4 ms·

The car began as a luxurious convenience for the wealthy to avoid public transit. Then it enabled the vast expansion of the suburbs. The problem is the suburba

The car began as a luxurious convenience for the wealthy to avoid public transit. Then it enabled the vast expansion of the suburbs. The problem is the suburban home is a prison. If you are in one, and don’t have access to a functioning car with a person to drive it, you can’t go anywhere. Even a healthy person will have to walk very far to reach anything. And so the car became associated with freedom. Of course, people who live in cities with public transit don’t need a car to be free. While the car allows one to break free of a suburban home, it is itself another prison. Owning and using a car means you must find a place to park it. Pay to fuel it. Pay for insurance. Pay for a new car every once in awhile. Pay to maintain it. If anything happens to the car, you have to take care of it. Any moment your life can be interrupted and ruined if there is any car related issue to take care of. Time lost sitting in traffic. Serious injuries or even lives lost to crashes. Sold my car over a decade ago, and haven’t owned another one since. I get in a car only a handful of times per year, if at all. One of the best decisions I ever made.

cafard 2y ago
a. That depends on the suburb. One can live well enough in some close-in suburbs without using a car, at least without using it much. b. The prison aspect does offer a degree of parental control, until the offspring are old enough to drive.
- earth-adventure 2y ago
  Your "b" just makes me think of The Amish and the like in a way. Once the kids find out the rest of the world, totally unequipped for it, it's either retreat to the suburbs or go bananas
galleywest200 2y ago
My suburb is a 15-20 minute walk from grocery stores and pubs, sports fields, parks, etc. So that depends on where you live. That is not a long walk, that is the exact number of minutes people push for with "15 minute cities". Overall I view suburbs as probably a net negative for all of the space wasted.
rsynnott 2y ago
It’s entirely possible to have well-connected suburbs, via rail or tram for dense ones and bus for less dense. I get that US suburbs are typically not like that, but it’s not _really_ a problem for suburbs _in general_.
gruez 2y ago
>The problem is the suburban home is a prison. If you are in one, and don’t have access to a functioning car with a person to drive it, you can’t go anywhere. Even a healthy person will have to walk very far to reach anything. >While the car allows one to break free of a suburban home, it is itself another prison. Owning and using a car means you must find a place to park it. Pay to fuel it. Pay for insurance. Pay for a new car every once in awhile. Pay to maintain it. If anything happens to the car, you have to take care of it. Any moment your life can be interrupted and ruined if there is any car related issue to take care of. Time lost sitting in traffic. Serious injuries or even lives lost to crashes. Those are all downsides, but characterizing them as "a prison" is a stretch. For instance, if you live in the city and are forced to rely on public transport, how are the associated downsides not similarly "a prison"? For instance, having to wait 30 minutes for a bus, that might stop operating at 10pm, is arguably more of a hassle than trying to figure out parking or whatever. Does that make public transit "a prison"?
- eesmith 2y ago
  > Does that make public transit "a prison"? No. It makes that specific type of low quality public transport a prison. Following the metaphor, a low-security prison, or house arrest, but one none-the-less. Good public transit needs headways no more than about 10 minutes apart, not 30 minutes, and it needs to run much later than 10pm, and even later on Friday and Saturday nights to provide a good alternative to drunk driving.
- Apreche 2y ago
  There may be occasional problems with even the best public transit system. But even if the public transit system is completely failed, living in a dense urban environment is not a prison. You can reach a grocery store, a restaurant, a movie theater, a bar, a drug store, a park, your friend’s place, or whatever else you need within walking distance. Even a person with limited mobility can reach everything they need. Public transit is only for things you need occasionally that are a bit further away.

cafard 2y ago

a. That depends on the suburb. One can live well enough in some close-in suburbs without using a car, at least without using it much. b. The prison aspect does offer a degree of parental control, until the offspring are old enough to drive.

earth-adventure 2y ago
Your "b" just makes me think of The Amish and the like in a way. Once the kids find out the rest of the world, totally unequipped for it, it's either retreat to the suburbs or go bananas

galleywest200 2y ago

My suburb is a 15-20 minute walk from grocery stores and pubs, sports fields, parks, etc. So that depends on where you live. That is not a long walk, that is the exact number of minutes people push for with "15 minute cities". Overall I view suburbs as probably a net negative for all of the space wasted.

rsynnott 2y ago

It’s entirely possible to have well-connected suburbs, via rail or tram for dense ones and bus for less dense. I get that US suburbs are typically not like that, but it’s not _really_ a problem for suburbs _in general_.

gruez 2y ago

>The problem is the suburban home is a prison. If you are in one, and don’t have access to a functioning car with a person to drive it, you can’t go anywhere. Even a healthy person will have to walk very far to reach anything. >While the car allows one to break free of a suburban home, it is itself another prison. Owning and using a car means you must find a place to park it. Pay to fuel it. Pay for insurance. Pay for a new car every once in awhile. Pay to maintain it. If anything happens to the car, you have to take care of it. Any moment your life can be interrupted and ruined if there is any car related issue to take care of. Time lost sitting in traffic. Serious injuries or even lives lost to crashes. Those are all downsides, but characterizing them as "a prison" is a stretch. For instance, if you live in the city and are forced to rely on public transport, how are the associated downsides not similarly "a prison"? For instance, having to wait 30 minutes for a bus, that might stop operating at 10pm, is arguably more of a hassle than trying to figure out parking or whatever. Does that make public transit "a prison"?

eesmith 2y ago
> Does that make public transit "a prison"? No. It makes that specific type of low quality public transport a prison. Following the metaphor, a low-security prison, or house arrest, but one none-the-less. Good public transit needs headways no more than about 10 minutes apart, not 30 minutes, and it needs to run much later than 10pm, and even later on Friday and Saturday nights to provide a good alternative to drunk driving.
Apreche 2y ago
There may be occasional problems with even the best public transit system. But even if the public transit system is completely failed, living in a dense urban environment is not a prison. You can reach a grocery store, a restaurant, a movie theater, a bar, a drug store, a park, your friend’s place, or whatever else you need within walking distance. Even a person with limited mobility can reach everything they need. Public transit is only for things you need occasionally that are a bit further away.