upvote

points

by redox991 days ago |
comments
upvoteby tsimionescu1 days ago|
next
[-]
The point is that good public transport makes cars unnecessary for the vast majority of everyday life in an urban setting. And, in particular, it means that taking away someone's license, even for a long period of time, doesn't have to be as crippling as it is in cities that don't have good infrastructure - hopefully leading to society being way more willing to apply drastic driving penalties to repeat offenders.
reply
upvoteby redox991 days ago|
parent|
[-]
Unnecessary is a very strong word. It's also unnecessary to have your own private house, sharing it with other people would be more efficient.
reply
upvoteby tsimionescu1 days ago|
parent|
next
[-]
The point is this: if you live in a city with bad/no public transport, then a car is necessary for going about everyday life. If you live in a city with good public transport, it's really not.

Given the fact that car infrastructure competes for resources with public transport infrastructure, and is vastly more expensive per person-km, and vastly more dangerous as well, prioritizing efficient use of public resources trumps personal comfort when looking at this. The same can't be said for housing, so the comparison is not relevant. Plus, there are very objective reasons for which privacy is an absolute requirement at home (mostly to do with vulnerability and sexual behaviors), which also don't apply to cars; especially since the kind of privacy you get in your own car is actually quite limited anyway - it would be both illegal and quite unsafe to drive around naked, at least in a bad neighborhood, for example.

reply
upvoteby llbeansandrice19 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
Unnecessary is the perfect word. If a car is unnecessary then can simply choose to not have one. Right now a car is required to live in most places in the US.

No one is saying people must give up their cars. I just want more options.

Your housing analogy is also perfect. Nearly 80% of the land in my city is single-family zoning so it’s necessary to buy an expensive detached home to live in my city. I would like more choice in housing, transit, etc.

Unnecessary is the perfect word and it’s not strong at all

reply
upvoteby ted_dunning19 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
Unnecessary is a very realistic world.

For lots of people in cities or large portions of Europe, going without a car is much better.

reply
upvoteby uv-depression1 days ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Private houses aren't killing tens of thousands a year.
reply
upvoteby redox991 days ago|
parent|
[-]
You can argue all day whether cars are good or bad. That's not my point. My point is that pretending public transport is equivalent to cars if you have good enough infrastructure is silly. They are different experiences, each with their own tradeoffs. And those tradeoffs matter differently to different people.
reply
upvoteby amanaplanacanal1 days ago|
parent|
[-]
I don't think anybody was suggesting getting rid of cars.
reply
upvoteby sensanaty1 days ago|
prev|
[-]
No one said it is, and I even clarified at the end that better public transport infra makes life for drivers easier as well. More public transport means less people on the road since they're concentrated in buses and trains and trams, meaning for people who do need cars, they have to compete for less space on the road.

For example the Netherlands simulatenously has world class public transport infra and the happiest and most satisfied drivers. 60% of the country still drives, it's just that it's not the only option and the drivers also take public transport and bike when it's more convenient than driving.

reply