this post was submitted on 27 May 2024
1120 points (97.5% liked)

Fuck Cars

9809 readers
2 users here now

This community exists as a sister community/copycat community to the r/fuckcars subreddit.

This community exists for the following reasons:

You can find the Matrix chat room for this community here.

Rules

  1. Be nice to each other. Being aggressive or inflammatory towards other users will get you banned. Name calling or obvious trolling falls under that. Hate cars, hate the system, but not people. While some drivers definitely deserve some hate, most of them didn't choose car-centric life out of free will.

  2. No bigotry or hate. Racism, transphobia, misogyny, ableism, homophobia, chauvinism, fat-shaming, body-shaming, stigmatization of people experiencing homeless or substance users, etc. are not tolerated. Don't use slurs. You can laugh at someone's fragile masculinity without associating it with their body. The correlation between car-culture and body weight is not an excuse for fat-shaming.

  3. Stay on-topic. Submissions should be on-topic to the externalities of car culture in urban development and communities globally. Posting about alternatives to cars and car culture is fine. Don't post literal car fucking.

  4. No traffic violence. Do not post depictions of traffic violence. NSFW or NSFL posts are not allowed. Gawking at crashes is not allowed. Be respectful to people who are a victim of traffic violence or otherwise traumatized by it. News articles about crashes and statistics about traffic violence are allowed. Glorifying traffic violence will get you banned.

  5. No reposts. Before sharing, check if your post isn't a repost. Reposts that add something new are fine. Reposts that are sharing content from somewhere else are fine too.

  6. No misinformation. Masks and vaccines save lives during a pandemic, climate change is real and anthropogenic - and denial of these and other established facts will get you banned. False or highly speculative titles will get your post deleted.

  7. No harassment. Posts that (may) cause harassment, dogpiling or brigading, intentionally or not, will be removed. Please do not post screenshots containing uncensored usernames. Actual harassment, dogpiling or brigading is a bannable offence.

Please report posts and comments that violate our rules.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

18 lane monstrosities are connections between the dense cities/burbs. We're talking two lane highways here, nobody builds an 18 lane freeway to a town with 50 people in the middle of nowhere. At best they will build a freeway THROUGH the middle of nowhere but the nowhere wasn't the purpose of the freeway, the connection to another major city was.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

18 lane monstrosities are connections between the dense cities/burbs.

All those 18 lanes are built ONLY because of cars.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

And there are fewer cars per km in rural areas. Do you think the dirt owns cars?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

What? Cars per length? What is this unit of? Some wierd linear density? I'm saying that that 18-lane abominations are built only for no other reason than driving cars. You say that car infrastructure is cheap, especially in rural areas, but you seem to ignore(intentionally or not) most expensive and destructive part of it. Which happens to go through rural areas. Or you can name abomination that is purely within city limits?

And public transit just doesn't need this abomination. Public transit works fine even with one lane per direction. Or track if we are talking about trains.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

That's not even what I said. Why talk to people if you have no intent of actually listening? Talk about an unpleasant person to talk to.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

And there are fewer cars per km in rural areas.

You said sentence that has no clear meaning. Per km of what? Per average distance between houses? Per average distance those cars travel? Or you want to say rural areas require more car infrastructure per car? If so, then this is close to what I was trying to say.

I reread entire convo. This started from

If you live in rural areas with really low density it is often cheaper and greener to not build mass transit systems there.

And if you are not the only person living in that area, then public transport WILL be greener. One car for two people is more efficient than two cars for two people, one car for four people is more efficient and one minivan for eight people is more efficient than two cars for four people. And minivan is just few steps awa from bus.

And again, less total amount of cars means less car infrastructure needs to be built and maintained, which means less money spent.