Hacker News Reader

Comment by Sevii | Hacker News Reader

You mention a lot of the negatives of cars and express frustration that people won't budge on the issue but the reason you run into so much opposition is because cars are the most empowering invention for the average person ever.

For most people the trade offs are worth it 100 times over.

View on HN

It’s kind of weird, because if you live in a place where you really don’t Need one, it becomes pretty quickly apparent what a trap that sense of empowerment actually is.

A car for an individual is empowering, a car for everyone in the city is awful.

> It’s kind of weird, because if you live in a place where you really don’t Need one, it becomes pretty quickly apparent what a trap that sense of empowerment actually is.

While I agree everyone having a car in a concentrated city is bad; I’ve lived in the Chicago suburbs and public transport is impractical. Cars on the other hand make loads of sense.

I think this occurs rather naturally. Car parking in the city is VERY expensive, so fewer have cars. It’s also dense, so there is less need. Similarly, where it’s cheaper to house a car, it’s more needed.

Personally, I hate living in the city. I am WAY more empowered, have more wealth and have a healthier life outside the city. I can visit any time with my car, but avoid the pollution and squaller

> I think this occurs rather naturally.

It’s not exactly natural. It was in no small part by design. The auto industry worked very hard to shut down public transit and lobby for as much public funding for roads as possible. This further induced demand for suburbs, which, once established, completely cemented the need for car infrastructure (let alone plumbing, electricity, public safety, etc). Decades later, these sprawling municipalities find themselves desperate for funds to maintain this expensive infrastructure, and push for ever more sprawl to (temporarily) relieve the present financial strain incurred from the last wave of sprawl that’s come due for maintenance… Rinse, repeat, and it’s not surprising why so many American cities go bankrupt and so many suburbs have decayed. There’s a lot more at play when it comes to the decay of American cities for sure, but the incredible influence of cars is kind of the 10 ton gorilla in the room.

I’m not saying it’s something that can be fixed overnight or anything, but I think we have to start by admitting it’s not really working. Maybe it works well for you like it does for so many other Americans. But I really don’t think most of us have the experience of what it could be like had history gone another way.

I think the system is far too complex to claim “it’s cars” because it costs more to run infrastructure.

Infrastructure is often not even the #1 expense for sprawling suburban cities. The Police-per-person-ratio is less, pension funds are usually extremely high on the list of expenses. Similarly, education can also be exceedingly high on the list of expenses, depending on jurisdiction.

I’m not saying you’re completely off base, but I think it’s far more nuanced.

Yeah I agree (hence “There’s a lot more at play when it comes to the decay of American cities for sure”), but so many things are inextricably linked to the inefficiencies inherent in the shape of cities that are only possible with high car ownership.

I live in Portland. 70% of my friends don't have cars. My friends are in the 40-60 age range.

If you live in rural or poorly design burbs, cars are necessary by design. If you live in a city, like the vast majority of the world, you don't really need a car.

100x already assumes the answer, which isnt the case for the majority of the world.

My wife cannot drive due to her disability. Whenever somebody tells me you don't need a car I just laugh. Since almost everyone can do it, you don't really think how much you depend on it. Outside of maybe NYC, really good transit isn't a reality. Sure her life would be great if we had all this transit, but that's the way it is.

The first step is admitting that this is a problem.

right, but we don't have good transit precisely because of our car-centric society. You and your wife would likely live easier lives in much of Europe

In the US, the car industry has and continues to actively undermine efforts to fix our public transportation system

Right, and because we live in an area that is about as good as you get for the united states (east coast, between NY and DC) for public transit, she is able to get around somewhat. Mostly it's just me ferrying her around though, like a concierge! Think about how much of a non starter that is for someone in Oklahoma? I know many hackernews readers are on either coast, well, statically most americans are, but for large parts of the country - driving is an absolute requirement. If we lived in Oklahoma, she probably would have found a doctor willing to overlook Epilepsy as a risk because, without a license she would have been destitute

That’s like saying that the reason people litter is because it’s 100 times easier to throw shit out of their window than to walk to the nearest can.

I’m not sure you are measuring the right thing.

> cars are the most empowering invention for the average person ever.

oh really? So imagine you have your car but without Lighting, so you'd drive around in the dark?

Or how about sewers? Imagine having to take out a bucket of poop, and live in steets covered in poop, and loosing your kids to the Plague.

Or Soap, Running water, electricity?

You just take everything else for granted.

This is what the walkable city's crowd doesn't understand.

Cars are pure freedom. Mass transit is state biopower/biopolitics.

the state built the roads you need to feel that "freedom". It's also the one maintaining them

Those roads and their economic merit predate the state's involvement. The might be lower quality in some places without the state subsidy but those roads would still exist.