3 ms·

The answer is so simple. We really really really really like our cars/trucks/SUVs in the US and have agreed that about 30,000 to 40,000 people a year will die

The answer is so simple. We really really really really like our cars/trucks/SUVs in the US and have agreed that about 30,000 to 40,000 people a year will die so that we can keep driving the way we do. It’s the price we pay for the way we choose to live.

octo888 1y ago
I'd love more of this kind of frank discourse because I'm tired of decades of political pearl clutching "even just one death is a tragedy"
alterom 1y ago
I like how your comment is downvoted even though this hypothesis is directly supported by the data from the article. Fat cars getting fatter, pedestrian-hostile streets becoming faster, city infrastructure requiring people to drive everywhere. Hmmmm, what could be the reason.
- potato3732842 1y ago
  >I like how your comment is downvoted even though this hypothesis is directly supported by the data from the article. I like (by which I mean I think it indicates a lack of moral character) that you say this despite the articles conclusion basically being "the data is all over the place, I see no strong trends <sigh> I guess it's the SUVs, ugh, maybe" Like yeah, it probably is the SUVs to an extent but the data only indirectly supports this at best and there's probably confounding factors (in particular road design which has been discussed at length and people all over these commands are bringing up).
  - alterom 1y ago
    >I like (by which I mean I think it indicates a lack of moral character) This isn't coherent, sorry. >that you say this despite the articles conclusion being... Notice that I said that the hypothesis is supported by the data presented in the article, not by the lackluster analysis (or the conclusion, which, nevertheless, does point to SUVs as the only hypothesis they find plausible). >the data is all over the place, I see no strong trends <sigh> I guess it's the SUVs, ugh, maybe" This is a bad and misleading summary of the article. >Like yeah, it probably is the SUVs to an extent but the data only indirectly supports this at best and there's probably confounding factors (in particular road design which has been discussed at length and people all over these commands are bringing up). You missed the entire point of the article, which is trying to understand why the rate of pedestrian fatalities spiked after 2009 in the US (but not in the EU). Road design, BY ITSELF, isn't the cause of the spike, since IT DID NOT CHANGE. The speed limits did go up in many places in the US, something that I brought up in another comment (and something that was glossed over by the article). That may be a factor. But the primary factor is the elephant in the room - cars getting bigger, heavier, taller, and more hostile to pedestrians. It's the goddamn obvious conclusion, and all the data out there supports it: https://www.npr.org/2023/11/14/1212737005/cars-trucks-pedestrian-deaths-increase-crash-data https://www.npr.org/2023/11/14/1212737005/cars-trucks-pedest...
- paulcole 1y ago
  > city infrastructure requiring people to drive everywhere I really really really disagree with this. A huge number of people could design a car-free or less car dependent life for themselves if that was something they valued highly. People just don't value it as highly as they claim they do.
  - alterom 1y ago
    >People just don't value it as highly as they claim they do. Whatever. Change it to "city infrastructure heavily incentivizing people to drive everywhere by heavily penalizing all other modes of transportation and prioritizing automobiles and accommodating the needs of car drivers above everything else". When the cities are designed for cars with everything else being an afterthought, people are going to driver everywhere.
    - paulcole 1y ago
      > When the cities are designed for cars with everything else being an afterthought, people are going to driver everywhere. Not if they really hate driving and want to live differently! You can say you're a victim of circumstance or you can say I care a lot about something and have more control over your life. I'm biased because I'm 45 and have never driven a car in my life. I grew up in a very rural area in Florida, went to a big state college, and then moved to Portland, OR because it was a decent place to live without a car. I knew from a very young age that driving a car seemed like a dumb way to live and so wondered why everyone did it and why nobody decided to try something different?
