When automobiles became affordable and normal for all classes to own, almost immediately there was a sense of "freedom" tied to owning a car. I do not understand the desire for things like walkable cities and public transport. I genuinely enjoy driving and even do it as a leisurely thing sometimes, exploring and finding new things, etc. Whenever I here arguments for centralized cities it genuinely sounds dystopian. Even if you do not own a car this has to make sense, right?

>>17784448 (OP)
>I genuinely enjoy driving and even do it as a leisurely thing sometimes, exploring and finding new things, etc.
Like what? More asphalt and suburbs?

>>17784457
In my state of Michigan alone there are all sorts of cities and towns that are fun to visit because they have their own local shit besides just staying around a single metropolitan. From my place alone there's about a dozen places under an hour I can visit that are all unique from one another

>Even if you do not own a car this has to make sense, right?

>>17784479
I dont get what this is supposed to mean. Are you saying I'm crying because I own a car?

I walk most places but "muh walkable city" niggers and bicycleniggers need to be shot. Yes, a car gives you freedom, and that is worth being 10% less efficient and ruining muh climate. No, I will not squeeze into a bugman 10ft. x 10ft. "apartment" to save the planet or to fulfill some factorio aurists' OCD. Of you want to make yourself into cattle that's fine, but don't force it on others. The one thing I agree with them on is cars should be safer somehow, for exmaple it might make sense for them to have to be smaller or lighter.

>>17784502
>The one thing I agree with them on is cars should be safer somehow, for exmaple it might make sense for them to have to be smaller or lighter.
Imo the more people force laws to refined vehicle the worst they are over all. Over the past 4 decades regulators have forced efficiency and environmental restrictions on auto companies and they always get more harsh; every compromise has just lead to more restrictions. That being said we now have SUVs that sometimes even have 3 cylinders and direct injection, etc. It's a tremendous amount of pressure put on components which just leads to the consumer getting less for what the pay for in the end. You can say, "well safety and clean air make it worth it!" but that never seems to get better... Meanwhile almost every manufacturer has to report a recall for some crap.

>>17784468
>In my state of Michigan alone there are all sorts of cities and towns that are fun to visit because they have their own local shit besides just staying around a single metropolitan. From my place alone there's about a dozen places under an hour I can visit that are all unique from one another
Sounds like Europe, except they don't need to get into a cuckbox to get there.

>>17784541
A train is an actual cuckbox unlike a car which you own and has no niggers in it.

>>17784541
What do you mean, how to you get to a place that's 50 miles awa?

>>17784545
>A train is an actual cuckbox unlike a car which you own
Yes, but you don't need to pay for insurance, maintenance, and gas. And you don't need to sit in traffic.
>has no niggers in it
That's not my problem.

>>17784597
You have to understand that paying for insurance and gas is valuable BECAUSE I don't have to revolve my life around train schedules, along with the delays, lack of privacy, etc. Being upset by maintenence is simply immature imo. Practically everything thats worth owning requires maintenence and upkeep.

>>17784609
>You have to understand that paying for insurance and gas is valuable BECAUSE I don't have to revolve my life around train schedules, along with the delays, lack of privacy, etc. Being upset by maintenence is simply immature imo.
I don't see how this is any of my problem. The train is fast and reliable. Americans are enamored by their cars, but only because their country was designed with them in mind.

>>17784614
>The train is fast and reliable
It's extremely impractical. If I want to go to a concert 45 minutes away via car it's absolutely fucking retarded to take a train. Even if the distance is 3 hours away having a personal vehicle is obviously way more convenient

>>17784614
>fast
Bullshit, especially if you have multiple stops before your actual destination

>>17784448 (OP)
I do not own a car and can not drive.
Therefore, cities and towns that aren't walkable feel like prisons. You should be able to get from point A to point B without having to hitchhike or pay massive amounts of money for a taxi.
To me, living somewhere with public transit means mobility and flexibility.

>>17784457
suburbs are based
>>17784448 (OP)
same

>>17784541
trains are cuckboxes
>>17784597
driving is significantly faster than taking a train. like 3 to 10 times faster

>>17784630
>I do not own a car and can not drive.
How come? Is it because you've been priced out?

>>17784614
>The train is fast and reliable.
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahah
>>17784630
have you tried not being a gay retard?

>>17784639
he isn't smart enough to pass the test

>>17784638
depends on where you're going desu
direct train routes are usually faster, but when it's a transfer or a 15 minute walk from the train station the car is faster

>>17784663
There is not a direct train route to every single town in a European country

>>17784663
if trains were faster, cities wouldn't need to put up congestion taxes.

>>17784668
Yeah but if there is one in the place you happen to be going to, taking the train is a good idea

>>17784619
>It's extremely impractical. If I want to go to a concert 45 minutes away via car it's absolutely fucking retarded to take a train. Even if the distance is 3 hours away having a personal vehicle is obviously way more convenient
None of this is my problem.

