← Back to context

Comment by NewJazz

11 hours ago

I'm sorry, it is not appropriate to presume that cars are less necessary than food? Hmm, what about water, is that one more important or are cars still top of mind for you?

6 comments

NewJazz

Reply
xp84  11 hours ago

I think the point being made wasn't literally that cars are more important than food, but more that for most Americans, you can't really get by without store-bought food and a car. This is just fact.

A few lucky people live in the densest urban areas where car non-ownership is totally fine, nice even. For the rest, it's horrible and no one would choose it. A trip to the grocery store in the suburbs could take 30-45 minutes each way in 90º heat (and in half the country, with humidity too) is terrible - and think how many times you'll have to go to the store if you're buying only what you can carry 3 miles. Also many school districts provide no buses, so now you're walking kids to and from school in all weather. Bikes are a thing, but the roads aren't always safe and it still sucks in weather.

  • jasomill  4 hours ago

    True, but even the most car-centric socities could adapt to a shortage of cars by means less drastic than a culling of the population through widespread famine and death.

  • NewJazz  9 hours ago

    For most Americans, you can't really get by without store-bought food and a car. This is just fact.

    For all animals on earth, you can't really get by without food. This is jus a fact.

  • LoganDark  40 minutes ago

    My electric scooter works just fine for getting around a city. You can carry a bag or two of groceries home with just a simple backpack. Visit the store frequently enough and you don't actually need a car. In my area you don't even need a license to ride the scooter on public roads.

    I have a car (and a license) anyway for comfort reasons, but I keep the scooter in the back for situations like distant parking. Works pretty well for me.