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

41–50 of 451 posts

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

#41

Post by scarejunba »

reallydontask wrote: post #34
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…

> But... this habitual style of treating everything as a conspiracy, built around a personified enemy ("They gave legal force to a mind-set—let’s call it automobile supremacy—that kills 40,000 Americans a year)... this way of thinking isn't doing us any favours. I get what you are saying, but isn't it, in this case, a relatively accurate description of what happened? If not all over the US, at least in some big citie…

It has the tone of that breathless protestor you see on Market Street yelling about contrails making the frogs gay or whatever.

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

#42

Post by ginko »

LeonidasXIV wrote: post #38
fergie wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a European I was really surprised at how cycle-friendly San Francisco and Palo Alto (especially Stanford campus) are- its much better than you might expect. Room for improvement, but no worse than many cities over here.

As a resident of Copenhagen this was not really my impression. Yes, Palo Alto is cycleable, kinda in the same way any small town in the world is cycleable - low amount of traffic and comparatively wide streets. San Francisco is cycleable because it is 7x7 miles large so not that much space to sprawl but cycling infrastructure is basically completely absent. What surprised me though is how overall passable public tran…

Yeah, I never understood what people have against MUNI. The bus and subway seemed perfectly fine and quite cheap when I visited.

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

#43

Post by methodover »

“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 don’t think the driver was going quite that fast — maybe 20, 25 at most.

The woman driving the car was elderly. It’s tough to gauge her age — pushing late 70s, maybe 80? She said she didn’t notice the girl in the crosswalk.

I was upset. I stayed the entire time, talked with the cops at length, gave a statement. I wanted to see the lady’s license taken away. Or a ticket at least. Or heck, even a talking to about if maybe she’s no longer fit to drive.

The cops let the old lady drive away. No ticket. No talk. I was stunned. Surely if you hit someone with your car at that speed, in fucking crosswalk, you at the very least need to prove to the DMV that you’re safe to drive. Especially if you’re an elderly person. But nope. They said they had no grounds with which to take any action at all.

Still bothers me. I hope that lady hasn’t killed anyone.

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

#44

Post by scarejunba »

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.

But in exchange you get to go anywhere in America. You aunt in San Jose you haven't seen in months because it's a day's horse-ride. Well you can pop over for lunch, and be home for dinner. You can go see Yosemite and Tahoe in the same day. Your groceries will be 10 mins away.

No. If someone invented cars today, he'd be considered a hero. We'd talk about him in history books.

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

#45

Post by kranner »

scarejunba wrote: post #44
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.

But in exchange you get to go anywhere in America. You aunt in San Jose you haven't seen in months because it's a day's horse-ride. Well you can pop over for lunch, and be home for dinner. You can go see Yosemite and Tahoe in the same day. Your groceries will be 10 mins away. No. If someone invented cars today, he'd be considered a hero. We'd talk about him in history books.

> Your groceries will be 10 mins away.

I doubt your groceries would be more than 10 minutes away even if no cars had been invented. Zoning practices would change to allow more shops distributed across residential areas. That would make more sense than requiring people to ride an hour on horseback.

But yes, the supermarket would be much less 'super' with a much smaller selection of goods.

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

#46

Post by nmeofthestate »

stellar678 wrote: post #39
DaveInTucson wrote: post #27

According to Wikipedia [0], the number of MV-related deaths has been right about 10 or 11 per 100,000 per year for the last ten years. Which makes the opening claim "Americans are condemned to lose friends and relatives to traffic violence" seem particularly overwrought. And while the legal system may have been of some help, I rather suspect the main reason cars took over is because they give the user a tremendous am…

If you live in a small town of 100,000 people, that means 11 of your neighbors will be killed by drivers crashing their cars every year. And that doesn’t account for the deaths and health costs caused by road pollution, by inactive lifestyles forced on communities due to car-centered infrastructure, etc... Given the car-oriented status quo, perhaps it’s true that cars give owners tremendous freedom and agency (at the…

I live in a small city of about 400,000 and only have about 10 neighbours. I guess Americans are just friendlier.

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

#47

Post by thaumasiotes »

raquo wrote: post #16
thaumasiotes wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't seem quite the same, but your comment strongly reminded me of https://www.econlib.org/an-epic-example-of-wealth-destructio... .

That article comes so close to defeating its own argument it's painful. If that land wasn't protected with zoning, it would have been built up long ago into a typical sprawling suburbia – the opposite of what they propose. So if it had been unprotected in the past, that would have been bad. And if it stays protected that's bad because it's underused. It is only this short sliver of time that is today that this land s…

Perhaps I shouldn't speak for Scott Sumner, but I feel pretty sure he wouldn't recognize your opinion of what he supposedly thinks.

If you make your comment at econlib, he's not unlikely to respond.

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

#48

Post by icebraining »

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #36
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…

Yet if you look at the countries that are held up as examples to follow you will find the one thing they have in common is no substantial domestic car industry. You can't ignore the politics of this.

Aren't Japanese cities often talked about as an example of good public transport (particularly trains) and reasonably dense areas with low housing prices?

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

#49

Post by tomohawk »

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…

No conspiracy required when a lot of people are acting according to a common view. People see the real advantages of owning a car and the freedom it brings, and that activity builds industries and has an impact on policies.

Of course, GM really did conspire to put the trolleys out of business.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_consp...

However, this is the kind of thing organizations (companies, government agencies, non profits) do when they get to a certain size or have accomplished initial goals and are looking to conquer that next frontier. Just look at the overreach of the SV titans, for example.

For better or worse, we have a car based society now, and pining for the good old days is backwards looking. The next thing should preserve the immense freedom and flexibility that cars brought. Prescribing a top down solution that gives even more power to the state at the expense of the people is a non starter.

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

#50

Post by taurath »

tomohawk wrote: post #49
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…

No conspiracy required when a lot of people are acting according to a common view. People see the real advantages of owning a car and the freedom it brings, and that activity builds industries and has an impact on policies. Of course, GM really did conspire to put the trolleys out of business. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_consp... However, this is the kind of thing organizations (companies,…

I sort of agree - I just wish there were more options, that didn’t have the same tradeoffs on alertness and attention that driving a car has. Self driving vehicles will certainly sell themselves.
Post reply on HN