this post was submitted on 04 Oct 2023
170 points (93.4% liked)

Fuck Cars

9642 readers
347 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Montreal is easily one of the most bike-friendly cities in North America, and yet even here we have carbrains who feel perpetually entitled to 250 parking spaces (the amount removed for the new bike lane) over the needs of everyone else. Clearly someone felt so strongly entitled to their parking that they threw thumbtacks in the new bike lane.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] mrpants@midwest.social 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Relative to motor vehicles cyclists cause zero damage to roads. All pay taxes. Motorists are therefore subsidized by cyclists.

Melbourne's bike network is extensive and goes through many areas of the city. Not just to million dollar homes.

Many people ride bikes because they can't afford cars.

Suburbia is further subsidized by cities and North American suburbs should never have existed in the way that they do.

Everything about your logic is backwards and focused on car drivers and suburbanites experiencing no discomfort during a transition to sustainability while all discomfort is placed on others.

[–] bigschnitz@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Relative to motor vehicles cyclists cause zero damage to roads. All pay taxes. Motorists are therefore subsidized by cyclists.

This is not at all in dispute.

Melbourne's bike network is extensive and goes through many areas of the city. Not just to million dollar homes.

I don't agree with this. The inner suburbs have good bike lanes, places like pakenham or cragieburn do not. I admit the million dollar number was a bad way of phrasing what I actually mean (and distracts because it's a wrong claim), which is unaffordable. Yes you can safely ride from like glenroy which is well connected with bike lanes, but family homes in glenroy exceed $800k which is ludicrous for a low income family.

Many people ride bikes because they can't afford cars.

Absolutely. Many others drive cars because they can't afford to live close enough to the city for riding to be safe and practical. Different housing needs drive different outcomes here.

Suburbia is further subsidized by cities and North American suburbs should never have existed in the way that they do.

Absolutely agree. However they do and a conscious, deliberate effort is needed over time to correct this.

Everything about your logic is backwards and focused on car drivers and suburbanites experiencing no discomfort during a transition to sustainability while all discomfort is placed on others.

A lot of your points I unreservedly agree with, so if you feel they have anything to do with my logic then your contradicting yourself. In your whole.paragraph there's only a single point that I don't agree with.