5 ms·

Why would I want a shift to walking? Cars give me fast transportation on my own schedule and let me have far more access to things than just walking or walking

Why would I want a shift to walking? Cars give me fast transportation on my own schedule and let me have far more access to things than just walking or walking plus public transit.

cbeach 2y ago
Exactly. And cars are essential for many journeys, and for normal family life in many out-of-town regions. Yet so many people on forums like this live in metropolitan bubbles and have no idea why cars might be necessary. There’s a lot of ideological opposition to motorists at the moment and it needs to stop, because the proposed “solutions” to motoring are zero-sum and in some cases downright hostile
- sagarm 2y ago
  Cities have a limited amount of space, and a disproportionate amount of it is allocated to drivers. It's fine to choose to live in a car dependent suburbs; but don't be surprised when urbanites want to prevent fast through traffic just like suburbanites do. They're not obligated to design their neighborhood for your convenience.
  - trgn 2y ago
    This is my biggest gripe in the US. it's not the cars per se. it's that sub/ex-urbanites want to change the city to conform to their values. keep your car, i don't care, drive everywhere, but don't trash up the city just for your convenience. Let a thousand flowers bloom. cars for the fur trappers, but beautiful, calm pedestrian environments for the urbanites.
    - tech_ken 2y ago
      > it's that sub/ex-urbanites want to change the city to conform to their values. keep your car, i don't care, drive everywhere, but don't trash up the city just for your convenience. Agree with the sentiment but IMO suburbs and car-centric cities are basically mutually defining. Suburbanites didn't change the city to suit their preferences, the city changing is what enables the existance of the suburbs. Suburbs can't sustain themselves alone, they lack the density and zoning to allow their citizens to productively work. The whole design concept is to give you place to live outside the city (away from the poor or minorities) while simultaneously making it as convenient as possible for you to commute into it with your personal vehicle. The end result is a system which generates wealth in a diverse urban area, and then exports much of it to the wealthy and exclusive suburbs. To make a city difficult to commute into by car breaks the whole system, since it deprives the outer suburbs of their revenue source; the people who live there (which typically includes the elite political class in charge of planning) will fight tooth and nail to prevent that.
      - trgn 2y ago
        thx, good way of summarizing it, and I think I understand this state of affairs the same way you do. > To make a city difficult to commute into by car breaks ... I think 90% of this is a mental fear. What we are really talking about in most US cities is just measures to overall calm car traffic; bike lanes, bump outs, some bollards, ... Small fiddly things which make city life meaningfully more agreeable for pedestrians, but the effect on drivers is all in all pretty marginal. Some slower top-speeds in the core, maybe parking a little further, ... It's incredibly frustrating to me that these small changes cannot even happen because suburbanites - at least, where I am - will not tolerate even the smallest material intervention. It's all gut feel. If miraculously one of these traffic calming measures does go through, it barely registers as a nuisance.
- francisofascii 2y ago
