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

321–330 of 451 posts

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

#321

Post by jliptzin »

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…

How is it possible that we don't have mandatory driving tests once you reach certain ages, ie 80, 85, 95+? I just heard the other week that my friend's great-great grandma (98 years old) is still driving. If someone that old can still drive safely, good for them, but there should be a mandatory test to check that.

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

#322

Post by mfer »

dalbasal wrote: post #12

Another way of stating this could be "transport is a policy question." How cities are built and what transport infrastructure they're built around. Im fairly sympathetic to the overall aims of this article. I think a transport system more similar to those in the Netherlands makes for better urban landscapes. But... this habitual style of treating everything as a conspiracy, built around a personified enemy ("They gav…

> How cities are built and what transport infrastructure they're built around.

Context is important.

The population of cities has grown. For example, the Chicago metro area has 70% more people now than in 1950. Population growth has impacted car ownership and use. We shouldn't use today's context against the past. Things were different and that's worth considering.

Urban areas are about 3% of the US physical space. The design of transportation for dense cities (and they are getting denser) is different from that of suburban or rural spaces. There is no one size fits all.

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

#323

Post by burlesona »

crunchyfrog wrote: post #297

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.…

I was aware of this in the abstract before I had kids. Now that I have them, it can be really terrifying. We go for walks even in places with big wide sidewalks and they are oblivious, they would jump out in the street at just about any moment if we weren’t holding hands and teaching them constantly to be afraid of cars.

It’s really sad. Kids nature is to want to run around and burn off energy, and right outside our door it’s safe for adults to do that, but it’s still not safe for young children because you still have to stay in the limited pedestrian zone and carefully cross streets.

I’ve wondered a lot about trying to build a car-free neighborhood with a commuter bus to downtown. I wish that existed, I’d move there.

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

#324

Post by turtlecloud »

SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #293
magduf wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You need to have the political will. There is nothing in the previous comment that is physically impossible.

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

#325

Post by digitalengineer »

jliptzin wrote: post #321
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…

How is it possible that we don't have mandatory driving tests once you reach certain ages, ie 80, 85, 95+? I just heard the other week that my friend's great-great grandma (98 years old) is still driving. If someone that old can still drive safely, good for them, but there should be a mandatory test to check that.

Perhaps because the generation making the laws are baby boomers? (And don’t want to loose their access to their cars?) https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/may/17/generation-soc...

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

#326

Post by acdha »

u801e wrote: post #281
acdha wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also to invest in things like public transit, sidewalks & protected bike paths for ebikes & trikes, mobility services which will pick you up, etc. Unfortunately we’ve lost our way nationally about funding infrastructure and in many areas the sprawl density is low enough that these are more expensive than, say, much of Europe.

> Also to invest in things like [...] protected bike paths for ebikes & trikes These lead to significant problems at intersections. It's best to keep vehicles of all types on roads where they obey the same set of rules.

Those lead to problems at poorly-designed intersections. I would prefer the answer be to design them correctly, making sure that some users aren't neglected.

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

#327

Post by SketchySeaBeast »

mac01021 wrote: post #313
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…

I'm not sure how much ifrastructure is really needed most places. Could we just use existing roads, and try to replace every 30 cars on the road with a bus?

That's what I mean - if you assume 100,000 cars on the road, that's 3,000 new buses the city needs, as well as multiples of that more bus drivers.

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

#329

Post by SketchySeaBeast »

turtlecloud wrote: post #324
SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

You need to have the political will. There is nothing in the previous comment that is physically impossible.

No, you're right - but to say it's simple is ridiculous. That will take the entire city being willing to be displaced for years - millions of people without homes - what does the political will for that look like?
Post reply on HN