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

Too many Americans live in places built for cars – not for human connection

vox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

541–550 of 576 posts

Re: Too many Americans live in places built for cars – not for human connection

#541

Post by tekknik »

closeparen wrote: post #297
hardnose wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>they're not happening in cities. Neither is people willingly moving there. Dense urban living might appeal to young people but once you build a family and priorities change to peace & quiet, safety, good schools, and stable property values, dense urban living loses most of its appeal.

Once you build a family you need 3 bedrooms and probably don’t have $1.8 million for such a condo. But the reason condos cost so much per square foot is regulation. Fundamentally, they should be cheaper than comparable houses.

$1.8mil for a condo is ridiculous, in many places you can get many hundreds of acres of land for this amount

Re: Too many Americans live in places built for cars – not for human connection

#542

Post by kodah »

paulmd wrote: post #528
_ktx2 wrote: post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Recreating your post after it was flagged and dead is classless. I'm surprised someone did this so brazenly. I'm not going to respond to all of the points that you raised that I think are false or misleading, but I'll respond to some. > There's a lot of miles of power lines and roads for what is, in the end, maybe 10k people in that county outside the cities/towns. Power plants are (mostly) created in rural areas, so…

> classless Uncivil, violates site rules. You can express yourself without putdowns. > I'm not going to respond to all of the points that you raised that I think are false or misleading, but I'll respond to some. Eh, rather dismissive yourself. > I grew up near rural areas and lived in one for a bit. I don't know what "infrastructure heavy" you're talking about. How many miles of roads and power lines in your rural a…

> Similarly, I find your "won't respond to the comment because I disagree with it" against the spirit of this community...

Not what I said, I was just clarifying I disagree with most of what you said but I'm only going to respond to a few points. I didn't have time to respond to each of them because my lunch period was ending soon. On top of that, nobody here owes you some full-scale rebuttal to a long reply; I disagree that it's part of the guidelines. I'm happy to read them again though.

You're right, maybe I shouldn't have called it out. Understand that what you're callously calling a "lifestyle" is a life I lived, not out of a "lifestyle" choice but because I wasn't saving any money. I lived in a trailer; not exactly a lifestyle choice. Mixed with factual inaccuracies and misrepresentations, you're right - I probably wasn't the person to respond to this without two sentences of emotion.

Re: Too many Americans live in places built for cars – not for human connection

#543

Post by mtalantikite »

vangelis wrote: post #347
mtalantikite wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like you should move to a rural place, and that's great! There's plenty of that in the US. And it sounds like you live in a place where biking on the sidewalk is legal, which I agree it shouldn't be (it's not here in NYC). But let's not throw away high density living because old people think the kids are making too much noise. As a New Yorker, I prefer the boisterousness of the city, because it sounds like joy…

If not having motorbikes ripping through the streets at 2am is gentrification, so be it.

I mean sure, no one is happy about dirt bikes revving at 2am. But that happens so infrequently, why even bring it up? Gentrification sounds like the rich person across the street from me that just moved in yelling at the group of black people laughing and having fun on the street at midnight. It’s Brooklyn, get over it.

Re: Too many Americans live in places built for cars – not for human connection

#544

Post by mtalantikite »

mancerayder wrote: post #461
mtalantikite wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like you should move to a rural place, and that's great! There's plenty of that in the US. And it sounds like you live in a place where biking on the sidewalk is legal, which I agree it shouldn't be (it's not here in NYC). But let's not throw away high density living because old people think the kids are making too much noise. As a New Yorker, I prefer the boisterousness of the city, because it sounds like joy…

NYC has an insane number of bikes on the sidewalks, especially e bikes, and especially in Manhattan, and especially in the non touristy areas.

The e-bike drivers jumping onto the sidewalk delivering door dash has certainly increased, but it’s not that bad. I’m dodging people with their dogs taking up the sidewalk a lot more than I am bikes.

But really, it’s all good. I choose this to the alternatives any day!

Re: Too many Americans live in places built for cars – not for human connection

#545

Post by mtalantikite »

FearlessNebula wrote: post #481
mtalantikite wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like you should move to a rural place, and that's great! There's plenty of that in the US. And it sounds like you live in a place where biking on the sidewalk is legal, which I agree it shouldn't be (it's not here in NYC). But let's not throw away high density living because old people think the kids are making too much noise. As a New Yorker, I prefer the boisterousness of the city, because it sounds like joy…

This article is ridiculous drivel. The author's point is basically that complaining about noise is another form of white people oppressing people of color? The author is complaining about being told to quiet down in libraries and homes. Let me give some perspective on the other side of this situation. In college one year I had 8 AM classes each day of the week which meant that if I wanted to have time to exercise I h…

I’m sorry that the city noise makes it hard for you to sleep. As someone with tinnitus as well I know how it can be. Personally, for me I like to have the background noise of the city because it sounds like life to me. The loudest, most distracting thing to me is to be in a sealed up house with climate control and no outside noise, it makes the tinnitus really bad. Last time I found myself in that situation I had to find a way to open the windows, to at least hear the wind and the insects.