  Why does it need to stop exactly? To me America skews to heavily to being car centric, and simply needs to be more pedestrian friendly, especially in cities. But it doesn’t have to ban cars everywhere. More balance is needed.
- striking 2y ago
  I lived where cars are essential. I don't think those places need to immediately get rid of cars. I do think that that same infrastructure doesn't need to be mirrored inside my high density "metropolitan bubble".
- oblio 2y ago
  That's super funny. Do you realize that the current car infrastructure is zero-sum and not "downright hostile" but "literally hostile" to walking and biking? We need a BALANCE. This should be seared on the forehead of every driver, especially SUV and truck drivers.
ryukoposting 2y ago
Cars offer maximum versatility at the cost of low accessibility, high inconvenience, and high unit cost. Plenty of people can't drive for medical reasons. My wife, for example. If she needs to be driven somewhere, I have to do it. That's a pain in the ass for both of us. It might take longer to get somewhere by bus/train/etc in the absolute sense, but you know what I'm not doing while riding the bus? Driving! I can read a book, take a nap, daydream, catch up on work or social matters, watch a movie, or countless other things that you simply can't do while driving. As a result, I actually have more time in the day to go about my life because I opt out of driving when possible. And I live in a mid-sized midwestern city with the middling public transit options you'd expect of such a place. Then there's money. Insurance, gas, tires, brakes, oil, and routine maintenance add up to several thousands of dollars in yearly expenses if you drive regularly. Public transit is flat-out cheaper, even if you don't have a monthly car payment. The point of all of this is that car ownership should be thought of as optional. The versatility is nice, and that's why I own a car. But, I don't use it much, because it's cheaper and more pleasant to walk or use public transit.
- AlgorithmicTime 2y ago
  [dead]
crummy 2y ago
I'm visiting Berlin at the moment, and one thing that's really nice is never having to figure out how to get home after a few drinks (or planning who will drive or how to pick up the car in the morning etc).
- betaby 2y ago
  Interestingly enough that km traveled by car per person in Germany isn't that different from Canada. Of course Berlin is nice, doesn't show the whole picture though.
LeChuck 2y ago
Because walking is good for you and good for the environment. Additionally, if everyone walked/biked when possible the roads would be more pleasant for you to drive on. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPUlgSRn6e0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPUlgSRn6e0
bradboimler 2y ago
You get exercise living your life Something I've realized after moving to a walkable neighborhood is that you interact with your neighbors more because you run into them as you go about. Cars are isolating. Walking about builds community. No car maintenance. No insurance. No gas. You don't have to deal with traffic or parking I still keep a car because it's the status quo but if I had to replace it I wouldn't
- lotsoweiners 2y ago
  > Cars are isolating. That’s what I want when I am trying to go somewhere. > Walking about builds community. I sure hope not. I walk my dog once or twice a day and avoid anyone who tries to talk to me. I’ve got enough community in other aspects of my life.
Moldoteck 2y ago
Because with proper city design you'd get even faster where you want, also on your own schedule and in very rare occasions this doesn't work out you'd get a taxi or rent a car several hours. Or maybe an ebike

