3 ms·

So you want to force everyone to walk and bike and give up the conveniences of a private vehicle? Why not just mandate that everyone has to do compulsory exerci

So you want to force everyone to walk and bike and give up the conveniences of a private vehicle? Why not just mandate that everyone has to do compulsory exercise everyday instead if we’re going to be paternalistic like that.

mslate 3y ago
No, I do not want everyone to be forced to drive--a reality that many are discussing in this thread but you choose to ignore. The mandate is accomplished with parking minimums, federal highway subsidies. I cannot find an apartment in my community that does not have a parking space--it has been illegal to build such a unit of housing for decades. The amount of publicly owned real estate that is given for free to car owners to store their cars is worth trillions. And you tell me I'm being paternalistic :)
eesmith 3y ago
You've read too much into the response. "Why shouldn't they buy cars if they want cars?" is a loaded question. Why do they 'want' cars? For many people it is the only reasonable means of transport. We know even from comments in this thread that some of the people who "want" cars now would prefer alternatives. When you speak of force, remember that alternatives were often taken away by force, as when a walkable part of town (often where poor and/or black people lived) was torn up to create a highway. Speaking of paternalism; zoning, backed by the force of law, prevents people from building a granny flat, and prevents someone from converting their garage into a neighborhood corner shop. Paternalism is why we have so many outsized parking space mandates. Paternalism is why modern suburban sprawl is subsidized over old-style compact and walkable so-called streetcar suburbs. If you are really against paternalism, help get rid of these paternalistic zoning laws, like laws which end up forcing most people to live in single family homes even when they would not want to pay for such expensive housing if other options existed. (And no, not all zoning laws are paternalistic. Don't build a toxic chemical processing plant in a residential area.)

mslate 3y ago

No, I do not want everyone to be forced to drive--a reality that many are discussing in this thread but you choose to ignore. The mandate is accomplished with parking minimums, federal highway subsidies. I cannot find an apartment in my community that does not have a parking space--it has been illegal to build such a unit of housing for decades. The amount of publicly owned real estate that is given for free to car owners to store their cars is worth trillions. And you tell me I'm being paternalistic :)

eesmith 3y ago

You've read too much into the response. "Why shouldn't they buy cars if they want cars?" is a loaded question. Why do they 'want' cars? For many people it is the only reasonable means of transport. We know even from comments in this thread that some of the people who "want" cars now would prefer alternatives. When you speak of force, remember that alternatives were often taken away by force, as when a walkable part of town (often where poor and/or black people lived) was torn up to create a highway. Speaking of paternalism; zoning, backed by the force of law, prevents people from building a granny flat, and prevents someone from converting their garage into a neighborhood corner shop. Paternalism is why we have so many outsized parking space mandates. Paternalism is why modern suburban sprawl is subsidized over old-style compact and walkable so-called streetcar suburbs. If you are really against paternalism, help get rid of these paternalistic zoning laws, like laws which end up forcing most people to live in single family homes even when they would not want to pay for such expensive housing if other options existed. (And no, not all zoning laws are paternalistic. Don't build a toxic chemical processing plant in a residential area.)