'umm sorry sweaty but cars are le bad because I can't afford one';

'the first thing you assert is backed-up by the graph you posted. the second thing you assert is both vague - moving from language like "objectively" to "generally" - and there is no attempt at all to back this up. the two statements are completely unrelated. shadowbox with this post if you're itching to pick a fight about the chip on your shoulder though';

'>>1987991
>the second thing you assert is both vague - moving from language like "objectively" to "generally"
ESL moment.';

'>>1987587
Doesn't have much to do with transit vs cars

The longest examples of Japan and China are both extremely populous, having some of the biggest metropolises in the world. That naturally makes commutes longer, and those cities are so populous they would not be able to function if everybody was using cars (chicken and egg problem as well, since if those cities were built with little transit like the US, they probably would have never grown to their current size)

Also country comparisons of commute times are absurd. In a single country you have massive variations. For example in France many people in Paris have to commute more than an hour, while that's very common outside of the Paris metropolis.';

'For instance here is an example of commute times in Japan by prefecture that I translated.
You can clearly see only the Tokyo region has long commute times.
The rest is pretty reasonable.';

'>>1988029
>Doesn't have much to do with transit vs cars
It does. Public transit is slower than cars because of public transit's inefficiencies. But you'd be correct to say it's not the only factor.

Also, comparing country to country is a good idea. As it shows you what the average commute time of the average person in each country is. Sure some goat farmer in rural UK may have a 2 minute commute but he's hardly the average person.

It additionally disproves the constant communist propaganda that Americans "sit in traffic for 4 hours a day!!" when the reality is that Americans have relatively very short commutes.';

'>>1988030
>only
only 1/3 of the country lives there
and keihanshin is still pretty bad, that's another 1/6 of the country';

'>>1988038
>Sure some goat farmer in rural UK may have a 2 minute commute but he's hardly the average person.
but he drags the average commute time down retard';

'>>1988320
>I don't understand how averages work
The absolute state of europoor education.';

'>>1988325
Do you?';

'>>1988334
Kek. Since eurocuck education was so poor I'll help you out.

100,000 citizens with a 45 minute commute = 45 min average.
Adding 10 rural farmers with a 2 minute commute = 44.995 minute average.

One guy with a 2 minute commute is functionally irrelevant, retard.';

'>>1988337
>One guy with a 2 minute commute is functionally irrelevant
And do you have the figures to prove that they don't form a statistically significant section of the population? No?';

'>>1988340
Yeah, that the average commute time in the UK is 45 minutes you fucking retard lmao.';

'>>1988341
the point is that such analysis has to be done for every country moron';

'>>1988348
Uh yeah like the average commute times in the OP? This eurostani education is truly terrible.';

'>>1988352
the point is that country-level analysis ignores differences within a country
a country with a less urbanised population will have a shorter average commute time all else being equal';

'>>1988355
Listen retard, you jumped in and said "uhmm akshully 1 guy TOTALLY matters for the average commute!!". When he does not. And you're a total faggot.';

'>>1988030
>Tokyo region
What did they mean by building cities like this?';

'>>1988417
Is this autism?';

'>>1988417
Just bug behavior.';

'>>1988418
That seems comfy.';

'>>1987587
The longer the commute, the more important public transit is, hense increased public transit usage. You got the cause and effect reversed.';

'>>1988418
An autist wouldn't design a street so narrow that the only way two vehicles could safely pass eachother is if both vehickes were either on bicycles or motorcycles. The japanese love to walk but if I can't deafen some kyoto nigga at 3am what is even the point';

'>>1988358
the point is that it isn't just "one guy" retard';

'>>1988030
>Includes source
>>1987587
>Doesn't include source
Weird.';

'>>1988428
Ding ding ding. A car-infested Tokyo would collapse into the sea. Commute times are higher because an hour walking and on a train is actually tolerable (both from a psychological perspective and a physiological one) when compared to sitting in traffic for an hour. I imagine that cardiovascular disease deaths caused by commuting in your car for two hours a day for decades brings the average down a bit.';

'>>1988499
>uhmm source???
Lol. Anyway, Toronto Board of Trade.';

'>>1988500
>Ding ding ding.
This isn't plebbit';

'>>1988038
trains are faster, have higher throughput and higher efficiency of movement for people than cars, the only things cars have are the ability to go on any road at any time but this is heavily variant on roads being there and traffic not being a thing. if a city like tokyo had only car transit it would literally not function.';

'>>1988418
>>1988417
looks comfy as fuck, oh sorry here's something that's totally not buglike and soulless';

'>>1988562
Ugh yeah, look at those private, fenced in yards. Detached housing so you don't hear your neighbors?? A drive way and garage?! I bet those disgusting fucks have lots of room in those homes too, I bet they're all over 1,600 sqft each!!