>>17784679
Do these trains run 24/7?
>>17784680
So you're a shut in?

>>17784696
>So you're a shut in?
No?

>>17784448 (OP)
I also enjoy driving. I hate when there's retards driving slow and when there's no space for parking. It would be great if these retards took public transport instead, maybe even take it myself. It's comfy to take in the scenery of the bus route.

>>17784702
You're saying nothing is your problem which would imply you have absolutely no where to go

>>17784696
being out past the last train somewhere that's too far away to walk home is another use case for cars, yes (though if you only do this rarely, the occasional taxi may actually be preferable to the high cost of car ownership)
I'm not saying cars are useless if you can afford one, I'm saying trains are in many places and situations a preferable idea

>>17784706
>I'm not saying cars are useless if you can afford one,
And this goes back to my main point. It's pretty on the nose that the people who want a "carless society" are doing this at the expense of the middle and lower class.

>>17784712
car societies benefit people who have the money for cars at the expense of those who don't
if anyone benefits from pro-car policy it's the already well-off

>>17784718
Its not like that my country and can only assume it never was always like this either. It's what I find so ironic too. Owning a home, a car, and easily affording leisurely things was very attainable for the common man just a single generation ago.

>>17784448 (OP)
It's not dystopian. Cars don't give you "freedom". What the hell are you babbling about? It's rarely convenient for there to be so many cars wasting so much fossil fuels and destroying the earth. Car crashes are common and you most likely will end up in one throughout your life. I hope self driving electric cars replace all the cars on the road. A concert shouldn't be three hours away from you in the first place. If you want to live in the middle of nowhere by all means go live with the Indigenous folk in Africa or move to an island (Epstein??). Walkable cities and good public transit should be the norm everywhere. What you can't take public transit and go for a walk for leisure?

IIIIlllIIIIIllll

>>17784704
>takes 8 times as long to get there, the the bus is either 98 degrees or 20 degrees and there is a fat smelly black woman loudly shouting crole into the phone
>>17784718
cars are cheap

>>17784733
I can tell you're young and it is very pathetic to want literally everything done for you without any effort of your own. Ontop of the fact that you buy into the notion, "If you don't reduce leisure in YOUR life the planet is going to end."

>>17784712
this. london and nyc have sin taxes the rich can ignore and the paris law exempts rich fags using "company" cars

>>17784733
global warming isn't real and cars are freedom of movement

>>17784735
until you account for paying for gas, insurance, maintenance, and parking

>>17784743
Yes, all the things that have been artificially inflated curiously around the time where there is news that the middle and lower class owning assets makes the weather deadly

>>17784743
Ah yes, isn't it strange that we've made leaps and bounds of advancements in fuel efficiency and safety and yet the cost of both fuel and insurance has only risen..

>>17784743
things that are sin taxed?

>>17784736
>I can tell you're young and it is very pathetic to want literally everything done for you without any effort of your own. Ontop of the fact that you buy into the notion, "If you don't reduce leisure in YOUR life the planet is going to end."

If I was young I wouldn't want things done for me. When you age you realize these type of things are actually beneficial. Don't get stuck in old school thinking because that's when you get in a rut leaving you out of touch. Don't tell me you're one of those lawless people behind the wheel breaking the laws for leisure. Yanking the engine and poorly cutting people on the road out of pettiness could leave you in a ditch. I'm just saying It's not worth it.

IllIlllI

>>17784758
>Don't get stuck in old school thinking because that's when you get in a rut leaving you out of touch.
This is hilarious considering your the person that believes concerts should be within your proximity or never exist at all.

>>17784739

It is real. Most cars can only withstand the road that's not freedom of movement. Exhausting all that fuel from all the cars adds up. Fossil fuels don't just burn and disappear.

>>17784739
where do you think the gas goes after it leaves the car? What happens to it?

>>17784760
>>17784761
>the common man being able to afford a car is killing earth
>meanwhile literally everywhere else

>>17784760
>>17784761
global warming isn't real and with a car you can go anywhere you want

>>17784761
What do you think the loads of freighters in the ocean run off of? You know the ones shipping all that chinese bullshit?

>>17784448 (OP)
I always thought the issue is more complicated than just muh cars.
The issue both sides have to face is mass urbanisation, it's not surprising that muh public transport people also tend to believe that tower blocks are a good idea while muh cars types are more of a suburb or satellite town proponents.
Obviously it would be difficult to make the economy more decentralised without some Pol Pot tier measures, so the question of servicing massive urban centres is important. The advantage of public transport centric approach is that you concentrate the infrastructure in more or less one place, yes tearing down existing streets to expand the sewage system is not nice, but once it's done it's done, don't have to play catch up with developers.
The bigger problem however is the quality of life, for instance public transport is nice until reality of using it settles in - ok I take the bus to get to the tram station, where I wait 5 minutes for the tram that gets me to a bus station where the bus may come in 5 minutes but it may be 15, just few more stops and I'm 700 metres of walk away from my workplace! Sure it's cool that you can get around while being fucked up drunk, but in comparison to I hop into my car and drive directly to my work, the daily commute is kind of meh and you will do much more daily commute than getting back home from bar hopping. This is just one part of the quality of life, we can talk about high density housing being by necessity smaller than low density housing(despite often being more expensive), any kind of neighbourly inconvenience being more annoying(whether it's a dude who loves his wife almost as hard as he beats her a party animal or a whore) and we can go on and on and on

