this post was submitted on 18 Dec 2023
149 points (98.7% liked)

CanadaPolitics

1895 readers
3 users here now

Placeholder for any r/CanadaPolitics refugees

Rules:

All of Lemmy.ca's rules apply

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] LaserTurboShark69@sh.itjust.works 21 points 11 months ago (23 children)

Sounds good to me but I do worry that new vehicles will be even more expensive than they are now and the used car market will go the way of the current housing market.

[–] SkepticalButOpenMinded@lemmy.ca 14 points 11 months ago (14 children)

That’s a good point. I think one solution is smaller cars. For the past two decades, we’ve bought way more car than we need—everyone has huge SUVs and pick up trucks, despite the fact that families are smaller than ever and fewer people carpool than in the past. That’s because big cars are subsidized with relaxed regulations.

The other solution is fewer cars. We’ll always need cars, but there’s lots of low hanging fruit to improve our mediocre public transportation and lack of mixed zoning.

[–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 6 points 11 months ago (4 children)

People are too stupid to buy a smaller car. Media tells them that bigger = safety and luxury, and that's all they need to know. Just look at how many people scream "the grid isn't ready", "they don't work in the cold", and "the batteries cause slavery" about EVs because they heard it in a tik tok once.

Fewer car is the ideal solution but the people who will loose their cars are the ones with the least lifestyle choices, they don't commute by choice. There will never be a lack of rich pricks to buy white Audi/BMW/Merc suvs.

[–] SkepticalButOpenMinded@lemmy.ca 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

You might be right, but it would be a good motivator to have people pay the true cost of big heavy cars — including the negative externalities to health, safety, road wear, parking, and pollution. Drivers don't currently pay those costs, which means we essentially subsidize big heavy cars now. If we stopped doing that, Canadians would act more like consumers in the rest of the world.

Also, strong agree on fewer cars being the ideal solution. In fact, fewer cars is a mathematical necessity. We can't electrify ourselves out of terrible land use, e.g. the oceans of parking lots, crumbling roads, and inefficient highways that contribute to carbon emissions and environmental degradation.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

the negative externalities to health, safety,

see: Car Insurance Costs

road wear,

you're thinking a Road Tax like the UK? That's coming; but I'll only vote on it if it pays MoT AND MoT takes over a completely-public mass-transit

parking,

User-fees

and pollution.

E car; but I can get behind a levy on car insurance through our publicly-managed consolidated regional single-base-insurer, for Internal Combustion Engine cars.

Drivers don’t currently pay those costs,

It seems the only thing missing is the road tax; and that's just because they're in love with their volatile user fees for transit despite the near-collapse of CEO bonuses during the pandemic.

[–] SkepticalButOpenMinded@lemmy.ca 2 points 11 months ago

Car insurance only covers a small number of externalities. It does not cover tire particle pollution (tires are the number one source of microplastics in the world), air exhaust pollution, noise pollution, etc etc. Even if they never got into accidents, cars would remain one of the most hazardous things to our health. Cars are also the number one killer of children, by far, and insurance doesn’t bring them back to life.

Agreed that a road tax is a good start. But a road tax wouldn’t cover the fact that bigger cars cause MUCH more of all these harms than smaller cars, so externalities remain.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (19 replies)