Simply horrible. I for one prefer pic related. You don't NEED more.';

'>>1988563
>yes i would like to live in a house that looks exactly the same as the one next to it and the one next to that and the one next to that and the one next to that
>no i'm not soulless, you're soulless';

'>>1988575
So what';

'>>1988575
Actually there is a variety of house styles in that picture.';

'>>1988563
that's a hotel used only for sleeping, noone lives in pods and the biggest and most famous one actually closed down because regular hotel rooms are not much more in japan. you can literally see single family homes in the picture I replied to';

'>>1988529
I want newfags who whine about reddit to leave.';

'>>1987587

You’ll notice whenever 15 minute cities are mentioned they always jump to say that it’s about choice, but that “choice” ALWAYS means making driving much more difficult and expensive.

Bottom line cars bad, drivers selfish, you don’t know what you want, shut up do as your told and rely on big brother to look after your transport concerns, indeed even the question of whether you need to travel at all.';

'>>1988630
>big brother
oh yeah the freedom of
>insurance or you lose your license
>only allowed to go on roads the government builds (a lot of offroading is illegal)
>gas prices set by the government and able to be changed at will
>car registration
>modern cars now literally sell your data to corporations and make your insurance more expensive for bad driving';

'>>1988640

You hit someone, how are you going to compensate them? Of course insurance is needed.

Registration needs deregulating. But governments always seek control. New ANPR cameras spy on pedestrians too, FYI. Your phone also tracks you everywhere you go, hardly anyone leaves theirs at home.

If we weren’t happily being led down the net zero bandwagon we wouldn’t allow the State to tax us so easily.

Trucks and Cars can run on sunflower oils and ethanol depending on the engine type. No need to depend on gas stations with an adapted fuel system.

You can rip out all that data collection stuff. people don’t bother to but I have literally never used Bluetooth in a car, I could happily gut a brand new one and not miss any of it.

None of your points are actually an issue except for the general public being spineless. You better put that phone/computer down as it’s listening to you and watching you =)';

'>>1988642
accountability for hitting someone? what if it was their fault? sounds like overreach to me.
>Trucks and Cars can run on sunflower oils and ethanol depending on the engine type. No need to depend on gas stations with an adapted fuel system.
ok, start up your alternative fuel now then because prices are already going up. i'm sure it's really easy. my point is that everything is controlled by the government or corporations and it's a stupid thing to say cars are in anyway free, and to actually believe in the retarded conspiracy theory that "15 minute cities" are anything new and not just the way cities used to be designed';

'>>1988645
They will tax that too. Call it fuel duty or whatever. The U.K. used to prosecute people for running old diesels on veggie oil because the Treasury was losing tons of money. It was so common they gave up and allowed a certain amount to be used duty-free. Eventually the “problem” resolved itself when the fuel systems became too complex and fine tuned for the thicker consistency of SVO.

You’re missing the point of insurance. You’ve got no guarantee you won’t be at fault. If you are, how are you going to pay for the repairs on that Bugatti or the loss of earnings for a father who’s been knocked out of work by your negligence or incompetence? Some people are proposing to make cyclists carry insurance too.

Sounds to me like you just don’t want to take responsibility for your actions so you want the State to take care of your trans our needs instead.

The 15 minute city absolutely is about control, or it would ONLY be about adding infrastructure rather than blocking off roads and putting cameras up everywhere. A lot of you are Americans who have no idea how it is in other parts of the world. Once they get the ball rolling, they aren’t interested in merely making alternative transport viable - it’s an outright attack on anyone who wants to use a car or motorcycle, the vehicles are plainly not welcome in any numbers. I get it, some people feel stranded without a car but don’t ruin it for the rest of us in the process.

All of which will be used to monitor you as a pedestrian, I might add. The cameras have technology which can monitor your gait and match it up to biometrics. That’s just one example. They also have microphones to listen to what you’re saying.';

'>>1987587
Does that graph correct for all the americans who live in bumfucksville who are 5 minutes from wherever they want to go?
I'd like to see one that specifically shows the commuter times of urban dwellers';

'>>1988655
>Does that graph correct for all the americans who live in bumfucksville who are 5 minutes from wherever they want to go?
Superior city planing.';

'>>1988655
Lol so much for density';

'>cager tries to defend his retarded way of life
>goes into conspiratorial screed about how 15-minute cities are a form of government control and how highways and cars aren't';

'>>1988729
When people scream conspiracy theory it’s because they have no real come back to the facts they are confronted with. You can’t disprove a single thing I said or you would’ve done so. Fact';

'>>1988729
I see a free-flowing urban expressway. What's the problem?

>>1988734
Why samefag?';

'Calling something a conspiracy theory is like admitting defeat. You are saying you’ve no come back so you can only dismiss it with an insult. Unscientific and would never hold up as a defence in a court of law.

