4 ms·
It would be more polite and useful to ask me to clarify rather than producing a strawman. I don't prefer driving because it is inexpensive, I prefer it because
by throwaway22032 2y ago
It would be more polite and useful to ask me to clarify rather than producing a strawman.
I don't prefer driving because it is inexpensive, I prefer it because it has greater utility for me. If the cost of fuel doubled or more I would still do it, I'd just be a bit more efficient with the journeys I do make.
I'm not terrified of the tube/trains/buses, I use them. It's just a bit shit, doesn't go to loads of places I want to go, and is generally less comfortable.
I do think that bigger is better. I don't pay for someone to clean or maintain my house, I do it myself.
I haven't been told that bigger is better, it simply is. For example, just yesterday I made a table. In order to do that I needed enough space to work in and store my tools. I could not do this in a smaller house or apartment.
Theoretically I could hire a workshop or go to a hackspace but that would be substantially more hassle than just walking into my garden or the garage or whatever.
I like human interactions. Just not with endless hordes in a super dense city centre. I prefer chatting with my neighbours, or someone on a hiking trail, or having people over, etc.
It sounds as if you just have different preferences to me. Different hobbies, desires, etc. That's fine, that's why you don't prefer driving. I do.
- PaulDavisThe1st 2y agoI live in a small village of 250 people in rural New Mexico, 25 miles from the nearest town. To get to almost anywhere I have to drive. When I socialize, it is mostly with neighbors or people on hiking trails. I have a large set of tools out back and space to use them. Don't assume that my preferences are so different from yours (though your use of "the tube" suggests that you're located in SE England, so many things may be different). My point was that all the preferences you expressed come with a cost, not only to you, but to everything and everyone else as well. Talking about these things as if they are merely personal choices is misleading, they are actually personal choices that, in aggregate, shape the world we all get to live in. And the specific set of choices that you listed, for the most part, in aggregate, have a negative impact on the world. I'm a participant in that too, clearly.
- throwaway22032 2y agoI disagree that these things have a negative impact on the world when you or I do them. I think that if billions of people do them, we have issues, sure. But there is a finite carrying capacity regardless of what we do. We could live plugged in like the Matrix and there would still be an upper bound somewhere. It is patently nonsensical to take the behaviour of one person or even a million people, scale it to 8 billion, and then claim that it's unsustainable as a result. We have plenty of mechanisms to prevent that from happening. One obvious one is that, as a Brit, I'm legally not permitted to move to the US and live in the same way that someone in Arizona does, which puts a cap on my lifestyle. Most people are in situations like that - ever heard of the "golden billion"?
- PaulDavisThe1st 2y agoKind of amusing, then, that I'm a Brit :)
- cageface 2y agoWhat brought you all the way from the UK to rural New Mexico?
- PaulDavisThe1st 2y agoNothing like that direct. I've lived in Seattle and Philadelphia before this. The rest of my history is easily discoverable online if you're really interested. Basically, my wife and I really like our house and the region where we live.