5 ms·

People need to feed their family, and in order to do that, they need transportation. Until public transportation is good enough not to make you miserable, peopl

People need to feed their family, and in order to do that, they need transportation. Until public transportation is good enough not to make you miserable, people will use cars. Blaming people for consuming is like blaming the victim of domestic abuse from not running away and becoming homeless.

chpatrick 3y ago
Cars are only a part of the problem, but people who need to drive any old car just to work are an even smaller one. There are many many people who drive oversized fuel inefficient cars for no particular reason, or are just as wasteful in the rest of their lives. Even in Europe many people drive alone in their cars even when great public transport is available just because it's more comfortable. That's not the gas station's or the car manufacturer's fault, it's the driver's.
- lotsofpulp 3y ago
  Cars are basically the entire problem. Cars allow everyone to consume more space per person, and more space per person means more mass can be consumed and that mass has to travel further distances. And all of that translates to more energy consumed per person.
  - chpatrick 3y ago
    When it comes to the overall problem of climate change cars are only one issue, the others being manufacturing, construction, services, agriculture, travel, etc. Many of these don't have a clean solution yet for the current demand so fossil fuels are here to stay unless we manage to reduce that demand, which the individual consumer needs to accept.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - lotsofpulp 3y ago
      >unless we manage to reduce that demand, which the individual consumer needs to accept. My point was no one needs to accept that as long as cars are around.
      - chpatrick 3y ago
        I don't think cars are responsible for waste in agriculture or air travel, but ok.
        lotsofpulp 3y ago
        That is true, I guess if people did not have personal cars, then that consumption could be replaced by air travel and/or more food that travels further (even more than the current amounts).
- bheadmaster 3y ago
  If public transportation was as reliable, comfortable and cheap as driving a car, nobody would drive a car. That's my whole point. But it's not - it's expensive, unreliable and utterly uncomfortable.
  - chpatrick 3y ago
    In my city we have fantastic public transportation that's cheap, comfortable, reliable and faster than sitting in traffic. Despite that, the streets are full of single-occupant cars with drivers who just don't want to mingle with the plebs. They're not helpless against big oil - they're just wasteful.
    - bheadmaster 3y ago
      > the streets are full of single-occupant cars with drivers who just don't want to mingle with the plebs I assume the "comfortable" public transportation still requires one to occupy same space with many other people, perhaps even sharing personal space during rush hour? If my assumption is correct, I'd say that public transportation is not nearly as comfortable as it needs to be to replace cars. Not many people like having to share room with strangers, especially when there is no requirement of personal hygiene or quieteness. And that's not even mentioning the issue of safety - how safe are you from getting mugged and/or killed on your public transportation? The risk is drastically lower when you're in your own car.
      - chpatrick 3y ago
        > If my assumption is correct, I'd say that public transportation is not nearly as comfortable as it needs to be to replace cars. Not many people like having to share room with strangers, especially when there is no requirement of personal hygiene or quieteness. Well then those people can't pretend that they have no choice but to pollute or that it's big companies' fault, they're just too spoiled to accept any change to their lifestyle. That's my whole point. > And that's not even mentioning the issue of safety - how safe are you from getting mugged and/or killed on your public transportation? The risk is drastically lower when you're in your own car. Where I live (Budapest) you're way more likely to die in a car crash than get killed on public transport (or anywhere). This isn't the US or Somalia. For comparison, last year there were 89 murders and 201 traffic fatalities. People make 3.2 million trips on public transport every day.
sokoloff 3y ago
If you take that logic line one more step, it’s a good thing Exxon stands ready to supply those consumers with the oil products they need.
- bheadmaster 3y ago
  Yes, as much as it's good that a domestic abuser still pays the rent and puts the food on the table. On the other hand, it is a failure of the government that people don't have any other choice but to consume what is available. Don't blame powerless victims, blame the powerful who are responsible, but do nothing about the problem.
  - chpatrick 3y ago
    If 5% of the people on the road are victims and 95% of the people drive huge cars just because they feel like it, can't they be blamed?
    - bheadmaster 3y ago
      The victims? Of course they can't be blamed. The people who drive huge cars can be blamed, but it's pointless because you'll never get people to voluntarily stop driving huge cars if they want to drive huge cars. You can, and should, blame the government for allowing manufacturers to sell huge cars and people to drive them, if the problem is so huge. If there's a point to your comment, I did not get it.
      - chpatrick 3y ago
        The point is that people who buy huge cars can't claim that it's Ford's fault for polluting when it's their personal choice to get a wasteful vehicle. Same with people who fly a lot for fun or any number of environmentally damaging things.
        bheadmaster 3y ago
        Yeah, but each individual, by themselves, cannot make any significant positive change by giving up huge cars, while doing so means giving up something they want. So the gain/loss tradeoff is not good on an individual level. You can assign collective blame, but what good is that, except for virtue signalling and guilt tripping? It's not an effective method of social change. There is an organization (government) that can make those changes that you want (ban huge cars) - so why not blame them for not doing it?