So in general the suburban sprawl is a burden on infrastructure, the dense urban areas are a strain on people. Americans have mostly the former, as they're simply rich and can afford it, while poorer countries have more of the latter

>>17784775
>capitalists destroy the very planet we live on in order to push down wages
yeah it's horrifying

>>17784448 (OP)
Associating cars with freedom is mostly just an illusion sold to you by people who want you to buy cars. For example, if I was trying to sell you a car I would definitely want you to think it would make you more free, even though:
40% of Americans have car payments (being a debt slave does not make you free)
Neither does looking for parking, or sitting in traffic for hours surrounded by other freedom lovers, but to be honest if you live in the countryside then I could see why you think having a car makes you more free.
As a city-slicker myself a car was and is generally a needless expense that makes my life more convenient, because instead of spending upwards of 500 USD a month to fuel and maintain a car, I can just...not do that?
Cars in general are financial liabilities and almost never add value to someone's life, so for that reason I generally do not like them. But I also support other people making bad financial decisions because it helps me get ahead.

>>17784767
>with a car you can go anywhere you want
No, cars can only go anywhere with a road or a driveway, you will need a boat to access most of the surface earth and an aircraft to access most of the greater universe.

>>17784448 (OP)
Cars makes urban living harder
Walkable cities and public transport makes urban living better

Nothing wrong with using them to travel or in the rural areas but using them in a crowded city is inefficient and bothersome to everyone

>>17784448 (OP)
Cars weren't important at the beginning to people in cities they were revolutionary to farmers who still made up most of the population, who still relied on horses.

>>17784775
>What do you think the loads of freighters in the ocean run off of?
Wind and Waves.

>>17784484
You are crying because you don't (own one).

>>17784831
Way to completely change the subject. Why hasn't a single IPCC scientist complained about globalism? No it's only the pesky middle class running their AC in the summer driving a Toyota, that's whats killing the planet!
>>17784859
>>17784978
Most humans would consider having the option of being able to leave their city or city blocks whenever they want as "freedom." It seems like "urban living" has become some sort of Stockholm Syndrome cult

>>17784979
Cars literally revolutionized metropolitans and replaced horses because people were sick of stepping around mass piles of horse shit everywhere

>>17785069
The op is me lel

>>17784831
shalom
>>17784859
driving is like 3 to 10 times faster than public transit and you don't have to deal with the other public transit riders

>>17784922
my car can go offroad. with public transit you can only go where the government says you can
>>17784978
cities are fucking terrible to live in

>>17785276
>>17785512
People aren't banned from using cars to go outside of cities and cars aren't banned in rural places. You're mad at a non-existent problem. This entire thread you're just inventing things to be angry about. No one cares about cars in the countryside, it's transit within cities that are problems.
Your personal feelings about cities are irrelevant to the discussion but you constantly bring it up like a little girl

>>17785678
>People aren't banned from using cars to go outside of cities and cars aren't banned in rural places.
Yet? But as If seen with covid hysteria and the fact that the EU, Canada, etc. plan on banning ICE vehicles by 2035 is pretty concerning

>>17785678
you are a fucking liar. you city faggots want to ban suburbs and ban cars

>>17785678
FUCK YOU

>>17785678
No but they've definitely been priced out. Probably intentionally

yet another stupid fucking american thread, ban them

>>17784448 (OP)
America have plenty of inhabited land and low population density. If you give every euro a car and two everyone would stand in traffic for hours.
It's simply not economical nor possible. Unless you slash population by like 95% r more. Heck even now most USA population is not motorised. Imagine every nog, spic, migrant have a car or two and use it to commute.

>>17784545
So car is the goybox that you pay for(how much insurance and tax) constantly or coward box where you hide from niggers.
In all, car is ultimate soul animal of the 'white' judaized Americans that embold their ,Otto 'Fuck you, I have mine''

>>17784766
>Imagine every nigger owning a car.

>>17784822
Both public transport and cars benefit from not being over used.
If you put too many niggers in the trains or too many cars on the road , then the quality of transport suffer.

>Live in european suburbs
>Did my student/uni days in public transportation
>Driving a car 99% of the time since I got a job
>Both perfectly fine
It just works. I don't get why americans think you have to choose one or the other.
Btw. when I was ill and couldn't work or drive a car for a while, I was pretty fine as well. Next grocery store is 10min walking.

