I know the demographics around here, so I know everyone’s just going to put “nothing lol”, but please understand what I’m asking first.

I’m physically incapable of driving a car. I stand to gain immeasurably from a world that didn’t assume everyone owned one. Having loved-ones with respiratory issues aggravated by car exhaust has made me very aware of the health issues surrounding the burning of fossil fuels, and having to navigate sidewalkless suburban stroads on a regular basis and juggle poorly funded public transit has made it very clear to me that pedestrians are second class citizens. I could go on and on about the mess cars have made of urban planning, and the number of jobs I couldn’t take because they required driving, but I digress.

In short, I hate cars just as much as the rest of you. But I’m also conscious that a lot of other people feel differently. What does widespread car ownership enable that would be difficult or impossible otherwise?

As an American I’m familiar with the cultural aura that surrounds the automobile. One of the early episodes of Mythbusters explained this pretty well while digging into the folklore surrounding a particular car-related urban legend. Cars represent freedom and self determination, two qualities highly prized in American society. You can go where you want when you want, without relying on schedules and routes mandated by public transit[1].

Looking at more tangible things, I suppose hauling a bunch of stuff from point A to point B would be hard without a car.

But what else am I missing?


  1. Ignoring the fact you can only go where there are roads, and someone has to build and maintain those roads. ↩︎

  • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    Especially since public transit is usually locally funded (at least in the US), in areas like this the tax base doesn’t exist to be able to functionally fund public transit. We would need to completely rethink and re-organize how public transit is funded and rolled out for this to functionally work in remote areas.

    Or, you know, we could continue lettings cars be a thing for remote populations kind of like how in some far northern territories people use snowmobiles to get around part of the year because there’s simply too much snow to try to use another type of vehicle at all.

    I think the latter, having specific types of transportation still be a thing in places where they’re needed, makes a lot more sense, honestly.

    • tomkatt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      7 hours ago

      I kind of agree, but I’ll admit, I wouldn’t give up my car. I moved out here because I wanted out of city life and into more nature and quiet life. I only drive into town every 6 weeks for groceries and necessities in bulk and there’s no way I could haul all that on public transit. I want to be in the city as little as possible.

      • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Well, like I said, I honestly think public transit doesn’t make very much sense for remote areas. I think it makes far more sense to give people the types of transportation that work best for their use case, and in remote areas: that’s cars.