Re: Too many Americans live in places built for cars – not for human connection

#546

Post by user3939382 »

kmeisthax wrote: post #44
user3939382 wrote: post #15

Search YouTube for “stroad” (edit spelling) there’s a guy that’s very passionate about this topic with a lot of high quality videos on it.

"Stroad" will get you what you want. The channels you are thinking of are probably either Not Just Bikes, Strong Towns, or Adam Something.

Yep I was thinking of Not Just Bikes. He puts a lot of effort into those videos.

Re: Too many Americans live in places built for cars – not for human connection

#547

Post by atyppo »

AlwaysRock wrote: post #57
dont__panic wrote: post #22

I've seen so much anti-car, pro-walkability, pro-transit, pro-bikeability sentiment online recently. I really hope this is proof of the younger generations -- Millenials, Zoomers, and younger folks even -- waking up to the idea that the USA in particular has become a toxic environment thanks to cars. WFH was a big wakeup call, I think -- once you step away from the commute for a year or two, trying to sit in traffic…

One of the hardest parts about buying a home, apart from all the stuff that isnt fun about buying a home, is finding somewhere that is walkable to... anything. I've rented my whole life and spent my entire adult life in cities. The idea of having to get in the car to get milk or something from the corner store, or have to drive to ANY restaurant, or not have some type of walking/running path within a few blocks of my…

Check out Portugal's golden visa program especially if you can WFH. Either way, the real estate program provides instant residency and only mandates 7 days of residency per year before citizenship (14 in the last year). After five years, you'll have a passport issued by a Schengen country that will allow you to work anywhere in the Schengen area.

Re: Too many Americans live in places built for cars – not for human connection

#548

Post by aldonius »

ryukafalz wrote: post #243
jimmaswell wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What percentage of people who are too old and disabled to drive a car are fit to ride a bike instead?

You’re replying to a post where the source’s headline image is several people using mobility scooters on a cycle path.

This. Good bike infra is also good mobility-scooter infra.

Re: Too many Americans live in places built for cars – not for human connection

#549

Post by ryan_lane »

TaupeRanger wrote: post #301
dont__panic wrote: post #22

I've seen so much anti-car, pro-walkability, pro-transit, pro-bikeability sentiment online recently. I really hope this is proof of the younger generations -- Millenials, Zoomers, and younger folks even -- waking up to the idea that the USA in particular has become a toxic environment thanks to cars. WFH was a big wakeup call, I think -- once you step away from the commute for a year or two, trying to sit in traffic…

Maybe I'm just not exposed to these ideas because I live in the Midwest, but this entire post sounds like some weird borderline clinical phobia of cars and driving that just doesn't jive at all with my experience, except perhaps a hatred of long car commutes. I can't imagine ever hating cars so much that I'd want to move to a new country...

Have you been exposed much to the alternative to car commuting? I used to live in New Orleans, and commuted 45 minutes each direction by car, usually without traffic. I moved to San Francisco and commuted 40 minutes by bus, each direction. The difference in experience of these two commutes is something you truly need to experience for yourself.

On public transportation, you don't have to be engaged with the road. You can read. You can text with people on your phone. You can watch a TV show. You can get caught up on emails, or slack messages you need to handle. Commuting in general sucks, but not having to have your mind fully engaged on a specific (and frankly boring) task the entire time is an amazingly freeing experience.

Now I live in Tokyo and mostly work from home. The commuting experience here (for most routes) is even better. It's fast, comfortable, highly accessible and extremely quiet. I'm eventually moving back to the experience, but to be honest I'm a bit worried about my reverse culture shock when I have to downgrade my transportation experience.

I absolutely hate driving everywhere when I go back to visit my family. It's dangerous. It's expensive. I have to figure out where to park, worry about damage to the car, stay sober, and not be sleepy. Driving is in most ways a worse experience than using public transportation.

Re: Too many Americans live in places built for cars – not for human connection

#550

Post by ryan_lane »

stjohnswarts wrote: post #523
Steltek wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those values are totally compatible with dense urban living! I have kids and enjoy all of those things in a walkable/bikeable community (Boston, MA). Most Americans have never seen it work so they think it's impossible. The reality is that it's illegal to build these places and the environment found here was built before NIMBYs strangled it.

I think you are discounting the desires of others. I personally love having my little slice of land. Cooking for myself in my own kitchen. I don't mind a drive every couple of weeks to get some more food. I know all my neighbors and bbq with them occassionally. I don't wish to break up dense city culture, why do you want to break up my preferred suburban culture? Can't we live in peace rather than dumping on each oth…

They're talking about wanting dense urban living, and you're talking about preserving suburban living. Having one doesn't remove the other. Good, dense, urban living, however is very often shut down by suburbanites, because they work in cities, and actively shut down any attempts to reduce cars (and car amenities) in cities.
Post reply on HN