>>17784448 (OP)
>almost immediately there was a sense of "freedom" tied to owning a car
You mean almost immediately there was a government that artificially forced cities to become car-centric by interfering in the free market and using zoning restrictions, eminent domain, parking minimums and floor area ratios to force urbanism to prioritize cars inorganically, which we never observe in urbanism driven by freer markets, correct?

>>17786611
No anon, this is a bad argument and you know it. You're putting the cart before the horse and making this insane assumption that nobody owned cars before freeways were built. Even before the Second World War, Ford had sold well over 20 MILLION Ford Model Ts and Ford Model As, and this was just two cars from one automaker. People wanted Cars. The construction of highways and the removal of light trams in cities wasn't some conspiracy by big car, at least not to the degree I'm sure you'll let on. It was a response to an increase in vehicle traffic in cities that were not built for cars initially, so taxpayers and local governments took action and made cities more car-friendly to increase road safety. It's that simple. People want cars. Every single country on Earth has a car culture anon.

I also want to point out that Europe actually had a BIGGER car culture before World War II. The only reason this changes was because Europe was in shambles after the war from endless aerial bombings which destroyed most of their infrastructure. When the Marshall Plan came along to rebuilt Europes infrastructure, city planners encouraged more use of bicycles and public transport because the average European was still too poor to afford a car at that point.

>>17786174
America is the only first world country, cuck boi >>17786235
because trains suck and trainfags know they suck so they want to ban cars

>>17785704
Cars are never going to be banned, go be mad at some other manufactured outrage

>>17787501
you queers say that same shit about guns while pushing gun control

>>17786670
That's completely untrue
The car-free stuff came later, in like 1970s, the immediate post-war reconstruction was aping america in every way possible
Amsterdam was full of cars till 1970s for example

>>17787503
>Amsterdam was full of cars till 1970s for example
Amsterdam is still full of cars

>>17787506
Well it was even more full of cars
Honestly the ideal amount of cars in cities would be 0
Cars are the 2nd biggest problem of living in a city

>>17787502
republicans are responsible for most gun control, thank reagan for that

>>17787508
>Honestly the ideal amount of cars in cities would be 0
Nobody thinks like this. My bicycle is my main form of transportation and even I don't think like this.

>>17787508
>Cars are the 2nd biggest problem of living in a city
cars aren't even in the top 100 biggest problems of living in a city
>>17787509
>republicans are responsible for most gun control
that's factually not true. every major federal gun control law was passed by dems.
NFA 1934 FDR
GCA 1968 El BJ
brady bill 1993 Clinton
AWB 1994 clinton

>>17787508
>Well it was even more full of cars
Statistically untrue, now its full of cars and tons of bikes sharing the road with them and now nobody is happy as a result. The idea of Amsterdam being some cyclist paradise is just relative because the rest of Europe is simply worse. I've been to Amsterdam, most bikes still have to weave between bike lanes and traffic and honestly the ratio between dedicated bike lanes and car lanes didn't feel much different than an American city, then again I've also never been to American cities that are nutoriously anti-bike like Houston or Detroit

>>17787517
FOPA was more restrictive and important than any of those. Reagan's work, who also supported the later ones

>>17787526
what do you think the FOPA does or says?

>>17787519
Most American cities are actually okay when it comes to bicycle infrastructure, a bikeable city isn't necesarilly the same as a walkable city. Suburbs for example might not be very walkable depending on where you live but suburbs in general are actually great for cycling as a main form of transport because suburbs are designed for slower vehicle traffic

>>17787531
"it shall be unlawful for any person to transfer or possess a machinegun."

>>17787538
>>17787526
cool, so you are full of shit. it isn't unlawful to transfer or possess a machine gun. You are referring to the hughes amendment added by William J. Hughes (D-N.J.) and passed illegally by Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) which made it so you couldn't add machine guns made after 1986 to the NFA registry that already existed. the dems added this as an attempted poison pill to the bill to block it from passing. What the NFA does do is
>preempts states from arresting someone for having "illegal guns" when they are just passing through the state
prior to the law if you were from new hampshire and wanted to go with your legal guns to georga you could be detained and arrested in shithole states like mass, ny, nj, and md for violating state gun laws. The FOPA made it so states cannot arrest you for that
>allows ammo to be sold through the mail
>removes registration requirements on everything but "armor piercing hand gun rounds"
>defines what is a prohibited person and federal disqualifier
>removes the requirement for someone not "in the business of " selling guns from needing an FFL to sell their guns and thus legalizes private sales
So basically, you are a lying piece of shit and every federal gun control law was passed by dems and there is no reason to ever vote dem because all dems are lying pieces of shit who want to ban guns and cars and the suburbs

>>17787558
NTA, and I don't want to go too deep into /pol/shit, but only one of the two candidates in the last election was an actual gun owner and only one of the two candidates in the last election didn't pass any anti-gun laws, and it sure as hell wasn't the Republican candidate in either case