Why would I want a shift to walking? Cars give me fast transportation on my own schedule and let me have far more access to things than just walking or walking plus public transit.

cbeach 2y ago

Exactly. And cars are essential for many journeys, and for normal family life in many out-of-town regions. Yet so many people on forums like this live in metropolitan bubbles and have no idea why cars might be necessary. There’s a lot of ideological opposition to motorists at the moment and it needs to stop, because the proposed “solutions” to motoring are zero-sum and in some cases downright hostile

sagarm 2y ago
Cities have a limited amount of space, and a disproportionate amount of it is allocated to drivers. It's fine to choose to live in a car dependent suburbs; but don't be surprised when urbanites want to prevent fast through traffic just like suburbanites do. They're not obligated to design their neighborhood for your convenience.
- trgn 2y ago
  This is my biggest gripe in the US. it's not the cars per se. it's that sub/ex-urbanites want to change the city to conform to their values. keep your car, i don't care, drive everywhere, but don't trash up the city just for your convenience. Let a thousand flowers bloom. cars for the fur trappers, but beautiful, calm pedestrian environments for the urbanites.
  - tech_ken 2y ago
    > it's that sub/ex-urbanites want to change the city to conform to their values. keep your car, i don't care, drive everywhere, but don't trash up the city just for your convenience. Agree with the sentiment but IMO suburbs and car-centric cities are basically mutually defining. Suburbanites didn't change the city to suit their preferences, the city changing is what enables the existance of the suburbs. Suburbs can't sustain themselves alone, they lack the density and zoning to allow their citizens to productively work. The whole design concept is to give you place to live outside the city (away from the poor or minorities) while simultaneously making it as convenient as possible for you to commute into it with your personal vehicle. The end result is a system which generates wealth in a diverse urban area, and then exports much of it to the wealthy and exclusive suburbs. To make a city difficult to commute into by car breaks the whole system, since it deprives the outer suburbs of their revenue source; the people who live there (which typically includes the elite political class in charge of planning) will fight tooth and nail to prevent that.
    - trgn 2y ago
      thx, good way of summarizing it, and I think I understand this state of affairs the same way you do. > To make a city difficult to commute into by car breaks ... I think 90% of this is a mental fear. What we are really talking about in most US cities is just measures to overall calm car traffic; bike lanes, bump outs, some bollards, ... Small fiddly things which make city life meaningfully more agreeable for pedestrians, but the effect on drivers is all in all pretty marginal. Some slower top-speeds in the core, maybe parking a little further, ... It's incredibly frustrating to me that these small changes cannot even happen because suburbanites - at least, where I am - will not tolerate even the smallest material intervention. It's all gut feel. If miraculously one of these traffic calming measures does go through, it barely registers as a nuisance.
francisofascii 2y ago
Why does it need to stop exactly? To me America skews to heavily to being car centric, and simply needs to be more pedestrian friendly, especially in cities. But it doesn’t have to ban cars everywhere. More balance is needed.
striking 2y ago
I lived where cars are essential. I don't think those places need to immediately get rid of cars. I do think that that same infrastructure doesn't need to be mirrored inside my high density "metropolitan bubble".
oblio 2y ago
That's super funny. Do you realize that the current car infrastructure is zero-sum and not "downright hostile" but "literally hostile" to walking and biking? We need a BALANCE. This should be seared on the forehead of every driver, especially SUV and truck drivers.

ryukoposting 2y ago

Cars offer maximum versatility at the cost of low accessibility, high inconvenience, and high unit cost. Plenty of people can't drive for medical reasons. My wife, for example. If she needs to be driven somewhere, I have to do it. That's a pain in the ass for both of us. It might take longer to get somewhere by bus/train/etc in the absolute sense, but you know what I'm not doing while riding the bus? Driving! I can read a book, take a nap, daydream, catch up on work or social matters, watch a movie, or countless other things that you simply can't do while driving. As a result, I actually have more time in the day to go about my life because I opt out of driving when possible. And I live in a mid-sized midwestern city with the middling public transit options you'd expect of such a place. Then there's money. Insurance, gas, tires, brakes, oil, and routine maintenance add up to several thousands of dollars in yearly expenses if you drive regularly. Public transit is flat-out cheaper, even if you don't have a monthly car payment. The point of all of this is that car ownership should be thought of as optional. The versatility is nice, and that's why I own a car. But, I don't use it much, because it's cheaper and more pleasant to walk or use public transit.

AlgorithmicTime 2y ago
[dead]

crummy 2y ago

I'm visiting Berlin at the moment, and one thing that's really nice is never having to figure out how to get home after a few drinks (or planning who will drive or how to pick up the car in the morning etc).

betaby 2y ago
Interestingly enough that km traveled by car per person in Germany isn't that different from Canada. Of course Berlin is nice, doesn't show the whole picture though.

LeChuck 2y ago

Because walking is good for you and good for the environment. Additionally, if everyone walked/biked when possible the roads would be more pleasant for you to drive on. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPUlgSRn6e0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPUlgSRn6e0

bradboimler 2y ago

You get exercise living your life Something I've realized after moving to a walkable neighborhood is that you interact with your neighbors more because you run into them as you go about. Cars are isolating. Walking about builds community. No car maintenance. No insurance. No gas. You don't have to deal with traffic or parking I still keep a car because it's the status quo but if I had to replace it I wouldn't

lotsoweiners 2y ago
> Cars are isolating. That’s what I want when I am trying to go somewhere. > Walking about builds community. I sure hope not. I walk my dog once or twice a day and avoid anyone who tries to talk to me. I’ve got enough community in other aspects of my life.

Moldoteck 2y ago

Because with proper city design you'd get even faster where you want, also on your own schedule and in very rare occasions this doesn't work out you'd get a taxi or rent a car several hours. Or maybe an ebike