Ok I am only going to address the points that aren't batcrap crazy or irrelevant. Also please provide a link to a study showing that restrictions on cars restrict economic activity, as I provided evidence of my claim - that cars have healthcare costs.
gbaji wrote:
Well hell! Why did man bother to invent the wheel then? Think of all the extra exercise he'd get dragging things around. You honestly don't see the flaw in your position?
Flaw in which position, exactly?
Is it, or is it not true, that when I bike to work I am both going to work (1 goal accomplished) and exercising (goal 2 accomplished) at the same time?
I never said we should never use machines (and a bike is a machine, anyway) - simply that I have noted productivity gains in my own life because of using active transportation.(and I was clear this was my own experience, which seems fair given the fact you produced no evidence of your conjecture whatsoever)
Quote:
Some might say that people are chained to urban designs by lack of cars. Tomato, tomahto, right?
Now I said I was only going to deal with the non-lunatic responses, but I couldn't resist here. What's the difference? People can only be "chained to urban designs by lack of cars" if those urban designs are centered around car use.
For instance, suburbs with no amenities "served" by big box stores, make it nearly impossible for people to bike or even bus effectively.
Whereas communities designed in a way that people can get groceries and other goods and services within walking distance or by hopping on a bus with good service don't chain people down to car ownership. If that was a fancy way of saying you agree that a failure in urban design has made it very difficult for many north americans to live without their cars, then thanks, otherwise I am not sure what you're saying here.
Quote:
Except that's basically what you were doing in your post. You judged that people would be better without cars, so why care about them?
Sorry where did I say that? Maybe you can stretch some of my rhetoric to say that but my point was if someone moved into a neighbourhood with a car and the rest of the neighbourhood bullied them because they didn't like cars (because of noise, danger of it hitting their kid, pollution, etc) wouldn't it be wrong?
It would be wrong, just like it was wrong for people to bully the guy who fed birds. The point is just because you have a minority point of view doesn't mean you deserve to be bullied. I can't believe people can't see that as basic.
Quote:
But if there weren't any cars, wouldn't it be a zero lane street? You're honestly upset because cars parking on the side of the street take up space in the street and think the problem is that cars exist? that seems... bizarre.
Where did I say I believe we should get rid of all cars? I didn't. So please don't misconstrue me. I would like it if people parked their cars in driveways, but I don't make a fuss about it. The point is, I find it mildly annoying, but unlike the people who drove the bird man out of the hood, I don't bully people about it.
also even if we didn't have as much or even any personal car ownership we would still have roads (as we did well before cars) for emergency vehicles, delivery vehicles, bikes, wheelchairs etc.
Edited, Jan 9th 2012 9:31pm by Olorinus