3 ms·
Sorry that the 2nd half of my reply to your comment is on top of the first half). HN wouldn't let me post it as a single reply, so I had to break it up. HN woul
by briandon 13y ago
Sorry that the 2nd half of my reply to your comment is on top of the first half). HN wouldn't let me post it as a single reply, so I had to break it up. HN wouldn't let me reply to myself either, so it had to be a 2nd reply to your comment.
I hadn't realized that replies were stacked newest-to-oldest.
My bad.
Edit: this reply was the last but has ended up on the bottom. Wheee!
- saraid216 13y agoI'm not really sure what you're getting at. You're saying that your supermarket and delivery person use you low quality packaging material, so therefore you need to take care of it yourself via car? Um, okay? Going from flimsy paper to a gigantic, self-propelled metal box seems like a bit of an extreme, but it floats your boat? I still buy milk and eggs regularly and I don't have the issues you're talking about. Maybe it's because I use a reusable cloth bag that's sturdy enough to hold up even when drenched. Maybe my milk is packaged in a decent enough carton that condensation isn't really a relevant factor. Maybe the person who bags my groceries is competent? Maybe it's because I walk like a normal person? > I didn't even touch on what it's like to be walking home from the supermarket, in the open, and getting caught in a sudden downpour. I've experienced it. And at this point in my life, I've started to hate rain, which is ironic for Seattleite. But it's still manageable. Perhaps it's because I'm young and virile, I'm still capable of stepping up my pace for two blocks with a heavy backpack on my back (I walk to work and I carry my laptop with me both ways) and my hands filled with bags. (We still use paper bags, too; city ordinance for recycling. Seattle tends to be less humid than Hong Kong.) I should point that out a third time to make it clear: my closest market is 2 blocks away. Because it's the Asian one, it doesn't have all the foods that I like (like Jamaican jerk sauce, mmm), so I take the light rail downtown and go to one of the markets there and bring it back. I also do not use a delivery service. I consider it an unnecessary luxury, and am afraid of the exact hassles you describe: I have enough issues receiving the usual parcels to begin with. > Without a vehicle to hold stuff in between stops and to get you from one stop to another faster, everything takes much, much longer to accomplish and the planning outings becomes much more than a matter of leaving the supermarket stop for last so that your ice cream won't melt. That's certainly true. I tend to make it a point to only target a few stores per outing, because it's not reasonable to do them both on the same day. This is pretty nice, as it means I actually spend less overall and I get a bit more exercise. I need to value my targeted purchases highly enough to dedicate a trip to getting them. Incidentally, I have family in Kowloon (both of my parents grew up there) and my aunt actually uses a car. But I also don't know about anything near her apartment; it's been a long time since I visited.
- briandon 13y agoWhat I'm getting at is that having a personal vehicle gives a person a lot of choices that are not available to those without personal vehicles and that walkability and public transit are not a viable replacement for vehicle ownership unless one is willing to sacrifice large amounts of time (walking time) and mental energy (working out, in advance, the logistics of your movements for the day/evening in advance in detail). Your situation with a local market that doesn't stock everything that you need leading to you needing to sometimes have to make another trip to get a specialty item, is a small example of what I'm talking about. You make an effort to see the upside (spending less, getting exercise) of having to advance-plan your errands and restrict the number of errands that you can do in one go and I think that your positive attitude is admirable but it's akin to a person who has lost their vision comforting themselves with the thought that their sense of hearing has become much more acute to compensate somewhat for their loss of sight. Also, a reusable cloth shopping bag is great. So long as you always carry it with you. And so long as all of your purchases fit inside of it. Perhaps, from your point of view the reusable shopping bag's fixed size serves as an additional constraint on your grocery spending and is helping you to lead a more frugal and focused life. Obviously, I disagree. I can think of better uses for my time than acting as a human pack mule and the opportunity cost is cumulatively enormous -- all of the things that I could be doing during the lost time, which does add up, and the things I'm not getting done or taking longer to get done b/c of the can-only-get-n-errands done instead of n+several-more factor due to walking time or the delay involved in hailing taxis or waiting for booked taxis to show up.
- saraid216 13y ago> What I'm getting at is that having a personal vehicle gives a person a lot of choices that are not available to those without personal vehicles and that walkability and public transit are not a viable replacement for vehicle ownership unless one is willing to sacrifice large amounts of time (walking time) and mental energy (working out, in advance, the logistics of your movements for the day/evening in advance in detail). Sure. But what you're not detailing are the drawbacks of having a personal vehicle, namely the additional errands piled on from having to maintain it (and its license), the extra space required to store it, the emotional tax of being in traffic, the higher risk of injury, the consequences at a macro-scale. It's manifestly unfair to say, "Well, choice!" when both options have drawbacks. Not having a car, for instance, makes it harder to road trip: admittedly not something you do much of in Hong Kong, but it's a quintessential American fantasy. I'd estimate 20% of Americans have lived out of their cars at some point; their experience would not have been better without a car. > Perhaps, from your point of view the reusable shopping bag's fixed size serves as an additional constraint on your grocery spending and is helping you to lead a more frugal and focused life. This is overthinking it, in my view. I recognize that I can always make a second trip if I need to, and given that I can literally go to the store twice a day if I actually have the need, it's meaningless to worry about buying too many items. "I'll go back tomorrow" is a reasonable thought and doesn't require justification. It's an extra 10 minutes a day to detour through the market, pick up what I need, go through checkout, and be on my way. This is a side effect of not driving; if I drove, I'd go to the Costco in the other neighborhood, fill up my trunk with bulk purchases (because any less would fail to justify the gas I just spent), and be set for a few months since I'm living alone. It's certainly true that I disagree with rampant consumerism and unintentional obesity. This is something like saying I disagree with providing suicidal people with loaded guns, in order to provide them with choice. The provision of choice is not a binary action: it can be provided in many ways, and you need to choose between those possible actions. In order to argue for cars, you need to do more than argue that they provide choices unavailable to walkers and cyclists. You need to argue that the choices they provide are more important than the choices provided by what a car-less society would look like.