To build the cities of the future, we must get out of our cars • Hacker News Board

Re: To build the cities of the future, we must get out of our cars

#21

Post by crispyambulance » Mon, Mar 18, 2019, 12:46 PM UTC

RickJWagner wrote: post #11

mtberatwork wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the US went to the other extreme and is only slowly turning around. US car manufacturers are doubling down on large trucks and SUVs and the current administration continues to thwart progress on tackling climate change and other societal concerns. I would say the US, at least on a macro level, is still on the "other extreme" path.

I don't believe there is a nefarious scheme in play. People who live in cities don't need cars. People who live outside cities still need cars. The manufacturers try to fill that need. The manufacturers, sellers, etc. make the economy go 'round. It will all change if/when economic forces bring it about. Directly forcing it through politics probably isn't the right approach.

    > I don't believe there is a nefarious scheme in play.

I don't either but I do see it a sad lack of imagination and resignation to out-of-date mythologies about individualism.

There's no defensible reason why work-home-school-retail structures rural places can't nucleate closer together into walkable "main street" towns.

Much of the design of fly-over states is dictated by developers. It starts when a farmer who wants to retires sells a huge tract of land to a development company. The land eventually gets populated with a mind-numbing matrix of boring mcmansions, without regard to utilities, tax base, schooling, or distance.

People then buy into to the facade of rural living but then end up driving 10's of miles for each and every errand and activity. They even take vacations in Europe and marvel at how delightful it is to sit in a town square and be able to walk to everything. When they get back to their ex-burban strip mall hellscapes in the USA, the vast majority just fail to make the connection that it doesn't have to be that way.

Re: To build the cities of the future, we must get out of our cars

#22

Post by bryanlarsen » Mon, Mar 18, 2019, 12:47 PM UTC

ptero wrote: post #19

mtberatwork wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the US went to the other extreme and is only slowly turning around. US car manufacturers are doubling down on large trucks and SUVs and the current administration continues to thwart progress on tackling climate change and other societal concerns. I would say the US, at least on a macro level, is still on the "other extreme" path.

> US car manufacturers are doubling down on large trucks and SUVs Manufacturers are building lots of SUVs because this is what people in the US prefer to buy. If manufacturers build tons of subcompacts instead they would have to drop prices and probably sell those subcompacts at a loss. If you wanted to sell more small cars instead you should convince consumers to buy them (e.g., via end user incentives), which would…

The deck is stacked, though. CUV's are considered trucks for the purposes of CAFE regulation. If they were considered the cars that they really are, they would be more fuel efficient, more expensive and manufacturers would be pushing small cars a lot harder to bring those averages down.

Re: To build the cities of the future, we must get out of our cars

#23

Post by lsniddy » Mon, Mar 18, 2019, 12:50 PM UTC

bogle wrote: post #14

RickJWagner wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't believe there is a nefarious scheme in play. People who live in cities don't need cars. People who live outside cities still need cars. The manufacturers try to fill that need. The manufacturers, sellers, etc. make the economy go 'round. It will all change if/when economic forces bring it about. Directly forcing it through politics probably isn't the right approach.

I don't think too many trust the market to make their decisions for them. The purpose of politics is to represent the people and, ideally, do what is best for them. That's definitely not what the market is for! Get involved in politics if you want to bring about change in the world because companies whose job it is to sell more cars certainly aren't going to be helping improve the environment.

This is the logic that produced the green new deal.

Re: To build the cities of the future, we must get out of our cars

#24

Post by lazyjones » Mon, Mar 18, 2019, 12:56 PM UTC

Improving life in cities is a matter of fixing existing problems, like poor public transport and pollution from combustion engines and heating. Building a "feel good" fantasy around the hatred of cars isn't going to improve anything, it'll just replace the current best choice for individual transport with something inferior, as well as destroy the economy (which depends on roads for logistics and public services).

Re: To build the cities of the future, we must get out of our cars

#25

Post by njepa » Mon, Mar 18, 2019, 12:57 PM UTC

Tepix wrote: post #2

Not exactly rocket science. Many cities around the world have figured it out already. To me it seems that the US went to the other extreme and is only slowly turning around. I remember reading "Das neue Universum"² in the early 80s where they proposed large skyscrapers connected by tubes. No cars in sight. Oh and don't miss "Das Neue Universum Volume 84 (1967)": http://klausbuergle.de/buergle_verkehr1.htm - Click on…

> Not exactly rocket science.

Rocket science seems straight forward in comparison to creating attractive, rather than combative, societies. The Nordic countries had insane possibilities the 'win' the information age, but have all to a large extent been going the other way (at least in terms of outlook).