Next time you say cars don’t give any power to the people may I remind you of how scared the Canadian government was of the freedom convoy.

Cope

Try harder.';

'>>1988738
I was talking to the guy who called the 15 minute cities thing a conspiracy theory.

Even if it is only a “theory” that doesn’t mean it’s untrue. The evidence to suggest it’s real is found in government and WEF-type NGO websites and documents. People looked at things that are happening all at once and put two and two together.

I mean:

CBDC (control of peoples money)

Digital ID (linked to a social credit score - can be used to deny you access to services)

Removal of cars, trucks and motorcycles (cars are considered weapons in law)

Removal of guns (unable to resist the State)

Mass surveillance and tracking (used to locate dissidents)

When you put it all together you have a situation where the people are disarmed and the State can do whatever it wants without any repercussions. But democracy exists, you say. Yeah. What democracy?';

'>>1988586
but no variety of garden styles because the hoa doesn't permit personal expression
>>1988642
>Trucks and Cars can run on sunflower oils and ethanol depending on the engine type. No need to depend on gas stations with an adapted fuel system.
instead you depend on the people growing, refining, and distributing sunflower oil and ethanol retard
>>1988739
>Next time you say cars don’t give any power to the people may I remind you of how scared the Canadian government was of the freedom convoy.
a) the freedom convoy didn't involve cars
b) the american government is so scared of a rail strike they have signed laws making it illegal to strike every time one has been threatened
>>1988744
I like how nothing that you mentioned has anything to do with "15-minute cities"';

'>>1988760
You can buy that stuff in supermarkets you donkey. It’s actually better used as fuel considering the health implications seed oils have but that’s a separate issue entirely.

What’s the difference between dependant on oil, dependant on supermarkets and dependant on the State provided transport solutions? I’ll wait. Because you’re still dependant on someone else to get to where you want to go. Combustion engines can be adapted to run on pretty much anything with the right fuel system. Somebody even ran a car on coffee as an experiment. It was successful.

The freedom convoy actually did have a lot of cars and F-150/Ram kinda trucks involved. It was more than semi truck drivers. You’re still missing the point that even a 1000 kg car can travel at a high speed and do a lot of damage if the driver so chooses. That’s why the government wants to get rid of them.

15 minute cities absolutely are tied up with what I said. It’s a convenient front to implement the schemes. Nobody had ever heard of it until the WEF and UN stooges started parroting sustainability and air quality rhetoric';

'In fact the diesel engine was originally designed for farmers to run with their waste products. Until big oil realised it could use the leftovers from gasoline production to make even more money.

Case in point? The diesel engine is just about as much potential for independence as you can hope to get.';

'>>1988761
>What’s the difference between dependant on oil, dependant on supermarkets and dependant on the State provided transport solutions?
My point is that there is no difference, retard.
>Combustion engines can be adapted to run on pretty much anything with the right fuel system.
And where's this fuel that IC engines can use that's readily available even without global supply chains?
>Somebody even ran a car on coffee as an experiment. It was successful.
But was it practical? And coffee is hardly a good example of a fuel you're not dependent on international supply chains to get.
>You’re still missing the point that even a 1000 kg car can travel at a high speed and do a lot of damage if the driver so chooses. That’s why the government wants to get rid of them.
So it's not about restricting mobility?
>Nobody had ever heard of it until the WEF and UN stooges started parroting sustainability and air quality rhetoric
Where would you expect the idea of "fifteen-minute cities" to come from if not the sort of people you label as "WEF and UN stooges"?';

'>>1988779
Your tone is hilariously angry. We aren’t farmers living off the land in the jungle anymore. Your food comes from supermarkets. You literally wouldn’t survive without modern society. The fuel supply chains you’re speaking of are no different to the food supply chains. Matter of fact those same food supply chains can also be used to obtain vehicle fuel. As I previously posted, when people did this in the U.K. the government got angry.

You can make fuel suitable for combustion engines at home with a little knowledge of chemistry. The worlds fastest land vehicles run on alcohol. Something people have been making in their back yards since records began. The coffee powered car was an extreme example since nobody would ever consider it a viable fuel source but it worked.

The government wants to stop us having the ability to live independently. It wants us entirely dependant on it. If you misbehave you get your access to public services (such as buses) removed. For this to be an effective method of manipulating the population you first need to remove their guns (ability to fight) and their cars (ability to flee). If the president announced a car ban tomorrow would it work? No. You introduce it gradually through taxes and regulations so people voluntarily give them up because it’s too much hassle. Then once everyone’s disarmed the government moves onto the real goal.

As per the UN and WEF, why are we taking orders from unelected officials?