>>17787561
that's false. the current president owned guns before his conviction and never passed a single anti gun LAW in his time in office. meanwhile biden wrote the fucking AWB and him and his vp kept saying they wanted to ban guns every week and the loser in the presidential election is on record saying she supported a complete handgun ban in her city 20 years ago.
Anti gunners and dems do nothing but lie

>>17787565
>and never passed a single anti gun LAW in his time in office.
eeh, orange man signed an executive order baning bump stocks

>>17787568
that's not a law. congress passes laws. meanwhile the only federal gun control law passed since 1994 was signed by a certain dementia patient who has ass cancer
All dems do is lie and try to ban cars and guns

>>17787558
Reagan still signed it, with that amendment. He also signed the Mulford Act.

No one in politics attempts to ban cars or suburbs or even say they want to. Dems don't lie about wanting to pass gun control laws, even though it constantly hurts their election results

>>17787576
>Reagan still signed it, with that amendment.
because the rest of the bill was good. the protection for transporting was needed. Reagan was an anti gun piece of shit and may he burn in hell, but you are a lying piece of shit when you say the GOP pushed gun control. it was literally always the fucking dems
>He also signed the Mulford Act.
the majority of california legislators who passed the mulford act were dems. most state gun laws historically have been dems.
>No one in politics attempts to ban cars or suburbs or even say they want to.
state and local dems do
>Dems don't lie about wanting to pass gun control laws, even though it constantly hurts their election results
the most recent presidential candidate and vp candidate lied about it constantly. every dem lies about it and then they get called out because they are on record saying the opposite.
never ever ever ever vote dem because all they do is lie and try to ban cars and suburbs and single family homes and guns

>>17787586
Mulford himself was Republican. And the GOP elected an anti gun piece of shit and celebrates him constantly, even today?

>state and local dems do
Are you talking about making a car free street or congestion pricing in nyc? "banning cars" or "banning suburbs" just doesn't happen, as much as you want to be afraid of it happening

>>17787517
Cars cause most of the noise and pollution
Plus they make getting anywhere a chore and public transit gets stuck in traffic jams

>>17787597
>Mulford himself was Republican.
the dems controlled both chambers of the california state legislature in 1967 and the majority of legislators who voted for the mulford act were dems
It's pretty telling that the only "gotcha" you have is a single state law from 58 years ago
>nd the GOP elected an anti gun piece of shit and celebrates him constantly, even today?
the GOP doesn't celebrate mulford
>Are you talking about making a car free street or congestion pricing in nyc? "banning cars" or "banning suburbs" just doesn't happen, as much as you want to be afraid of it happening
california and nyc are literally trying to ban zoning laws and the California Air Resources Board has been trying to ban cars since it formed in the 1960s
>>17787604
cars are 3-10 times faster than taking public transit and in your car you don't have to hear the annoying faggots on the subway blasting their shitty music

>>17787604
>Plus they make getting anywhere a chore
A climate controlled enclosure that you can control at your leisure is the last thing I would describe as a "chore" anon

>>17787597
I also just want to point out
you lied and said the GOP does gun control even though
>NFA 1934, GCA 1968, brady bill 1993, AWB 1994
were all dems
you lied and said the FOPA 1986 was somehow worse than the nfa or awb
and you lie about presidents owning guns and their stances on guns
you've lied in every singe post. why should I believe you?

>>17787606
>california and nyc are literally trying to ban zoning laws and the California Air Resources Board has been trying to ban cars since it formed in the 1960s
Making cars less emissive and more fuel efficient is banning them? Anon, I think it's time you get some sleep bro.

>>17787613
CAR voted to ban sales of all ICE cars after a certain year. again see>>17787612

>>17787612
>and you lie about presidents owning guns and their stances on guns
Not the same guy, and I still don't want to turn this thread into /pol/shit but the candidate under the donkey party last election did indeed say she owns a glock and was willing to shoot someone who broke into her home, I'm just saying man that's more than what the other guy ever said about guns, in fact, I recall orange man himself was a Dem for the entirety of the 2000s

>>17787614
Anon, the California Air Resources Board does not in fact poses the authority to unilaterally ban the sales of internal combustion engines, get some sleep bro

>>17787610
I meant for actual people who live in cities not suburban pigs who clog the streets with them
Though i dont know if some AC is enough to make being stuck in traffic enjoyable

>>17787616
she tried get a city wide handgun ban and in her official capacity as an public official swore on a document saying that the 2nd amendment didn't apply to individual citizens. all you commies do is lie
>>17787618
they were the ones who forced saturn to make the electric cars in the 1990s and there is a law in california banning ice car sales after a certain date

>>17787606
>the GOP doesn't celebrate mulford
They celebrate reagan. Quite a bit.

GOP historically has introduced plenty of gun control - there is no lie there. I never even said anything about presidents other than reagan, and certainly nothing about if he owned guns.

