Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cars took over because the legal system helped squeezed out alternatives

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 451 posts

Re: Cars took over because the legal system helped squeezed out alternatives

#291

Post by ThomPete »

afiori wrote: post #148
lostjohnny wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disclaimer: I don't like cars, I love driving, but as a sport, not in urban areas. Biking is like running, playing soccer, playing tennis, swimming, many people don't do it because they don't do any sport. Biking requires skills that normal people usually don't have, but that they believe they have. It is in fact more dangerous than driving (compared to the driver, not pedestrians) As soon as older people could not b…

And I would add, public transport; even better if free for elderly and people with disabilities.

Public transportation is not free, someone has to pay for it which means its more expensive for everyone else..

The real problem though is what you do in less densly populated areas.

Re: Cars took over because the legal system helped squeezed out alternatives

#292

Post by tathougies »

ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #76
methodover wrote: post #43

“Given New York’s lax enforcement record, the Freakonomics podcast described running over pedestrians there as “the perfect crime.”” I was driving in Oakland when the car in front of me didn’t slow down for a pedestrian in the crosswalk. The pedestrian disappeared in front of the car. I stopped my car, got out, found the struck young woman trembling and bleeding in the street. The speed limit was 30 miles per hour. I…

Wait, what!? In Europe if you strike a pedestrian on the crosswalk you'll definitely loose your license and be looking at manslaughter charges too while your insurance company will murder you after paying the victim's medical/disability/court bills.

This is a story from oakland a city where the citizens do not like the police and protest against them. As a result it is crime ridden and the police are ineffective. At one point, oakland was the murder capital of america and murder was also a non punished crime.

In most parts of the country, I doubt this story would have played out this way

Re: Cars took over because the legal system helped squeezed out alternatives

#293

Post by SketchySeaBeast »

magduf wrote: post #279
SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then cities have to radically change. I don't know how people can ever commute from the current urban sprawl to their place of work without them. Cities would need to build massive bus and rail infrastructures at the cost of billions or similar amounts are going to have to be spent to increase densification. I chose where to live because of a desire to be able to commute easily - the bus is 10 minutes, walking is abo…

Simple: they need to bulldoze most everything and start over, building cities the way they are in Europe with high density and public transit lines built in (and under). Add in either closed roads for anything except delivery trucks (you can't deliver goods to the supermarket with a subway), or huge tolls/taxes for personal vehicles to keep people from driving there and causing gridlock and get them out of the suburb…

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic, or you think that's actually feasible and simple.

Re: Cars took over because the legal system helped squeezed out alternatives

#294

Post by adrianN »

LoSboccacc wrote: post #31
megablast wrote: post #22

Imagine if someone invented cars today? Hey everyone, we want to make you use this killing machine, that kills a million people every year around the world directly, many more indirectly. We just need to clear out the parks currently around your houses to turn into horrible bleak roads, so they can bring the pollution directly to your door.

mass transit will never be capillary enough. you know what they did in old European cities when the started blocking city centers to public transit? they introduced 8 seater autobus to have enough and be capillary enough to get people where they needed to. mass transit can't do that, unless at some point you want very very tiny trams and tramways everywhere instead of roads everywhere or would you prefer to live in a…

Mass transit + bikes or scooters is pretty good. Millions of people in cities don't own cars. It's good enough for many people and there is still lots of room for improvement.

Re: Cars took over because the legal system helped squeezed out alternatives

#295

Post by tossAfterUsing »

myspy wrote: post #239
stronglikedan wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a pedestrian (or cyclist), you should always give way to cars, even being prepared to jump out of the way when you have the right-of-way. Unless the driver is intoxicated, they get inconvenienced with higher insurance premiums for a little while at worst, while you get stuck with life long injuries and pain at worst.

Which is a reason why cars have to vanish from cities.

That's a great idea!

https://arcosanti.org/project/about-arcosanti/

Re: Cars took over because the legal system helped squeezed out alternatives

#296

Post by cgriswald »

pavel_lishin wrote: post #274
bspammer wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cognitive decline happens to everyone the longer they live, if that's ageism then I'm afraid it's also reality. Testing everyone yearly would be prohibitively expensive. Hopefully, self-driving cars will eventually render these discussions redundant. But that still seems to be decades away at this rate.

> Testing everyone yearly would be prohibitively expensive. I reiterate that we're driving huge pieces of metal at nearly a hundred miles per hour. Let's stop sacrificing people's lives for the privilege, and start sacrificing time and money.

I propose greater enforcement of existing traffic laws (instead of just speed and DUI); and a heavier hand when it comes to revocation. This would target those who need to be retested the most regardless of age and the burden of doing so can be put on them through fees.

Re: Cars took over because the legal system helped squeezed out alternatives

#297

Post by crunchyfrog »

Another result of this culture that I wish the author would have addressed is how cars have changed how we raise our children. We are forced to keep our children inside because all our houses are surrounded by rivers of death. Why are we surprised that young kids spend all their time sedating themselves with screens? What choice have we given them?

We have designed our living spaces to be ideal for cars, not humans. It is hard to acknowledge because it has been that way all our lives but it is a trade-off we are making.

Re: Cars took over because the legal system helped squeezed out alternatives

#298

Post by tmux314 »

There is no doubt that we are over-reliant on cars. We (Americans) spent the last century towards developing automobile infrastructure. Now with global warming, it will take many more years to undo the damage. We can agree over that.

But focusing the blame on car companies and the wealthy one-percenters is historical revisionism. It undercuts the fact that these policies were eagerly supported by lower-middle class and middle class people like my family, as well as by many working class people from the countryside. It expanded our agency. It allowed us to vacation to beaches and parks. It allowed us to visit faraway families and pursue work in faraway places. In short, it provided us physical and economic mobility.

We didn't know the damage we were doing. And even if we did know, we probably would have done the same thing. But passing the blame doesn't solve anything.

Re: Cars took over because the legal system helped squeezed out alternatives

#299

Post by cgriswald »

wycy wrote: post #257
dsego wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My old (first) croatian driver's license issued back in early 2000s had an expiry date in 2040-something I think, basically until retirement. The new one is only 10 years, so I have to renew it. I only got the new one because it's a plastic card that fits in my wallet (unlike the old booklet).

My license expires after just 6 years I believe, but it can be renewed without retesting or anything, so unfortunately expiry doesn't solve the problem (at least in the US).

I believe mine expires every five years, but the first time I renewed it I did it through the mail. The last time, I only had to retake the eye test (at ten years). And the DMV made me wait a long time, with the eye test at every window clearly visible (and I think the same one, but I could be remembering incorrectly). I can see fine, but it would have been trivial to memorize it. Even if you can't see it while waiting, take a picture on your phone and zoom in. Memorize the lines you can't see. Plus, I'm not sure the employee was even listening to me as I rattled off the letters.

In my old state they had a machine you looked into. I had a harder time with that one, I'm guessing due to my mild astigmatism. But no chance to memorize it, because you don't see it until your face is in the machine; and all the lines were the same size, so you could have gotten any of them.

Re: Cars took over because the legal system helped squeezed out alternatives

#300

Post by [deleted] »

myspy wrote: post #239
stronglikedan wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a pedestrian (or cyclist), you should always give way to cars, even being prepared to jump out of the way when you have the right-of-way. Unless the driver is intoxicated, they get inconvenienced with higher insurance premiums for a little while at worst, while you get stuck with life long injuries and pain at worst.

Which is a reason why cars have to vanish from cities.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN