4 ms·

This whole idea is fucking terrifying. Normalizing not having cars i.e. making people dependent on the government from birth. If you didn't understand what Amer

This whole idea is fucking terrifying. Normalizing not having cars i.e. making people dependent on the government from birth. If you didn't understand what Americans were complaining about with gun laws you will soon.

Mashimo 3y ago
> making people dependent on the government from birth. Roads are also mostly build by the Government. A lot of people around the world are born in government build/run hospitals.
m000 3y ago
Aren't you missing a "/s"? I hope you are.
oulipo 3y ago
Are you a troll? Nothing better than a city without car, it's exactly the reverse: we have pure freedom (and health)
- NinjaSaves 3y ago
  A new government comes in and limits your ability to use it. What now? Car-free cities seem nice until they're used as leverage. No cars means massive power for a tiny number of people. Not everyone is a troll when they disagree with you.
  - eropple 3y ago
    Who exactly do you think maintains the roads that cars need to run on? Or are you bombing around your carmaxxing city in a lifted 4Runner all day just in case you gotta Go Off-Road Because The Government Closed The Roads? The whole concept is silly on its face.
  - Asraelite 3y ago
    A government can always take away your driver's license. In practice this happens far, far more often than restricting use of public transport.
- trgn 3y ago
  true - you feel very free when everything is accessible on foot. Healthier, more centered, less like a bag of potatoes. It's having options, agency. You can live in a car-free city, and still have a car for the stuff you see in the car commercials, just not required for the day2day. It's counter-intuitive, and I miss it.
Angostura 3y ago
Weird take. Do all, busses and train systems have to be government owned? And who builds and pays for those roads the cars travel on?
slothtrop 3y ago
Err you're still dependent on government in the case of vehicles, if you use roads and freeways and.. everything related to traffic.
dgacmu 3y ago
Yes, because we're (hospitals, 911) not (schools) dependent (roads) on (water) each (trash service) other (fire and police services) other (airports) to (finance) start (research) with. We live in a complex modern world with a lot of dependencies and moving parts.
NinjaSaves 3y ago
Exactly. If you're skeptical of gun ownership, go to England and start voicing controversial opinions, or to Australia during a viral pandemic, and see how quickly you realize that "any old fool could be armed" is unbelievably important to ensure everyone keeps their basic ordinary human rights. If you think "no cars" is a good idea, live under a government that takes away your right to public transport. It may not happen right now where you live, but if they need leverage against you, they could use that, and there would be nothing you could do.
gammalost 3y ago
You are already dependent on the government from birth. It is the government that has a monopoly on violence and they are the enforcers of private property.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
Tarrosion 3y ago
I don't think I follow, can you elaborate? * Car users are quite dependent on the government for transportation, e.g. the many billions (in the US) of public dollars spent on roads each year. Hard to get around without them! * Even if we hand-wave that away and assume car users aren't dependent on the government for transportation, surely _everyone_ is dependent for other reasons like enjoying public goods (national defense, clean air and water, rule of law), access to the social safety net, etc.?
Qem 3y ago
> Normalizing not having cars i.e. making people dependent on the government from birth. IMHO relying on cars makes us more dependent on the government, overall, because then we depend on road maintenance, fuel supply, fuel subsidies, raw materials and transport for auto parts, et cetera. The government is a critical actor in ensuring all of this.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

Mashimo 3y ago

> making people dependent on the government from birth. Roads are also mostly build by the Government. A lot of people around the world are born in government build/run hospitals.

m000 3y ago

Aren't you missing a "/s"? I hope you are.

oulipo 3y ago

Are you a troll? Nothing better than a city without car, it's exactly the reverse: we have pure freedom (and health)

NinjaSaves 3y ago
A new government comes in and limits your ability to use it. What now? Car-free cities seem nice until they're used as leverage. No cars means massive power for a tiny number of people. Not everyone is a troll when they disagree with you.
- eropple 3y ago
  Who exactly do you think maintains the roads that cars need to run on? Or are you bombing around your carmaxxing city in a lifted 4Runner all day just in case you gotta Go Off-Road Because The Government Closed The Roads? The whole concept is silly on its face.
- Asraelite 3y ago
  A government can always take away your driver's license. In practice this happens far, far more often than restricting use of public transport.
trgn 3y ago
true - you feel very free when everything is accessible on foot. Healthier, more centered, less like a bag of potatoes. It's having options, agency. You can live in a car-free city, and still have a car for the stuff you see in the car commercials, just not required for the day2day. It's counter-intuitive, and I miss it.

Angostura 3y ago

Weird take. Do all, busses and train systems have to be government owned? And who builds and pays for those roads the cars travel on?

slothtrop 3y ago

Err you're still dependent on government in the case of vehicles, if you use roads and freeways and.. everything related to traffic.

dgacmu 3y ago

Yes, because we're (hospitals, 911) not (schools) dependent (roads) on (water) each (trash service) other (fire and police services) other (airports) to (finance) start (research) with. We live in a complex modern world with a lot of dependencies and moving parts.

NinjaSaves 3y ago

Exactly. If you're skeptical of gun ownership, go to England and start voicing controversial opinions, or to Australia during a viral pandemic, and see how quickly you realize that "any old fool could be armed" is unbelievably important to ensure everyone keeps their basic ordinary human rights. If you think "no cars" is a good idea, live under a government that takes away your right to public transport. It may not happen right now where you live, but if they need leverage against you, they could use that, and there would be nothing you could do.

gammalost 3y ago

You are already dependent on the government from birth. It is the government that has a monopoly on violence and they are the enforcers of private property.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

Tarrosion 3y ago

I don't think I follow, can you elaborate? * Car users are quite dependent on the government for transportation, e.g. the many billions (in the US) of public dollars spent on roads each year. Hard to get around without them! * Even if we hand-wave that away and assume car users aren't dependent on the government for transportation, surely _everyone_ is dependent for other reasons like enjoying public goods (national defense, clean air and water, rule of law), access to the social safety net, etc.?

Qem 3y ago

> Normalizing not having cars i.e. making people dependent on the government from birth. IMHO relying on cars makes us more dependent on the government, overall, because then we depend on road maintenance, fuel supply, fuel subsidies, raw materials and transport for auto parts, et cetera. The government is a critical actor in ensuring all of this.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]