>california and nyc are literally trying to ban zoning laws and the California Air Resources Board has been trying to ban cars since it formed in the 1960s

You are genuinely schizophrenic if you think there is a chance california will ban cars, or the concept of suburbs

>>17787619
Traffic isn't necesarilly a car problem though, in fact, car-centric countries tend to have lower commute times overall on average, whereas more train centric countries like Japan have longer commute times on average because too much passenger traffic even over rail inevitably leads to delays. My point is that traffic always sucks and it's not always necesarilly cars that cause traffic

>>17787619
driving is 3-10 times faster than a train or bus
suburbanites are chads, city cucks are swine
>>17787622
>GOP historically has introduced plenty of gun control
this is not a factual statement, dems only lie
>I never even said anything about presidents other than reagan, and certainly nothing about if he owned guns.
sure thing samefaggot
>u are genuinely schizophrenic if you think there is a chance california will ban cars, or the concept of suburbs
they banned single family housing zoning laws, faggot. again, you are a proven liar

>>17787624
>they banned single family housing zoning laws, faggot. again, you are a proven liar

Have you been to california? It's almost entirely made up of suburbs.

>>17787623
What is going to cause traffic without cars, anon?
>>17787624
If suburbs are so great, stay in them.

>>17787621
>they were the ones who forced saturn to make the electric cars in the 1990s
Lmao what?
California NEVER forced anyone to make the fucking EV1, the EV1 may have been made in response to higher emission standards but GM was never forced to put that piece of shit to market. Every other automaker complied without having to resort to making a shoddy electric car
Besides, trucks and utility vehicles will always have lower emission standards than regular cars, so automakers can and do just release SUVs to the market and classify them as trucks, so this is a non-starter argument no matter what. Always with the California boogeyman with you Cleetus, shit

>>17787628
>What is going to cause traffic without cars, anon?
Trains missing their schedules from being unable to deal with a high volume of passengers, again, its one of the problems that contribute to Japans relatively high average commute times

>>17787631
You can run busses, the road isn't gonna disappear anon
And one articulated bus can fit like 100 people

>>17785276
I can still easily leave my city or city block without a car, I just use the bus or rail system which is considerably cheaper and I don't have to pay for insurance or maintenance for it. The only time it could be inconvenient is if I wanted to go outside of my city really late at night, which I never do, but I could also just do that using Uber.
Anyway I don't care what you do with your life, I'm just saying that I personally feel more free without a car than with a car.

>>17785509
Yeah but you still have to deal with motorists who can also be massive shitheads, they drive drunk, etc.

>>17787638
Then you run into the same issue. You're acting like public transport is just going to magically make rush hour dissapear. The truth is that traffic isn't caused by cars, or trains, or busses, its just a concequence of living in a big city

>>17787640
>I'm just saying that I personally feel more free without a car than with a car.
NTA but that's a pretty contrived feeling honestly, you can still own a car and just never feel the need to use it, but there WILL be a time when you do need to use it and you'll be glad it's there. Cars are simply too robust as a form of transport for all their perceived faults

>>17787646
This is the way I think.
Financial freedom is freedom.
If I had a car, I would be paying thousands more dollars per year in car-related expenses.
Because I don't, I can afford to invest more money every month into financial markets that will get me towards what I consider to be freedom, financial freedom.
Because of the fact that having a car would only suck surplus value out of my life on a per-month basis, a car is not freedom, but a financial liability.
If I had a car, I would either have to work a lot more to offset the mostly cost of owning it, which is inconvenient, or simply accept the fact that I'm making less money simply so that I can leave my city at 3am if I ever wanted to. Which I basically never do to begin with.

>>17787653
You have more money but you also have no car so you have less opportunity to spend that money so where has that gotten you? Ubers and train tickets aren't free either

>>17787654
Metro tickets are less expensive than owning a car. Spending money just to spend it is for poor and middle class people. Most of money money is tied up in financial markets, I don't just spend my paychecks when I get them. I have some savings as well just in case there is an emergency and because I am planning on moving soon.

Don't worry. Soon cars will become a luxury good for most of the Western world. It will happen in public-transport friendly Europe first, and it's inevitable in the US too. The unbeatable efficiency of WFH lifestyles, Amazon-style delivery of goods, and continued density increases of suburbs will turn suburbs into "urban" equivalents, with walking-distance necessities like grocery stores and light commercial zoning. This will depress car demand and lead to higher car prices for everyone as car companies fold. Resource bottlenecks will help bring this about quicker than you think. US manufacturers in particular made their choice to sell larger, more expensive vehicles instead of creating a sustainable car economy, a choice that will kill most of them in time.

>>17787643
Anon... Do you really think that moving from like 80 cars carrying 100 people to 1 bus carrying 100 people wouldn't make a difference...? Especially scaled up: like 10 busses won't cause any significant traffic, 8000 cars will cause massive traffic.