      - alterom 1y ago
        >You can say you're a victim of circumstance or you can say I care a lot about something and have more control over your life. >I'm biased because I'm 45 and have never driven a car in my life. I learned to drive when I was 24-25, after moving to Texas for graduate school, and cycling everywhere for a year. I cycled ~3 miles for groceries. I hauled an upright vacuum cleaner ~4 miles on a bicycle. And a bar stool. You really can't blame me for not trying hard to avoid driving. You can't blame me for, say, wanting to go to a movie theater, which was less than a mile away... by highway frontage, where cars would go 60mph. You can't blame me for wanting to see places other than College Station, TX, when I was living there (despite the name, there isn't a station there, and hasn't been for the past 100 years or so). And you can't blame for wanting to fucking live, after a good friend of mine was mauled down by an SUV when he, a non-driver, got out into the street in Long Island on roller blades. Several were hit by cars while cycling (non-lethally, thankfully). At least one by a driver who was looking left (into the oncoming traffic) while making a right turn, and ignored what's literally in front of his car. > then moved to Portland, OR because it was a decent place to live without a car. My friend, not everyone has the choice to move to a handful of metro areas in the US where living without a car isn't a pain. I'm glad you have the means and the resources. I didn't, and still don't; Silicon Valley is where the jobs are for me. And it's not a great place to be at without a vehicle - and I say that even as I do use an e-bike for short runs. After all is said and done, my quality of life has gone up tremendously after getting a car. And that's why it's not a me-problem.
globular-toast 1y ago
It's funny because when I see people who really, really like something their faces are filled with joy. They talk about what they love and it's always positive. When I see car people I see anger, frustration, furrowed brows everywhere, oh and did you hear about that asshole on the road yesterday? From the outside this "love" looks more like an abusive relationship or Stockholm syndrome or something.
- potato3732842 1y ago
  >When I see car people I see anger, frustration, furrowed brows everywhere, oh and did you hear about that asshole on the road yesterday? If you actually pay attention when driving you'll see a ton of sub par behavior. Ignorance is bliss and they're not ignorant.
- paulcole 1y ago
  I'm biased because I'm 45 and have never driven a car in my life. I grew up in a very rural area in Florida, went to a big state college, and then moved to Portland, OR because it was a decent place to live without a car. I knew from a very young age that driving a car seemed like a dumb way to live and so wondered why everyone did it and why nobody decided to try something different? My view is that if people really hated driving they would change their lives to do it less! Instead they make excuses about how they have to drive. I judge people's actions and the way most people choose to live tells me that they love driving!
  - globular-toast 1y ago
    People stay in abusive relationships all the time. If they really hated it they'd just leave, right?
    - paulcole 1y ago
      People leave abusive relationships all the time, too.
rudnevr 1y ago
my impression was not that most people like their SUVs, they're just don't trust other people and don't follow the conventions. While on the micro level Americans follow the conventions much more seriously than Europeans (starting from tips and down to formal office rules) and love spending time discussing those conventions, on the higher level, with risk or high stakes involved, all the conventions go out of window, and the people fall back to guns, litigators, SUVs, suburban houses in the middle of nowhere, and other ways of self-isolation and atomization. Soccer vs american football is another visible example.

