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

If we want a shift to walking we need to prioritize dignity

streets.mn

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 713 posts

Re: If we want a shift to walking we need to prioritize dignity

#31

Post by jrockway »

psunavy03 wrote: post #6
paulcole wrote: post #4

The thing is we (as an American society) really don’t want a shift to walking. We like the idea of walking more but won’t actually do it. Instead we’ll make up a million excuses about why we just can’t walk. I say this as someone who at 40 years old has never learned to drive and who has walked/bicycled/taken the bus virtually everywhere I’ve needed to go. And I’ve lived in very rural and very suburban areas, as well…

> I say this as someone who at 40 years old has never learned to drive and who has walked/bicycled/taken the bus virtually everywhere I’ve needed to go. I say this with no mockery or disrespect, just description . . . you are not normal. I mean in a statistical sense. Not only are you part of (maybe the last) generation who salivated over the thought of getting a driver's license at 16 and getting away from Mom and D…

As someone else who is not normal, I have to say I'm a little tired of having my taxes subsidize the roads and sewers for someone who lives in the middle of nowhere and commutes 40 miles each way by car. "But my kids NEED a backyard!" Fair enough, but afford it on your own without a handout from the government.

Re: If we want a shift to walking we need to prioritize dignity

#32

Post by slifin »

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #23

This article kind of skips out on safety. Many of the urban areas that have the density for walking, often have issues of homelessness and open drug use that makes people feel unsafe walking, especially with children.

It must be easy to ignore a homeless population if you can just drive past them

Re: If we want a shift to walking we need to prioritize dignity

#33

Post by Guvante »

gruez wrote: post #16
closeparen wrote: post #3

This lens is underutilized in the discourse, but people feel it acutely. Even a lot of the anti-cycling stance comes down to, “What am I, poor?” When you are using transportation infrastructure that’s designed with contempt for you, you know, and you don’t want to be there. See also: rail slow zones, buses that shimmy and rattle violently on imperfect pavement, how Muni trains close their doors and pull one foot out…

>Even a lot of the anti-cycling stance comes down to, “What am I, poor?” I agree with the overall point that people don't want to cycle because the experience sucks, but your description feels like an unnecessarily inflammatory way to say "people are willing to pay for a more pleasant experience". Nobody says "a lot of the anti-cheap laptop stance comes down to, "what am I, poor?".

Nothing about the post you responded to says "people are willing to pay for a more pleasant experience".

The closest is "people aren't willing to pay to improve an unpleasant experience" which isn't related to purchasing a laptop in anyway.

Re: If we want a shift to walking we need to prioritize dignity

#35

Post by psunavy03 »

jrockway wrote: post #31
psunavy03 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I say this as someone who at 40 years old has never learned to drive and who has walked/bicycled/taken the bus virtually everywhere I’ve needed to go. I say this with no mockery or disrespect, just description . . . you are not normal. I mean in a statistical sense. Not only are you part of (maybe the last) generation who salivated over the thought of getting a driver's license at 16 and getting away from Mom and D…

As someone else who is not normal, I have to say I'm a little tired of having my taxes subsidize the roads and sewers for someone who lives in the middle of nowhere and commutes 40 miles each way by car. "But my kids NEED a backyard!" Fair enough, but afford it on your own without a handout from the government.

Too bad. You got outvoted in a democracy. Because most people do not hold this view.

Re: If we want a shift to walking we need to prioritize dignity

#36

Post by goda90 »

gruez wrote: post #16
closeparen wrote: post #3

This lens is underutilized in the discourse, but people feel it acutely. Even a lot of the anti-cycling stance comes down to, “What am I, poor?” When you are using transportation infrastructure that’s designed with contempt for you, you know, and you don’t want to be there. See also: rail slow zones, buses that shimmy and rattle violently on imperfect pavement, how Muni trains close their doors and pull one foot out…

>Even a lot of the anti-cycling stance comes down to, “What am I, poor?” I agree with the overall point that people don't want to cycle because the experience sucks, but your description feels like an unnecessarily inflammatory way to say "people are willing to pay for a more pleasant experience". Nobody says "a lot of the anti-cheap laptop stance comes down to, "what am I, poor?".

I have literally seen people scoff at biking or riding the bus as something for poor people. It is a common sentiment.

Re: If we want a shift to walking we need to prioritize dignity

#37

Post by davidktr »

OO000oo wrote: post #2

The same can be said for virtually any societal change. Want people to proactively fight climate change? It turns out guilting people doesn't work, but give them a dignified existence and they will immediately care about the world they live in.

Is that so? The most dignified, people with the most money, are also causing the most desctruction.

I find it odd to say people are fighting climate change if they actively contribute to climate's destruction. Doing it for a short time with a clearly stated end date would be one thing. However, almost nobody emits less than the crucial threshold of 2 t CO2/year.

At some point you have to admit that if you aren't doing it, you aren't doing it.

Re: If we want a shift to walking we need to prioritize dignity

#38

Post by Guvante »

voisin wrote: post #9

If we want a shift to walking, we need cities to plant around 100x the number of trees they have. Ever walk through an old, mature neighbourhood? Usually there are tons of people on the sidewalks, and a primary reason is that there are mature trees providing plenty of shade. Then try walking in a new neighbourhood with barely any shade. It is awful.

We had trees, they ripped them out in the name of safety.

"A drink driver might swerve off the road" killed so many old growth trees in the US.

Re: If we want a shift to walking we need to prioritize dignity

#39

Post by moomoo11 »

Guvante wrote: post #38
voisin wrote: post #9

If we want a shift to walking, we need cities to plant around 100x the number of trees they have. Ever walk through an old, mature neighbourhood? Usually there are tons of people on the sidewalks, and a primary reason is that there are mature trees providing plenty of shade. Then try walking in a new neighbourhood with barely any shade. It is awful.

We had trees, they ripped them out in the name of safety. "A drink driver might swerve off the road" killed so many old growth trees in the US.

Wouldn't that be safer?

I would rather the drunk driver hit the tree and deal with his/her consequences, than hit my house or my neighbors during our sleep.

Re: If we want a shift to walking we need to prioritize dignity

#40

Post by arrowsmith »

skrebbel wrote: post #13
paulcole wrote: post #4

The thing is we (as an American society) really don’t want a shift to walking. We like the idea of walking more but won’t actually do it. Instead we’ll make up a million excuses about why we just can’t walk. I say this as someone who at 40 years old has never learned to drive and who has walked/bicycled/taken the bus virtually everywhere I’ve needed to go. And I’ve lived in very rural and very suburban areas, as well…

Can you explain this to me? For example, my local supermarket is a 8 minute walk from my house. Driving there would take about 5 minutes, due to one way streets etc, so including the hassle of parking etc it takes about as long. Driving there seems positively insane to me, except if I’m shopping for a party or something and need to fill the trunk. Are you saying that Americans would choose the car here? Or that in Am…

Have you spent much time in the US? American cities are nothing like Europe. Everything is far more spread out with more empty land in between buildings, so all the distances are longer. And the concept of what we Brits call a "corner shop" hardly seems to exist in 'Murica - you get these huge residential zones where it's nothing but homes, homes, homes for miles and miles with no shops or anything commercial. So if you need to, say, buy a loaf of bread, or do any of the everyday chores of life that require one to leave the house, your destination is never within walking distance. It's my least favourite thing about day-to-day life in America.
Post reply on HN