this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2024
849 points (99.3% liked)

Fuck Cars

9805 readers
343 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago

If you've ever read Mistborn one of my fav things in that book is that all trees have to be fruiting trees in cities, so that cities naturally produce food in case needed. I always liked that idea.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 months ago

Letting cars into cities was a mistake from the beginning. Cars should be required to park on parking lots or garages at the edge of the city. The only large motorized vehicles allowed within cities should be trains, buses driven by professional drivers, and delivery vehicles limited by governors to the speed of a bicycle. The only forms of motorized personal transit allowed should be e-bikes and scooters that can travel no faster than a human-powered bicycle is capable of traveling. Cars should be used only for getting between towns and cities, not for traveling within them.

[–] [email protected] 33 points 2 months ago (2 children)

I keep seeing photos of urban renovation in countries other than my own and marveling at the fact that even the "before" photo looks better than most streets in my city.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Over 20 years ago I moved from my native Portugal to The Netherlands.

Then over time I've moved backwards in this - in the sense of moving to countries with progressivelly worse urban planning and increasing pro-vehicle mindsets - first to Britain, then back to Portugal.

It's pretty infuriating when you actually know first hand how it feels to live in a place that doesn't put cars uber alles and are now living in one where its painfully obvious in everything from urban planning to how drivers tend to break mostly the rules that are there to protect pedestrians, that you're in a society which at least in this has a mindset from 40 years ago.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 months ago

You don't even need to go live somewhere else; just visit.

I'm from Canada and went back to visit Germany and Belgium a few months ago. I already went to Germany and the Netherlands a few years ago and just used the trains. I had no fixed itinerary and was deciding where to go a day in advance before buying a train ticket to go there. It was obviously fine (most of the time) but because of how trains "work" here, I was anxious about buying tickets a day in advance, thinking it was "last minute".

Then while I was in Belgium I had to plan a train ride in Canada a week later, and there was no affordable tickets left. I was sitting in Liège, and just bought a train ticket to Bruxelles that was departing in the next hour... while trying to book a train a week in advance in Canada, and failing to do so.

Every time I have to use a train in Canada, or just any kind or intercity service, even a coach, I'm painfully reminded of how bad it is here.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

This is Haussmannien architecture, it looks pretty and unfiform because the prefect of Napoleon III in the 19th century got the permission to destroy most of the shitty medieval districts with poor people inside and build good looking housing with modern accomodations for rich people instead. That's largely why Paris is pretty today.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Interesting, I didn't know that.

I mean, it also has to be a little bit because they didn't let the car companies demolish the whole city and replace it with parking lots in the 1960s, right?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Well, yeah nobody would thought to destroy this kind of valuable architecture for parking. We did get some aweful towers in other districts though, like Montparnasse tower.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

In the US, people definitely thought destroying valuable architecture for parking (and highways) was a great idea. It's heartbreaking what we've lost.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I wanna punch the voice that says "but won't the homeless sleep in the bushes?"

load more comments
view more: next ›