3 ms·
> This is a different argument now It's been the same argument the entire time. > While better transit /may/ reduce uninsured driving It'll do far more to re
by vel0city 12d ago
> This is a different argument now
It's been the same argument the entire time.
> While better transit /may/ reduce uninsured driving
It'll do far more to reduce the rate than just taking away drivers licenses. Ooh wow you took away some paperwork and made an illegal thing they were doing more illegal. What a solution to the problem, really finding the root cause there.
> that doesn’t make urban planning the root cause of it.
It absolutely is the root cause. If you have to drive to realistically participate in society, people will drive no matter what. It doesn't matter what punishments you levy on them, they will end up doing it. Because, to them, there is no other real option. Take the bus...but there's no bus service? Ride a bike...on roads where massive cars are blasting by at 50mph while drivers are looking at their phones? Yeah, sure, you see how long taking that "option" works for you.
You edited your comment about the stealing food part, it was quite a bit more obvious about the connection the way you had it before. People in desperate positions do desperate things. If you think the only way to get to work and not spiral even deeper into poverty is to drive illegally, you're probably going to drive illegally. If you think stealing that bread is the only way you're going to be able to feed your family, you're probably going to steal that bread. Give that same person nutrition assistance, support food pantries, etc and suddenly there's choices other than stealing. Give people another way to move in society and they'll choose another way. Once again, if you think I'm trying to justify either of these activities you're massively misreading what I'm actually saying.
> Really? No one does that
Hungry people don't steal food? That's how much you're burying your head in the sand to reality? Incredible.