3 ms·

Because as soon as you leave a major metropolitan area, not having a car is almost a nonstarter.

by JoeBOFH 10mo ago

add-sub-mul-div 10mo ago
Over 100 million people live in just the top 20 metro areas alone. It's hardly an edge case.
- cwillu 10mo ago
  And _not_ living in one of the top 20 metro areas is also hardly an edge case.
  - ghaff 10mo ago
    And even in most of those metros (OK. Leave aside Manhattan), not having a car tends to imply a lot of lifestyle choices in terms of activities, visiting friends outside of the metro, etc. There are certainly people who are OK with living like they did in their urban school for a few years after graduation. But that's not a long-term solution for most people.
- vel0city 10mo ago
  A massive chunk (if not majority?) of those top 20 metro areas are largely car dependent for most of their populations. Large areas don't have any public transit at all, and the rest is often designed to be actively hostile to pedestrians. Try living without a car in these places, all in the 4th largest MSA. https://maps.app.goo.gl/mHmGidZRJaKptHeL8 https://maps.app.goo.gl/mHmGidZRJaKptHeL8 https://maps.app.goo.gl/5P4mW5iM6b5ab9Ve7 https://maps.app.goo.gl/5P4mW5iM6b5ab9Ve7 https://maps.app.goo.gl/JCiBgESKs5ZWqGny8 https://maps.app.goo.gl/JCiBgESKs5ZWqGny8 https://maps.app.goo.gl/E1iVwLCB28ooGhQL9 https://maps.app.goo.gl/E1iVwLCB28ooGhQL9 These are all in "urban" areas and a part of DFW. But how about Houston, the 5th? https://maps.app.goo.gl/7yEAimERmyE1EGde6 https://maps.app.goo.gl/7yEAimERmyE1EGde6 https://maps.app.goo.gl/UKSQjPqifWUSv82H7 https://maps.app.goo.gl/UKSQjPqifWUSv82H7 I don't know how one would even get groceries without a car. And even then, you're then talking about less than 1/3 of Americans living in that mostly car dependent space.
SoftTalker 10mo ago
It's the same in Europe, but people pushing an agenda don't talk about that either.
- oblio 10mo ago
  The US takes this to an entirely different level. In places like Vegas, even on days with great weather, trying to WALK 2-3km in residential areas is a nightmare.
- tavavex 10mo ago
  People who are "pushing an agenda" aren't arguing that there should be no cars ever, anywhere. Cars are the smallest-scale form of long-distance transport, they are unavoidable in low-density areas or for services that requires complete flexibility. All the agenda-pushers I've seen in real life are just saying that there's better options within cities, at least for a lot of people. Most of the time, most people only move within their cities, myself included. If transit within my city was in any way adequate, I would choose it over the car. I could cover those rare out-of-city edge cases with rentals or train travel. Besides, it's not even the same in Europe. In a few countries, maybe, but in the majority the inter-city transit or transit within small towns is not even in the same universe as what's available in most of the US.

Because as soon as you leave a major metropolitan area, not having a car is almost a nonstarter.

by JoeBOFH 10mo ago

Because as soon as you leave a major metropolitan area, not having a car is almost a nonstarter.

add-sub-mul-div 10mo ago

Over 100 million people live in just the top 20 metro areas alone. It's hardly an edge case.

cwillu 10mo ago
And _not_ living in one of the top 20 metro areas is also hardly an edge case.
- ghaff 10mo ago
  And even in most of those metros (OK. Leave aside Manhattan), not having a car tends to imply a lot of lifestyle choices in terms of activities, visiting friends outside of the metro, etc. There are certainly people who are OK with living like they did in their urban school for a few years after graduation. But that's not a long-term solution for most people.
vel0city 10mo ago
A massive chunk (if not majority?) of those top 20 metro areas are largely car dependent for most of their populations. Large areas don't have any public transit at all, and the rest is often designed to be actively hostile to pedestrians. Try living without a car in these places, all in the 4th largest MSA. https://maps.app.goo.gl/mHmGidZRJaKptHeL8 https://maps.app.goo.gl/mHmGidZRJaKptHeL8 https://maps.app.goo.gl/5P4mW5iM6b5ab9Ve7 https://maps.app.goo.gl/5P4mW5iM6b5ab9Ve7 https://maps.app.goo.gl/JCiBgESKs5ZWqGny8 https://maps.app.goo.gl/JCiBgESKs5ZWqGny8 https://maps.app.goo.gl/E1iVwLCB28ooGhQL9 https://maps.app.goo.gl/E1iVwLCB28ooGhQL9 These are all in "urban" areas and a part of DFW. But how about Houston, the 5th? https://maps.app.goo.gl/7yEAimERmyE1EGde6 https://maps.app.goo.gl/7yEAimERmyE1EGde6 https://maps.app.goo.gl/UKSQjPqifWUSv82H7 https://maps.app.goo.gl/UKSQjPqifWUSv82H7 I don't know how one would even get groceries without a car. And even then, you're then talking about less than 1/3 of Americans living in that mostly car dependent space.

SoftTalker 10mo ago

It's the same in Europe, but people pushing an agenda don't talk about that either.

oblio 10mo ago
The US takes this to an entirely different level. In places like Vegas, even on days with great weather, trying to WALK 2-3km in residential areas is a nightmare.
tavavex 10mo ago
People who are "pushing an agenda" aren't arguing that there should be no cars ever, anywhere. Cars are the smallest-scale form of long-distance transport, they are unavoidable in low-density areas or for services that requires complete flexibility. All the agenda-pushers I've seen in real life are just saying that there's better options within cities, at least for a lot of people. Most of the time, most people only move within their cities, myself included. If transit within my city was in any way adequate, I would choose it over the car. I could cover those rare out-of-city edge cases with rentals or train travel. Besides, it's not even the same in Europe. In a few countries, maybe, but in the majority the inter-city transit or transit within small towns is not even in the same universe as what's available in most of the US.