3 ms·

> It's always this circular logic where "I need my car because the supermarket is an hour walk" but the supermarket is an hour walk because everyone drives. If

by koolba 3y ago

> It's always this circular logic where "I need my car because the supermarket is an hour walk" but the supermarket is an hour walk because everyone drives. If there’s no roads and vehicles, how does the food get to the supermarket?

Gigachad 3y ago
There's a huge gap between "literally no roads or vehicles of any kind" and "I have to use my car to get anywhere". These bad faith arguments are tiring.
- s3p 3y ago
  You propose no alternative. You can't have cars if you have no roads. You can't have roads without cars, because you need to figure out how things are going to get to that supermarket.
defrost 3y ago
You can still have light roadways, people walking on them mixed with bikes and electric scooters, small electric cars, etc. You can still stock supermarkets, etc, with larger vehicles that only run once a day or every few days depending on demand, etc. It's common in places other than the US with it's hyper car centric development to have more walkable spaces.
afuchs 3y ago
That's a bit of a non sequitur. Roads and streets existed before cars. Even then, that ignores that the same location can be traveled to through different means. Goods can be delivered to a store by a van even if most customers arrive on foot or by public transportation. There are streets within north America which ban passenger vehicles but still allow trucks and vans for deliveries.
apexalpha 3y ago
In the Netherlands many shops sit in pedestrianized areas. The local government sets specific times, mostly low-traffic hours such as between 07:00 and 11:00 to open the area to trucks and vans to resupply shops. The other times these are closed with things like this: https://lowist.be/app/uploads/2017/03/Meir-antwerpen-4-1024x683.jpg https://lowist.be/app/uploads/2017/03/Meir-antwerpen-4-1024x...
camgunz 3y ago
No one's saying "no roads or vehicles", op was pointing to the circular justification for the level of infrastructure built up for vehicles. This is a classic straw man.

by koolba 3y ago

Gigachad 3y ago

There's a huge gap between "literally no roads or vehicles of any kind" and "I have to use my car to get anywhere". These bad faith arguments are tiring.

s3p 3y ago
You propose no alternative. You can't have cars if you have no roads. You can't have roads without cars, because you need to figure out how things are going to get to that supermarket.

defrost 3y ago

You can still have light roadways, people walking on them mixed with bikes and electric scooters, small electric cars, etc. You can still stock supermarkets, etc, with larger vehicles that only run once a day or every few days depending on demand, etc. It's common in places other than the US with it's hyper car centric development to have more walkable spaces.

afuchs 3y ago

That's a bit of a non sequitur. Roads and streets existed before cars. Even then, that ignores that the same location can be traveled to through different means. Goods can be delivered to a store by a van even if most customers arrive on foot or by public transportation. There are streets within north America which ban passenger vehicles but still allow trucks and vans for deliveries.

apexalpha 3y ago

In the Netherlands many shops sit in pedestrianized areas. The local government sets specific times, mostly low-traffic hours such as between 07:00 and 11:00 to open the area to trucks and vans to resupply shops. The other times these are closed with things like this: https://lowist.be/app/uploads/2017/03/Meir-antwerpen-4-1024x683.jpg https://lowist.be/app/uploads/2017/03/Meir-antwerpen-4-1024x...

camgunz 3y ago

No one's saying "no roads or vehicles", op was pointing to the circular justification for the level of infrastructure built up for vehicles. This is a classic straw man.