chpatrick 3y ago

Cars are only a part of the problem, but people who need to drive any old car just to work are an even smaller one. There are many many people who drive oversized fuel inefficient cars for no particular reason, or are just as wasteful in the rest of their lives. Even in Europe many people drive alone in their cars even when great public transport is available just because it's more comfortable. That's not the gas station's or the car manufacturer's fault, it's the driver's.

lotsofpulp 3y ago
Cars are basically the entire problem. Cars allow everyone to consume more space per person, and more space per person means more mass can be consumed and that mass has to travel further distances. And all of that translates to more energy consumed per person.
- chpatrick 3y ago
  When it comes to the overall problem of climate change cars are only one issue, the others being manufacturing, construction, services, agriculture, travel, etc. Many of these don't have a clean solution yet for the current demand so fossil fuels are here to stay unless we manage to reduce that demand, which the individual consumer needs to accept.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - lotsofpulp 3y ago
    >unless we manage to reduce that demand, which the individual consumer needs to accept. My point was no one needs to accept that as long as cars are around.
    - chpatrick 3y ago
      I don't think cars are responsible for waste in agriculture or air travel, but ok.
      - lotsofpulp 3y ago
        That is true, I guess if people did not have personal cars, then that consumption could be replaced by air travel and/or more food that travels further (even more than the current amounts).
bheadmaster 3y ago
If public transportation was as reliable, comfortable and cheap as driving a car, nobody would drive a car. That's my whole point. But it's not - it's expensive, unreliable and utterly uncomfortable.
- chpatrick 3y ago
  In my city we have fantastic public transportation that's cheap, comfortable, reliable and faster than sitting in traffic. Despite that, the streets are full of single-occupant cars with drivers who just don't want to mingle with the plebs. They're not helpless against big oil - they're just wasteful.
  - bheadmaster 3y ago
    > the streets are full of single-occupant cars with drivers who just don't want to mingle with the plebs I assume the "comfortable" public transportation still requires one to occupy same space with many other people, perhaps even sharing personal space during rush hour? If my assumption is correct, I'd say that public transportation is not nearly as comfortable as it needs to be to replace cars. Not many people like having to share room with strangers, especially when there is no requirement of personal hygiene or quieteness. And that's not even mentioning the issue of safety - how safe are you from getting mugged and/or killed on your public transportation? The risk is drastically lower when you're in your own car.
    - chpatrick 3y ago
      > If my assumption is correct, I'd say that public transportation is not nearly as comfortable as it needs to be to replace cars. Not many people like having to share room with strangers, especially when there is no requirement of personal hygiene or quieteness. Well then those people can't pretend that they have no choice but to pollute or that it's big companies' fault, they're just too spoiled to accept any change to their lifestyle. That's my whole point. > And that's not even mentioning the issue of safety - how safe are you from getting mugged and/or killed on your public transportation? The risk is drastically lower when you're in your own car. Where I live (Budapest) you're way more likely to die in a car crash than get killed on public transport (or anywhere). This isn't the US or Somalia. For comparison, last year there were 89 murders and 201 traffic fatalities. People make 3.2 million trips on public transport every day.

sokoloff 3y ago

If you take that logic line one more step, it’s a good thing Exxon stands ready to supply those consumers with the oil products they need.

bheadmaster 3y ago
Yes, as much as it's good that a domestic abuser still pays the rent and puts the food on the table. On the other hand, it is a failure of the government that people don't have any other choice but to consume what is available. Don't blame powerless victims, blame the powerful who are responsible, but do nothing about the problem.
- chpatrick 3y ago
  If 5% of the people on the road are victims and 95% of the people drive huge cars just because they feel like it, can't they be blamed?
  - bheadmaster 3y ago
    The victims? Of course they can't be blamed. The people who drive huge cars can be blamed, but it's pointless because you'll never get people to voluntarily stop driving huge cars if they want to drive huge cars. You can, and should, blame the government for allowing manufacturers to sell huge cars and people to drive them, if the problem is so huge. If there's a point to your comment, I did not get it.
    - chpatrick 3y ago
      The point is that people who buy huge cars can't claim that it's Ford's fault for polluting when it's their personal choice to get a wasteful vehicle. Same with people who fly a lot for fun or any number of environmentally damaging things.
      - bheadmaster 3y ago
        Yeah, but each individual, by themselves, cannot make any significant positive change by giving up huge cars, while doing so means giving up something they want. So the gain/loss tradeoff is not good on an individual level. You can assign collective blame, but what good is that, except for virtue signalling and guilt tripping? It's not an effective method of social change. There is an organization (government) that can make those changes that you want (ban huge cars) - so why not blame them for not doing it?