← Back to context

Comment by runarberg

1 day ago

Tbh. Those are all good reasons not to drive. I my self would add:

- They dangerous both to me as a driver, my passengers, and other road users, including pedestrians and bicyclists.

- They ruin cities which constantly have to accommodate ever increasing number of cars by destroying previously walkable neighborhoods to make room for roads and parking.

- They destroy our climate

- They are loud.

- Busses are nicer and I can read a book while riding the bus.

You're welcome to feel that way but it's a luxury belief. In reality, outside of a few (one?) major city in the US with public transportation infrastructure, you need a car. 92% of people own a car, higher if you exclude the dense urban areas I'm talking about.

  • People only need cars because people have cars and cars make cities worse for everyone outside of one. If nobody owned cars everyone would get by just fine. It's a race to the bottom.

    • Sure, but that doesn't change the fact that today people need cars. In an ideal world I'd also love a European or Asian city model but American cities are not like that.

      1 reply →

  • Car ownership is lowest in the lowest income brackets, and public transit ridership is highest among the lower income brackets. I really don‘t understand how you can reach your conclusion that not driving is a luxury. Data would suggest the exact opposite.

    EDIT: To clarify on the public transit usage. The data is by-modal. Lower income levels are by far more likely to use road based public transit (such as busses), but high earners are more likely to live near a rail station and use rail based transit: https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/public-transit-access-and-inc...