5 ms·

ok but how does this matter for other countries? The approach works for Singapore, but that says nothing about what is right for other places. Parent comment ca

ok but how does this matter for other countries? The approach works for Singapore, but that says nothing about what is right for other places. Parent comment came across as being generally anti car.

Daishiman 3y ago
A substantial number of American suburbs cannot pay for and maintain their car-centric infrastructure. The economic cost of requiring cars over public transit has an enormous social cost. The diseconomics of scale from designing cities around cars can also be priced in. Singapore may be extremely expensive than other places for car ownership but ultimately the prices in infrastructure, pollution and inneficiencies exist everywhere.
- wait_a_minute 3y ago
  These are just assertions without evidence, and every time I see these they inevitably end up being someone’s ideological gripes rather than something based on evidence. Cars are awesome. Yes, islands are constrained in space so it makes sense that everything including houses would be more expensive. But not everywhere is Singapore or Hawaii.
  - throw9away6 3y ago
    The direct cost of cars isn’t that bad but the low density that cars allow requires a lot of extra infrastructure that is very expensive to maintain.
  - Daishiman 3y ago
    I'm sorry but it seems absolutely self-evident that cars produce pollution in the cost of microplastics, noise pollution, CO2 emissions, burnt oil, etc. It's self-evident that car accidents have a huge cost in lives. It's self-evident that requiring people to be of sound mind and senses to have a license to drive because there are literally no affordable alternatives causes impact to minors, elders, and people with disabilities. No, cars suck. They suck really bad. Living next to an avenue or a highway literally reduces life expectancy. Spending n% of your waking hours commuting having to drive in a medium with a nontrivial chance of an accident versus being in a train or bus or walking is a clear disadvantage to anyone who doesn't absolutely depend on a car to move. Allocating road infrastucture to a budget is a clear use of funds that could be literally going anywhere else for better use. I swear some people are just so used to the needless pain of car ownership they can't imagine anything else, and I say this as someone who owns and uses a car.
    - wait_a_minute 3y ago
      Nah, the majority of people like and want to be able to go anywhere whenever they want. It’s nice to have nice cities and nice public transport but you don’t need to get rid of cars for that. Some people have a weird fixation on having everyone live in giant cities with giant buildings with as much density as possible. That would bring its own issues and then you’d end up spending huge resources to try to fix those issues instead of maintaining the road infrastructure that gives people freedom.
      - Daishiman 3y ago
        Who said gettin rid of cars? We just said pricing their environmental and infrastructure costs appropriately, which is much, much higher than it currently is. The idea that cars bring freedom just happens because many countries happen to have atrocious public infrastructure. As a car owner in a city having a car is 95% of the time a pain in the ass and justifiably so.

ok but how does this matter for other countries? The approach works for Singapore, but that says nothing about what is right for other places. Parent comment came across as being generally anti car.

Daishiman 3y ago

A substantial number of American suburbs cannot pay for and maintain their car-centric infrastructure. The economic cost of requiring cars over public transit has an enormous social cost. The diseconomics of scale from designing cities around cars can also be priced in. Singapore may be extremely expensive than other places for car ownership but ultimately the prices in infrastructure, pollution and inneficiencies exist everywhere.

wait_a_minute 3y ago
These are just assertions without evidence, and every time I see these they inevitably end up being someone’s ideological gripes rather than something based on evidence. Cars are awesome. Yes, islands are constrained in space so it makes sense that everything including houses would be more expensive. But not everywhere is Singapore or Hawaii.
- throw9away6 3y ago
  The direct cost of cars isn’t that bad but the low density that cars allow requires a lot of extra infrastructure that is very expensive to maintain.
- Daishiman 3y ago
  I'm sorry but it seems absolutely self-evident that cars produce pollution in the cost of microplastics, noise pollution, CO2 emissions, burnt oil, etc. It's self-evident that car accidents have a huge cost in lives. It's self-evident that requiring people to be of sound mind and senses to have a license to drive because there are literally no affordable alternatives causes impact to minors, elders, and people with disabilities. No, cars suck. They suck really bad. Living next to an avenue or a highway literally reduces life expectancy. Spending n% of your waking hours commuting having to drive in a medium with a nontrivial chance of an accident versus being in a train or bus or walking is a clear disadvantage to anyone who doesn't absolutely depend on a car to move. Allocating road infrastucture to a budget is a clear use of funds that could be literally going anywhere else for better use. I swear some people are just so used to the needless pain of car ownership they can't imagine anything else, and I say this as someone who owns and uses a car.
  - wait_a_minute 3y ago
    Nah, the majority of people like and want to be able to go anywhere whenever they want. It’s nice to have nice cities and nice public transport but you don’t need to get rid of cars for that. Some people have a weird fixation on having everyone live in giant cities with giant buildings with as much density as possible. That would bring its own issues and then you’d end up spending huge resources to try to fix those issues instead of maintaining the road infrastructure that gives people freedom.
    - Daishiman 3y ago
      Who said gettin rid of cars? We just said pricing their environmental and infrastructure costs appropriately, which is much, much higher than it currently is. The idea that cars bring freedom just happens because many countries happen to have atrocious public infrastructure. As a car owner in a city having a car is 95% of the time a pain in the ass and justifiably so.