octo888 1y ago

I'd love more of this kind of frank discourse because I'm tired of decades of political pearl clutching "even just one death is a tragedy"

alterom 1y ago

I like how your comment is downvoted even though this hypothesis is directly supported by the data from the article. Fat cars getting fatter, pedestrian-hostile streets becoming faster, city infrastructure requiring people to drive everywhere. Hmmmm, what could be the reason.

potato3732842 1y ago
>I like how your comment is downvoted even though this hypothesis is directly supported by the data from the article. I like (by which I mean I think it indicates a lack of moral character) that you say this despite the articles conclusion basically being "the data is all over the place, I see no strong trends <sigh> I guess it's the SUVs, ugh, maybe" Like yeah, it probably is the SUVs to an extent but the data only indirectly supports this at best and there's probably confounding factors (in particular road design which has been discussed at length and people all over these commands are bringing up).
- alterom 1y ago
  >I like (by which I mean I think it indicates a lack of moral character) This isn't coherent, sorry. >that you say this despite the articles conclusion being... Notice that I said that the hypothesis is supported by the data presented in the article, not by the lackluster analysis (or the conclusion, which, nevertheless, does point to SUVs as the only hypothesis they find plausible). >the data is all over the place, I see no strong trends <sigh> I guess it's the SUVs, ugh, maybe" This is a bad and misleading summary of the article. >Like yeah, it probably is the SUVs to an extent but the data only indirectly supports this at best and there's probably confounding factors (in particular road design which has been discussed at length and people all over these commands are bringing up). You missed the entire point of the article, which is trying to understand why the rate of pedestrian fatalities spiked after 2009 in the US (but not in the EU). Road design, BY ITSELF, isn't the cause of the spike, since IT DID NOT CHANGE. The speed limits did go up in many places in the US, something that I brought up in another comment (and something that was glossed over by the article). That may be a factor. But the primary factor is the elephant in the room - cars getting bigger, heavier, taller, and more hostile to pedestrians. It's the goddamn obvious conclusion, and all the data out there supports it: https://www.npr.org/2023/11/14/1212737005/cars-trucks-pedestrian-deaths-increase-crash-data https://www.npr.org/2023/11/14/1212737005/cars-trucks-pedest...
paulcole 1y ago
> city infrastructure requiring people to drive everywhere I really really really disagree with this. A huge number of people could design a car-free or less car dependent life for themselves if that was something they valued highly. People just don't value it as highly as they claim they do.
- alterom 1y ago
  >People just don't value it as highly as they claim they do. Whatever. Change it to "city infrastructure heavily incentivizing people to drive everywhere by heavily penalizing all other modes of transportation and prioritizing automobiles and accommodating the needs of car drivers above everything else". When the cities are designed for cars with everything else being an afterthought, people are going to driver everywhere.
  - paulcole 1y ago
    > When the cities are designed for cars with everything else being an afterthought, people are going to driver everywhere. Not if they really hate driving and want to live differently! You can say you're a victim of circumstance or you can say I care a lot about something and have more control over your life. I'm biased because I'm 45 and have never driven a car in my life. I grew up in a very rural area in Florida, went to a big state college, and then moved to Portland, OR because it was a decent place to live without a car. I knew from a very young age that driving a car seemed like a dumb way to live and so wondered why everyone did it and why nobody decided to try something different?
    - alterom 1y ago
      >You can say you're a victim of circumstance or you can say I care a lot about something and have more control over your life. >I'm biased because I'm 45 and have never driven a car in my life. I learned to drive when I was 24-25, after moving to Texas for graduate school, and cycling everywhere for a year. I cycled ~3 miles for groceries. I hauled an upright vacuum cleaner ~4 miles on a bicycle. And a bar stool. You really can't blame me for not trying hard to avoid driving. You can't blame me for, say, wanting to go to a movie theater, which was less than a mile away... by highway frontage, where cars would go 60mph. You can't blame me for wanting to see places other than College Station, TX, when I was living there (despite the name, there isn't a station there, and hasn't been for the past 100 years or so). And you can't blame for wanting to fucking live, after a good friend of mine was mauled down by an SUV when he, a non-driver, got out into the street in Long Island on roller blades. Several were hit by cars while cycling (non-lethally, thankfully). At least one by a driver who was looking left (into the oncoming traffic) while making a right turn, and ignored what's literally in front of his car. > then moved to Portland, OR because it was a decent place to live without a car. My friend, not everyone has the choice to move to a handful of metro areas in the US where living without a car isn't a pain. I'm glad you have the means and the resources. I didn't, and still don't; Silicon Valley is where the jobs are for me. And it's not a great place to be at without a vehicle - and I say that even as I do use an e-bike for short runs. After all is said and done, my quality of life has gone up tremendously after getting a car. And that's why it's not a me-problem.

globular-toast 1y ago

It's funny because when I see people who really, really like something their faces are filled with joy. They talk about what they love and it's always positive. When I see car people I see anger, frustration, furrowed brows everywhere, oh and did you hear about that asshole on the road yesterday? From the outside this "love" looks more like an abusive relationship or Stockholm syndrome or something.

potato3732842 1y ago
>When I see car people I see anger, frustration, furrowed brows everywhere, oh and did you hear about that asshole on the road yesterday? If you actually pay attention when driving you'll see a ton of sub par behavior. Ignorance is bliss and they're not ignorant.
paulcole 1y ago
I'm biased because I'm 45 and have never driven a car in my life. I grew up in a very rural area in Florida, went to a big state college, and then moved to Portland, OR because it was a decent place to live without a car. I knew from a very young age that driving a car seemed like a dumb way to live and so wondered why everyone did it and why nobody decided to try something different? My view is that if people really hated driving they would change their lives to do it less! Instead they make excuses about how they have to drive. I judge people's actions and the way most people choose to live tells me that they love driving!
- globular-toast 1y ago
  People stay in abusive relationships all the time. If they really hated it they'd just leave, right?
  - paulcole 1y ago
    People leave abusive relationships all the time, too.

rudnevr 1y ago

my impression was not that most people like their SUVs, they're just don't trust other people and don't follow the conventions. While on the micro level Americans follow the conventions much more seriously than Europeans (starting from tips and down to formal office rules) and love spending time discussing those conventions, on the higher level, with risk or high stakes involved, all the conventions go out of window, and the people fall back to guns, litigators, SUVs, suburban houses in the middle of nowhere, and other ways of self-isolation and atomization. Soccer vs american football is another visible example.