3 ms·

> in reality we're going to be relying on car-based transportation for the foreseeable future—which means decades at the very least. Well, maybe you (and much

> in reality we're going to be relying on car-based transportation for the foreseeable future—which means decades at the very least. Well, maybe you (and much of the U.S.) will be. Not me or my friends in Europe, China, etc, though.... Anyway, the fact that there's a long way to go (in many places) makes it all the more important to push hard, and soon. Part of the issue is that even though many countries haven't sunk to a level quite as low as the U.S., they still ironically look to the U.S. as an example, so when the U.S. does something bad, the effect is magnified. ... and yeah, getting rid of idiotic zoning laws is an important part of the solution.

SeanLuke 14y ago
> Well, maybe you (and much of the U.S.) will be. Not me or my friends in Europe, China, etc, though.... Fun fact. Italy has a very extensive non-car infrastucture, particularly trains. Yet I have dozens of friends and relatives in Milan, Rome, Rimini, and the countryside of Emilia-Romagna. Every single one of them has a car, sometimes two. The same goes for Northern Ireland.
- snogglethorpe 14y ago
  Of course, some people owning cars is not the same as society "relying on car-based transportation" (as the grandparent said). Tokyo has probably the best public transport system in the world, and automobiles have a ridiculously low mode-share for a modern city (12%), but car ownership rates are, relatively, much higher (approx. 300 cars/1000 people). Many people own cars that they use "occasionally," when it makes sense, not as their primary means of transportation. If those people all suddenly lost use of their cars, what would happen? Not much really; the city could cope easily.