Replace “love” with “don’t mind” and you’ve described a portion of us c/fuckcars subs in a nutshell.
I personally dislike car-dependent design, which forces the majority of people to purchase, insure, and operate an understatedly dangerous, but very convenient mode of transportation. Us as a society being numb to deaths caused by dangerous driving, but not to deaths related to motorbikes, pedestrians etc, kind of sums up how big of an exemption we’ve given these vehicles - both mentally and in infrastructure.
There’s no question that cars serve an essential mobility function in areas where public transport is an unrealistic possibility at present, but the same benefits don’t translate well to dense urban areas like cities, where entire blocks in some instances are dedicated just for accomodating vehicles, and road space is taken up by individuals in their own personal 5 seater bus (exc. Carpooling)
Urban sprawl prevents actual buses from being a viable alternative for out of city commuters, so it’s a tricky problem to solve. Trains are a nice alternative too, but most of those tracks were ripped out and the remaining ones are mostly owned by freight companies ☹️.
…although you didn’t ask for my opinion and I deviated a bit off topic here sorry 🤪
he isnt arguing that they’re not wrong for liking cars. he’s saying not enough people want this to happen to make it feasible, because people want cars. do you have a chip on your shoulder?
That’s not what they said. At all. That’s an entirely different argument. If you want to make that one, be my guest. Also take some lessons on reading comprehension.
You literally didn’t. You answered with a logical fallacy. I’m not even saying the conclusion is wrong or right. Just that your way to get there is brain dead. You literally argued “the most popular choice is the best choice.” I weep at whatever schooling system you’re a part of as you clearly are still in school based on your maturity level.
Pretending they didn’t respond again expanding on it is funny. Plus it was an argument against the given one. It wasn’t explaining why it’s not that way. It was explaining why it shouldn’t. Since that’s the structure of the given argument above.
When someone says we should do X and then you just respond with “no, people love y” you’re explicitly arguing it’s a reason against. We obviously know people have cars. There is no value add to the discussion if it’s truly what you claim, that they are just pointing out the current state of affairs. That’s ludicrous. You’re basically saying “no, they’re just stupid.”
Lmao there is a certain category of people that always starts using emojis the moment they are copeing.
Trying to put up points with you looks particularly useless, like speaking to a wall, but I will say for whoever reads this that people using something doesn’t necessarily means they like it. Unless you are suggesting people like to go to the hospital or to their workplace.
What a bs take. Many people used lead but that doesnt mean lead is good. Many buildings were built with asbestos but that doesnt mean asbestos is good either.
You may be shocked to hear this, but the world is a far bigger place than inside your head.
I love playing gran turismo, I love porsche, doesn’t mean I would buy a 1 ton car
So, you love cars and some culturally orbiting aspects of it, but you don’t like the application of it?
It just feels like everyone’s societal attachment to cars is a little more nuanced than “let’s get rid of them all” then, yeah?
Replace “love” with “don’t mind” and you’ve described a portion of us c/fuckcars subs in a nutshell.
I personally dislike car-dependent design, which forces the majority of people to purchase, insure, and operate an understatedly dangerous, but very convenient mode of transportation. Us as a society being numb to deaths caused by dangerous driving, but not to deaths related to motorbikes, pedestrians etc, kind of sums up how big of an exemption we’ve given these vehicles - both mentally and in infrastructure.
There’s no question that cars serve an essential mobility function in areas where public transport is an unrealistic possibility at present, but the same benefits don’t translate well to dense urban areas like cities, where entire blocks in some instances are dedicated just for accomodating vehicles, and road space is taken up by individuals in their own personal 5 seater bus (exc. Carpooling)
Urban sprawl prevents actual buses from being a viable alternative for out of city commuters, so it’s a tricky problem to solve. Trains are a nice alternative too, but most of those tracks were ripped out and the remaining ones are mostly owned by freight companies ☹️.
…although you didn’t ask for my opinion and I deviated a bit off topic here sorry 🤪
Removed by mod
That’s hardly an argument against it.
“Lots of people can’t all be wrong.”
Edit: might as well go back to Reddit. It is more popular after all. They can’t all be wrong. No?
he isnt arguing that they’re not wrong for liking cars. he’s saying not enough people want this to happen to make it feasible, because people want cars. do you have a chip on your shoulder?
That’s not what they said. At all. That’s an entirely different argument. If you want to make that one, be my guest. Also take some lessons on reading comprehension.
thats exactly what they said and i suggest you do the same
No. They literally didn’t. Jfc.
Removed by mod
You literally didn’t. You answered with a logical fallacy. I’m not even saying the conclusion is wrong or right. Just that your way to get there is brain dead. You literally argued “the most popular choice is the best choice.” I weep at whatever schooling system you’re a part of as you clearly are still in school based on your maturity level.
They literally did
Post asks why doesn’t x happen, they answer “because people like cars”
They never once gave it a value judgement, that’s on you
Pretending they didn’t respond again expanding on it is funny. Plus it was an argument against the given one. It wasn’t explaining why it’s not that way. It was explaining why it shouldn’t. Since that’s the structure of the given argument above.
When someone says we should do X and then you just respond with “no, people love y” you’re explicitly arguing it’s a reason against. We obviously know people have cars. There is no value add to the discussion if it’s truly what you claim, that they are just pointing out the current state of affairs. That’s ludicrous. You’re basically saying “no, they’re just stupid.”
Ask a stupid question and get a stupid answer my guy, sounds like y’all are just butthurt
Removed by mod
Lmao there is a certain category of people that always starts using emojis the moment they are copeing.
Trying to put up points with you looks particularly useless, like speaking to a wall, but I will say for whoever reads this that people using something doesn’t necessarily means they like it. Unless you are suggesting people like to go to the hospital or to their workplace.
Removed by mod
What a bs take. Many people used lead but that doesnt mean lead is good. Many buildings were built with asbestos but that doesnt mean asbestos is good either.
The same goes for you…