>>17787702
*800, guh

>>17784448 (OP)
christ is king btw

>>17786637
>insane assumption that nobody owned cars before freeways were built
Lol, no. The point is that the free market does not lead to car-centric urbanism spontaneously. Deregulate zoning and stop subsidizing cars then see what happens. If cars are about "freedom" then why can't they respect private property rights to become the main method of transportation?

>>17787626
>Have you been to california?
no thank god, but the state government passed a law preempting local zoning laws in an attempt to ban suburbs
>>17787628
I do. I've only been in the city 3 times since coof since it's so ass

>>17787629
>no CAR didn't make them do it
>it just so happened the saturn EVs showed up right when CAR changed their standards and went away when the standards got repealed
you are a lying faggot
>>17787638
busses are slower tian trains

Another reason trains and buses are gay is that most commie cities (illegally) declared them gun free zones so if you ccw on them you go to jail

>>17787640
public transit is 3 to 10 times slower than just driving
>>17787642
other drivers are way better than the dregs who ride public transit

Test

>"walkable city" with good public transport
>"hmmm I will go to the store. I will pay a very small amount of money to jump on a bus/train."

>yankslop car centric society
>"hmmm I will go to the store"
>"I can only get there by driving"
>it's a good thing I own a car and pay for insurance and maintenance and gas for my entire life to be able to go anywhere, ever

like all things america labels as "freedom" it is in fact a prison. Good city design supports travelling TO the city in your car, and through it on foot or publis transport.

>nooooo public transport is scary
You're an insecure faggot with no balls to tell someone to fuck off/shove a crackhead away from you.

middle class people need gassed

>>17787653
so basically you are poor and work a minimum wage job because my car only costs like $133 a month plus gas.
>>17787657
>communists actually believe this retarded schizo retardation

>>17787702
buses cause traffic
>>17787713
you do realize things are car centric because people vote for local government that makes things car centric because we prefer it, right?

>>17787797
>buses cause traffic
are you american by chance

>>17787790
>live in a walkable city
>get stabbed
>live in the pod
>rent is $4,000 for the pod
>can't go where I want, can only go where the government says
>>17787792
lol you are one fake tough guy. I bet you are afraid of guns and want them banned

>>17787799
they literally cause traffic. they stop every 100 feet and of course I'm American, I'm not a homosexual

>>17787802
>lol you are one fake tough guy. I bet you are afraid of guns and want them banned
why would I want that?

not that it matters, yanks are so fucking servile that they do nothing with the guns they're allowed. just endless stories of nogs shooting white people. "don't tread on me" my ass
>>17787803
do you not have bus lanes in the US?

In my city it's literally:
>get on a bus
>it drives past all the traffic in its own lane
>only during rush hour does it sometimes get caught, and that's only because COVID taxi drivers seethed and demanded to use the bus lane

>>17784448 (OP)
>the freedom of everyone becoming in effect some kind of immigrant socially and economically
whoah......

>>17787820
lol you are a yuro, guns are all ready banned in your country and your grandma opened her legs to an occupying army while your grandpa was in a pow camp
>bus lanes
bus lanes cause traffic

>>17787830
>bus lanes cause traffic
For cars, not for public transport users.
>lol you are a yuro
my point is that it's insane that despite not being cucked on guns like europeans, americans still just open their mouths and take whatever is thrown at them

the fact that your politicians aren't constantly getting gunned down is insane

>>17787846
>For cars, not for public transport users.
the bus still takes 3-10 times as long to complete the same journey as the cars would
>blah blah blah
you are a yuro and you voted go get your guns taken. also politicians literally got gunned down last week, retardo

>>17787857
>the bus still takes 3-10 times as long to complete the same journey as the cars would
If cars drove uninterrupted, yes. But they don't, they sit in traffic. Buses stop for a few seconds every several minutes and get their own lane.
>you are a yuro and you voted go get your guns taken. also politicians literally got gunned down last week, retardo
I never did anything of the sort.

But my point is that I wish the USA's people would do more with their guns instead of just treating them like funko pops and screeching about "the government taking them" as if they'd ever do anything.

Government doesn't have to take them, it'll fuck you guys to death and you'll let them. Just like us. But WE don't have guns.

>>17787862
>If cars drove uninterrupted, yes. But they don't, they sit in traffic.
even with traffic a car is 3 to 10 times faster than a bus
>more yurocuck seething
you voted to give up your guns in the 90 like a cuck and 2 politicians just got shot last week

>>17787802
>>live in a walkable city
>>get stabbed
>>live in the pod
>>rent is $4,000 for the pod
>>can't go where I want, can only go where the government says

>drive ze pod
>crash
>pay out of your ass for fuel, insurance and loan interest
>actually cant go where i want, only where the ebil government built roads, and then i cant leave my pod, all activities have to be circular so i can return to ze pod

>>17787781
Busses are faster on short distances, though i guess light rail is better
Its harder to build though

>>17787784
meds

>>17787786
Only on short distances

>>17787797
Busses decrease traffic if people ride them instead of driving. Are you mentally retarded?

