this post was submitted on 08 Sep 2023
551 points (89.1% liked)

Fuck Cars

9680 readers
1207 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Jimbabwe@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 year ago (7 children)

Because planned economies are a terrible idea. We would be doing this efficiently and organically if the demand for bikes and public transportation was higher and the demand for cars was lower.

Why don’t we uproot all our vegetable crops and grow cherry trees? Cherries are delicious so this is obviously a great idea!

The only reason you have food on your plate is because economies adjust incrementally from the ground up, not all at once from the top down.

[–] Nobilmantis@feddit.it 23 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Here comes the guy with the degree in economics and a lot of free time lmfao. It must be really difficult to misunderstand such a simple meme but here, I will help you out: MAYBE the spendings our governements "plan" (uuuh scary buzz word) on: car infrastructure (go check how much your country spends on it), gas tax cuts, road maintenance, healthcare costs related to car accidents (you don't obviously "plan" those but they are nonetheless a cost for a society), just MAYBE, they could be decresed in favor of public transportation? Cycling infrastructure?

"BuT tHe dEmAnD fOr CarS iS sO hIgh!!1!1 LeT tHe fReE mArKet ChOoSe wHaT pEoPlE wAnT."

Nice free market you got there when outside its all roads and parking lots (tax-paid), with no sidewalks/cycleways, and the only bus/train going to where you need to has a ride every 6 hours. Im sure people will buy a car to get around because they love it so much.

Why don’t we uproot all our ~~vegetable crops~~modes of transportation and grow car trees? Cars are delicious so this is obviously a great idea!

  • car manufactures in the '60s
[–] Jimbabwe@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago

I also have a degree in economics (and computer science, fwiw). We agree that the incentive structures in the United States are fucked up. I was just answering the question in the meme with regards to manufacturing decisions and how/why they’re made. Discontinuing our perverse car-centric subsidy schemes would be a great way to steer demand and supply away from cars.

[–] diffaldo@lemm.ee 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Demand for public transport will not increase because it continues to be underfunded.

[–] Nobilmantis@feddit.it 18 points 1 year ago

Under-founds public transportation until all that's left is a old dirty bus going in along a useless route every 6 hours. Builds massive highways, parking lots and roads that make it "easy" to drive and impossible to walk or cycle, cuts gas taxes. WOAH GUYS, people are buying cars because they love them! We should give them more funding and keep de-funding transit projects

[–] pjhenry1216@kbin.social 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That's a horrendous comparison. You could have had an arguable point if other countries weren't already doing it.

[–] Steve@communick.news 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

What we have is a transportation economy that's been planned by car companies. From demonizing "Jay Walkers", to buying trolley companies to shut them down.

Even today, where small trucks stop being produced in order to avoid emission restrictions. Along with marketing, that falsely claims improved safety of the larger, more expensive, more profitable large trucks.

Whenever a market is dominated by a small enough group of companies, they start planning how it will work.

[–] dangblingus@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Airport_Bar@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

If you uproot an old failing oak without plans to plant something in its absence, you’ll be left with a big hole and no shade.

Edit: Maybe I’m agreeing with some of what was said and I’m misunderstood. Either way, I agree with understanding demand as it relates to a planned economy.

[–] lemann@lemmy.one 0 points 1 year ago

This is a problem with some poorly executed pedestrianisation/walkable area conversions IMO.

I like it since it means more car free spaces for me and my 🚲, but those without a bike aren't going to wait around a hour for a bus, they'll hop in their car and drive to an alternative location. They might not even be familiar with bike paths and routes to get there, especially if they're not comfortable riding on the road.

When car-first infrastructure is ripped out, people need to be introduced to alternatives and the alternatives need to be attractive, otherwise the status-quo will shift elsewhere