> To me it seems that the US went to the other extreme and is only slowly turning around.

I don't think the US has been going the other way, so much that it has always been combative and the way to not get exponentially exploited in such a society is to build the easiest house anywhere. (You are still paying the price of course). Now as people are moving to cities again, they are rediscovering the dysfunctional society spanning both capitalism and government.

> I remember reading "Das neue Universum"² in the early 80s where they proposed large skyscrapers connected by tubes. No cars in sight.

As I heard someone say recently most of the futuristic ideas of that era is based on the idea of free energy, but what we got instead is free information. So what we have to deal with is a lot closer to Gibson than Asimov.

Re: To build the cities of the future, we must get out of our cars

#26

Post by benj111 » Mon, Mar 18, 2019, 12:58 PM UTC

lsniddy wrote: post #23

bogle wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think too many trust the market to make their decisions for them. The purpose of politics is to represent the people and, ideally, do what is best for them. That's definitely not what the market is for! Get involved in politics if you want to bring about change in the world because companies whose job it is to sell more cars certainly aren't going to be helping improve the environment.

This is the logic that produced the green new deal.

Could you expand? I'm not sure if you agree with the parent, or against the new deal.

Re: To build the cities of the future, we must get out of our cars

#27

Post by paganel » Mon, Mar 18, 2019, 1:07 PM UTC

growtofill wrote: post #10

> they’d no longer segregate rich from poor Should people who want to spend more on housing be automatically labeled “rich”?

That's generally how it works, yes, you have more money you're seen as rich, especially nowadays when housing is so expensive compared to one's average income.

Re: To build the cities of the future, we must get out of our cars

#28

Post by benj111 » Mon, Mar 18, 2019, 1:07 PM UTC

lazyjones wrote: post #24

Improving life in cities is a matter of fixing existing problems, like poor public transport and pollution from combustion engines and heating. Building a "feel good" fantasy around the hatred of cars isn't going to improve anything, it'll just replace the current best choice for individual transport with something inferior, as well as destroy the economy (which depends on roads for logistics and public services).

I don't think its a hatred of cars. Its just cars are so entrenched in western cultures that its easy to overlook all the problems.

All those things you cited are all exacerbated by the car. Electric cars will solve the pollution issue, but they are still cars, with all the issues they bring.

Re: To build the cities of the future, we must get out of our cars

#29

Post by naravara » Mon, Mar 18, 2019, 1:07 PM UTC

inapis wrote: post #7

naravara wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many cities in the OECD maybe. Lots of cities in Africa and Asia are going with the American model of car dependent sprawl and it’s completely untenable. My childhood home of Bangalore has become a nightmare.

India still invests a lot in public infrastructure. Bangalore is an exception. Mumbai, Delhi, Jaipur etc have invested a lot in urban infra especially the metro. Bangalore was just not ready for the influx of IT companies and is having serious trouble keeping up. But I love the airport buses though. Given India’s population, landscape plus the stave vs central govt politics, its unlikely India will see major car-depe…

It's possible Bangalore just gave me a bad taste. I didn't find it quite so nightmarish in Delhi or Jaipur, but generally when I go to other parts of India I'm doing more touristy things so the daily headaches aren't as bad and get replaced with headaches dealing with hawkers.

Re: To build the cities of the future, we must get out of our cars

#30

Post by bluGill » Mon, Mar 18, 2019, 1:10 PM UTC

crispyambulance wrote: post #21

RickJWagner wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't believe there is a nefarious scheme in play. People who live in cities don't need cars. People who live outside cities still need cars. The manufacturers try to fill that need. The manufacturers, sellers, etc. make the economy go 'round. It will all change if/when economic forces bring it about. Directly forcing it through politics probably isn't the right approach.

> I don't believe there is a nefarious scheme in play. I don't either but I do see it a sad lack of imagination and resignation to out-of-date mythologies about individualism. There's no defensible reason why work-home-school-retail structures rural places can't nucleate closer together into walkable "main street" towns. Much of the design of fly-over states is dictated by developers. It starts when a farmer who want…

It is about trade offs though. I moved from a 10 acre lot to a small city recently.

I love that my son and I went for an hour walk to a park (we passed a different park on the way because we played in that one yesterday) and back. I love that my work is only a few minutes drive away (now that the weather is warmer I need to get my bike working).

I miss other things about my rural lot though. There is no space to drive my tractor collection around. I can't see anywhere near as many stars at night.

It is about trade offs, I was happy in the rural area. I'm happy in town. Some think I like to do are better/easier, some things are worse/harder.