point though, the geography of Austin and existing land use patterns make the cost of doing so enormous. And we've built a ton of protected bike lanes in the past couple decades, but it's also been over 105F the past two weeks, so it's not hard to see why a car is pretty essential here. Yes, I also wish things had developed differently. But comparing Amsterdam with most cities in the US is just a silly exercise in general that accomplishes nothing.

lockhouse 3y ago
I think outside of major traffic congested cities, most people still love driving their cars.
- starttoaster 3y ago
  I don’t know that I buy that. People that are into cars, and buy a very specific car because it’s their dream car they’ve been seeing in recent Fast and Furious films, sure maybe them. Kids that just acquired the new freedom of being able to go wherever they want, sure probably them too. But the average person sitting in traffic to get to some specific destination? Now that I don’t buy for one minute. We’re all just angrily thinking about how the other people on the road are slowing _me_ down, or endangering _my_ life not paying attention to the road.
  - lockhouse 3y ago
    That's why I said outside of cities. Yes, many cities are absolutely miserable to drive in, but scenic country roads are often an absolute delight to drive on.
    - starttoaster 3y ago
      The trouble in this conversation is that I suspect we both consider each other to be exceptions to a rule. From my perspective, I'd say you're either one of the classifications of people I've identified to enjoy driving, or you're one of the minority that just actually like casual driving. And on the other side, you're going to think I'm the exception to your rule where most people apparently like being out on the road. From my subjective experience, driving appears to be an experience that induces some amount of stress that one would prefer to avoid if at all possible. For example, I don't know anybody that's psyched when they forget to pick something up on their last grocery trip and relish the chance to drive back to the shop for it. When remote work was beginning to take off, most people I knew fortunate enough to have that kind of job were just excited to not have to drive in to work every day. I could go on, but suffice it to say, people don't seem to enjoy to drive anywhere, from what I have observed. The destination is usually the thing to be excited by, as in: being finished with the drive there. And from what I have observed, this generalization has been mostly true in the suburbs and even in small towns.
  - mcv 3y ago
    I think there are times when people love driving, and there are times when they hate it. It's a good reason to provide better alternatives.
brenns10 3y ago
> That's just not true, and I'm a bit tired of the tendency online to blame "big bad boogeyman conspiracy" whenever it's convenient. > Yes, the auto and related industries have had huge impact on the design of our cities that now seems really unfortunate. But I don't think it was some big, evil master plan. I think I understand your perspective, but why does it have to be an evil master plan? Large corporations aim to make more money for shareholders. If a car/oil corporation can advance a car-oriented agenda through lobbying, PR campaigns, etc, then that's the obvious choice and they'll do it. Clearly it's not an evil plan, it's just business. And now, those same companies are massively enriched and in the position to lobby and create PR campaigns even more effectively to protect their profits. Again, it's just business. The whole frustration of the poster you replied to was that these companies are powerful, influential in politics, and are able to stifle the political will to make changes that improve cities by de-emphasizing cars. This isn't to say that there's a boogeyman, a conspiracy of people pulling the strings. It's just to say that corporations advocate for profit above public good or public health. So yes, of course there's no conspiracy. But also, these companies are not only directly responsible for the (perhaps unintended) adverse affects of cars on cities' public transit, but also are doubly responsible for the influence they exert every day on the political system to keep the status quo.
- mcv 3y ago
  > Clearly it's not an evil plan, it's just business. Exactly. Also consider that Exxon knew in 1978 about the risk of global warming, they briefly considered warning society about it, realised that would cut into their profit, and instead decided on a big misinformation campaign to discredit the idea of global warming. To them, that's just business. They're not sitting there twirling their mustaches and laughing diabolically, they're sitting there looking at their spreadsheets. And it's undeniable that the US government has had very close ties with the oil industry over the decades. Wars have been started and governments have been overthrown over oil. I don't normally like big conspiracy talk, but I think it's naive to think that the oil industry is innocent of some of the problems the US is facing. I think they're one of the major driving forces behind several major problems. All just to maximise profits.

lockhouse 3y ago

I think outside of major traffic congested cities, most people still love driving their cars.

starttoaster 3y ago
I don’t know that I buy that. People that are into cars, and buy a very specific car because it’s their dream car they’ve been seeing in recent Fast and Furious films, sure maybe them. Kids that just acquired the new freedom of being able to go wherever they want, sure probably them too. But the average person sitting in traffic to get to some specific destination? Now that I don’t buy for one minute. We’re all just angrily thinking about how the other people on the road are slowing _me_ down, or endangering _my_ life not paying attention to the road.
- lockhouse 3y ago
  That's why I said outside of cities. Yes, many cities are absolutely miserable to drive in, but scenic country roads are often an absolute delight to drive on.
  - starttoaster 3y ago
    The trouble in this conversation is that I suspect we both consider each other to be exceptions to a rule. From my perspective, I'd say you're either one of the classifications of people I've identified to enjoy driving, or you're one of the minority that just actually like casual driving. And on the other side, you're going to think I'm the exception to your rule where most people apparently like being out on the road. From my subjective experience, driving appears to be an experience that induces some amount of stress that one would prefer to avoid if at all possible. For example, I don't know anybody that's psyched when they forget to pick something up on their last grocery trip and relish the chance to drive back to the shop for it. When remote work was beginning to take off, most people I knew fortunate enough to have that kind of job were just excited to not have to drive in to work every day. I could go on, but suffice it to say, people don't seem to enjoy to drive anywhere, from what I have observed. The destination is usually the thing to be excited by, as in: being finished with the drive there. And from what I have observed, this generalization has been mostly true in the suburbs and even in small towns.
- mcv 3y ago
  I think there are times when people love driving, and there are times when they hate it. It's a good reason to provide better alternatives.

brenns10 3y ago

> That's just not true, and I'm a bit tired of the tendency online to blame "big bad boogeyman conspiracy" whenever it's convenient. > Yes, the auto and related industries have had huge impact on the design of our cities that now seems really unfortunate. But I don't think it was some big, evil master plan. I think I understand your perspective, but why does it have to be an evil master plan? Large corporations aim to make more money for shareholders. If a car/oil corporation can advance a car-oriented agenda through lobbying, PR campaigns, etc, then that's the obvious choice and they'll do it. Clearly it's not an evil plan, it's just business. And now, those same companies are massively enriched and in the position to lobby and create PR campaigns even more effectively to protect their profits. Again, it's just business. The whole frustration of the poster you replied to was that these companies are powerful, influential in politics, and are able to stifle the political will to make changes that improve cities by de-emphasizing cars. This isn't to say that there's a boogeyman, a conspiracy of people pulling the strings. It's just to say that corporations advocate for profit above public good or public health. So yes, of course there's no conspiracy. But also, these companies are not only directly responsible for the (perhaps unintended) adverse affects of cars on cities' public transit, but also are doubly responsible for the influence they exert every day on the political system to keep the status quo.

mcv 3y ago
> Clearly it's not an evil plan, it's just business. Exactly. Also consider that Exxon knew in 1978 about the risk of global warming, they briefly considered warning society about it, realised that would cut into their profit, and instead decided on a big misinformation campaign to discredit the idea of global warming. To them, that's just business. They're not sitting there twirling their mustaches and laughing diabolically, they're sitting there looking at their spreadsheets. And it's undeniable that the US government has had very close ties with the oil industry over the decades. Wars have been started and governments have been overthrown over oil. I don't normally like big conspiracy talk, but I think it's naive to think that the oil industry is innocent of some of the problems the US is facing. I think they're one of the major driving forces behind several major problems. All just to maximise profits.