• mondoman712@lemmy.mlOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    All necessary vehicles can be accommodated in pedestrianised areas when needed, as they already are in many places around the world.

    Car infrastructure comes with many extra external costs, such as increased heathcare costs due to pollution, increased travel due to the extra space needed between everything, etc

    Individual transport is great when it respects the world around it. A bike doesn’t need so many resources, nor does it take up so much space or cause harm to those around it.

    Autonomous electric vehicles don’t go far enough with fixing the existing problems. Sharing helps but you still don’t need to take all that mass along with you on your commute, and there isn’t space to have everyone else in a city doing the same every morning.

    • very smart Idiot@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You see, progress comes with cost. But car infrastructure is so popular, because it is relatively cheap. It’s an economic problem, that has proven that the current situation is the most effective we currently have.

      And in the end, some people want to drive cars in cities. Even people that live in cities want to do so.

      So as the systems continues to work as it does, one has to expect, that the majority thinks the way I do. And that’s what we usually call swarm intelligence.

      • mondoman712@lemmy.mlOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s cheap because it’s subsidised. Car users don’t pay all of the costs. And it’s popular because places are designed for it to be the most convenient option. When you design places that aren’t for driving, people will use other modes.

      • jcrm@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        because it is relatively cheap.

        It is not. Car infrastructure is some of the most expensive there is. It’s cheap because it’s heavily subsidized. It’s popular because car manufacturers made it popular, with propaganda and lobbying for making cars the default form of transportation.

        If your opinion is the obviously correct one where driving is the only thing accomodated for, why does the actual data show that the model for walkable cities with good transit have happier, healthier, more comfortable people, and are economically stronger than car dependent cities?