>>17787869
Did you get that 3-10 thing uploaded into your brain by the heritage foundation or something? It's like a mantra

>>17787869
Why do you want to get there fsster? Can't schedule for shit?
Also less cars on the road, better to drive in. Ever thought of that?

>>17787887
>loan interest
I'm pretty sure I paid less than $300 in interest on my car loan, paid it off in like 2 years and have had the car like 8 years without paying for shit
>>17787895
>Busses are faster on short distances, though i guess light rail is better
>Its harder to build though
buses are 3 to 10 times slower than cars for short distances
>meds
it isn't meds. NYC literally did that
>Only on short distances
over long distances driving is 10 to 20 times faster than public transit
>Busses decrease traffic if people ride them instead of driving. Are you mentally retarded?
buses increase traffic because they stop every 30 feet you gay retard
>Did you get that 3-10 thing uploaded into your brain by the heritage foundation or something? It's like a mantra
it's a factual statement based on every time I've driven vs taken a bus or train
public transit is fucking slow

>>17787918
why should I have to pay for your trains no one rides and because commuting is gay, I want to spend as little time commuting as possible

>>17787919
>its universally true because uhh i say so
retard
>without paying for shit
so how much do you pay for fuel, insurance and repairs per month average? lol
The whole thing was a non-sequitor anyways because you started whining about rents for some reason, as if no cars = higher rents

>>17787921
You'd be paying to have less retards on the road.

>>17787931
fewer, ESL and not worth it
>>17787928
>>its universally true because uhh i say so
you are a gay retard
>so how much do you pay for fuel, insurance and repairs per month average? lol
Fuel maybe like $50-100, insurance is like $133 and repairs has to be under $100, probably under $50
>The whole thing was a non-sequitor anyways because you started whining about rents for some reason, as if no cars = higher rents
city cuck pods have higher rents

>>17787941
Thats a lot of money spent to be retarded

>>17787941
Languages evolve, nigga.

>>17787955
nah, you are just ESL
>>17787949
not really, vs you spending a ton extra on rent to live in a cuckshed

>>17787981
That's a lot of assumptions you got there, fatso. Touch grass. Have sex.

>>17787988
you live in a pod and you are too poor and gay to afford a car

>>17784457
>Like what? More asphalt and suburbs?
The wilderness

>>17784718
What niggers cant afford to own a car? There's entire movements of people who can't afford rent who can afford to live in their car?

>>17784733
Walkable cities don't work if you're country is <90% White

>>17787996
4000 sqft, 2 cars. 8, 6, and 3.

>>17788027
sure thing there, lil bro

Cars are good for long distance, when you need shit done that requires actually picking up stuff (grocery shopping, hardware store etc) and heading to places out of the way like the beach or bushwalking etc. Cars become a fucking NIGHTMARE when they are a day to day requirement, like going to work.
Walkable cities are far better for actual social life, nightlife, community, sense of place etc.
Issue with places like London, New York, Paris etc, is that they are not actually walkable, they are fucking MASSIVE so you have to take the rail jew to get everywhere and that becomes a massive pain in the ass, especially when big cities like London and Paris end public transport at like 11pm.
Walkable city that is population of like 300-500k is the best sort of city. (pic related).
>t. lived in Canada, Australia and UK.

>>17788061
>no it's great to not be able to go anywhere and to be stuck in a cuckpod inna city

>>17787119
you are a 3rd world shithole, fucking subhumans

>>17788085
America is the only first world country, homo

>>17784468
I, too, live in Michigan. This entire is built around forcing you to drive somewhere to do anything. The reason you have to drive to do anything good, is because there is nothing walkable. If you don't understand why this is awful, you are a true retard who has never been anywhere where you don't have to drive.

>>17784530
This guy get's it. Car design peaked with diesel Mercedes Benz from the 80s. These cars will literally run forever and can be repaired by a regular mechanic. Anything with a touch screen is pure consumerism.

>t. people who will pay insane amounts of money simply to avoid walking because they are so fat.

>>17788110
>muh walkable city
go to detroit
>>17788133
>t. seething trannies because they are too poor to afford a car and too retarded to pass a driving test

Its depressing to drive into run down villages or abandoned places.

>>17784448 (OP)
>I genuinely enjoy driving and even do it as a leisurely thing sometimes
I don't. I drive because I have to. And it's fucking miserable. Drive to the store, drive to the post office, drive to the bank, drive to work. It's fucking annoying.
It's not freedom if you can't be without it.
But walkable cities just aren't possible with all the riff raff about.

>>17787780
>no thank god, but the state government passed a law preempting local zoning laws in an attempt to ban suburbs

Pathetic attempt then, because again, california is mostly suburbs - probably the most suburban state in the country. If you like suburbs, maybe you should live in california

Trainsisters...