You’re free to make a party with a manifesto stating you want to get rid of cars. But people won’t vote for it in large numbers. The general public is (on the whole) quite happy with cars being so commonly used. On the other hand there’s no shortage of complaints about gas prices being too high. The people aren’t asking for buses and cycle lanes, they’re asking for cheaper fuel.';

'>Europoors spend hours on a piss stinking train next to rapefugees
Lol
Do they really?';

'>>1988575
>I am different to everyone else!
Is that why you decide to wear panties and paint your toenails?';

'It’s not for governments to start telling the public that they know better and the masses don’t know what they want.

Sure research can be done and published. If people prefer the idea of (potentially) better commute times over privacy and self autonomy, they can vote for it.

As I said before you can make anti car political parties, they won’t get anywhere. Pressure groups with brown envelopes on the other hand, work wonders.

Ah the joys of governments preferring their back pockets to working with the wishes of the people.';

'>>1988787
>Your tone is hilariously angry.
We are on fucking 4chan.
>We aren’t farmers living off the land in the jungle anymore. Your food comes from supermarkets. You literally wouldn’t survive without modern society. The fuel supply chains you’re speaking of are no different to the food supply chains. Matter of fact those same food supply chains can also be used to obtain vehicle fuel.
I'm not disputing that, in fact it's my entire point you fucking mongoloid.
>You can make fuel suitable for combustion engines at home with a little knowledge of chemistry. The worlds fastest land vehicles run on alcohol. Something people have been making in their back yards since records began.
And why isn't everyone making fuel at home instead of complaining about gas prices?
>As per the UN and WEF, why are we taking orders from unelected officials?
Are elected officials "taking orders" when they follow the advice of someone?
>The general public is (on the whole) quite happy with cars being so commonly used. On the other hand there’s no shortage of complaints about gas prices being too high. The people aren’t asking for buses and cycle lanes, they’re asking for cheaper fuel.
Where are your sources for this information? Where are the results of opinion polls and referendums?
>>1988794
You are on fucking 4chan, this is not the place for people who desire social conformity';

'>>1988834
Calm down pal. You’re clearly upset. It’s ok. I get it. Someone coal rolled you after you decided to ride your bike in the middle of the road and not move over when you had space to do so.

If you actually read what I said you’d have paid attention to the fact making your own fuel will get the attention of the tax office. And some people with old trucks do run them on SVO straight out the bottle.

You’re trying to make out we are dependant on supply chains so the bus isn’t any worse. That’s entirely false and you know it. Oh look the buses aren’t running and the sale of gas is banned, no problem I’ll just modify my truck to run on something else.

Most people are NPCs and too ignorant to bother at the moment but necessity is the mother of invention. People will undoubtedly adapt if the need arises.

Klaus Schwab has proudly bragged about infiltrating governments. The WEF and UN is an unelected group of billionaires seeking nothing but their own power and money, they are not accountable and shouldn’t be listened to.

I don’t need to post sources as election results clearly show what’s important to people. If your socialist urban planning was so important to people you’d see parties who support it being voted for up and down the country. But they’re not.';

'>>1988793
>why yes, I do have a tiny penis, how did you know?';

'>>1988846
You are thinking about penis again, anon.';

'>>1988760
>but no variety of garden styles because the hoa doesn't permit personal expression
I love how people how go after single family homes like this (HOAs aren't universal) but then don't say anything when every new apartment complex is built practically exactly the same, and each new development has the exact same floorplan (basically a few variations with more or less square footage) and a laundry list of things you can and can't do.';

'The angry replies people give on here are living proof of why public transport is something to avoid if possible. Terrible ambassadors for their proposals';

'>>1988843
>Calm down pal. You’re clearly upset. It’s ok. I get it.
Save me the faux-concern over tone. This is 4chan, if you can't handle the bants get back to Twitter.
>Oh look the buses aren’t running and the sale of gas is banned, no problem I’ll just modify my truck to run on something else.
And what will you modify it to run on that isn't dependent on international supply chains, fucktard?
>Klaus Schwab has proudly bragged about infiltrating governments. The WEF and UN is an unelected group of billionaires seeking nothing but their own power and money, they are not accountable and shouldn’t be listened to.
What non-elected officials do you consider acceptable to listen to?
>I don’t need to post sources as election results clearly show what’s important to people.
Which election results do you feel prove the rejection of "fifteen-minute cities" by the populace?
>If your socialist urban planning was so important to people you’d see parties who support it being voted for up and down the country. But they’re not.
There has been no large-scale shift away from left-wing parties.
>>1988896
I wasn't attacking all single-family homes you brainlet fucking retard
>>1988901
Sorry for not meeting your standards of etiquette on FUCKING 4CHAN.ORG';

'>>1988901
Pro-transit people are their own worst enemies. See >>1988992 as an example.';

'>>1988996
It’s ok he just got the runs after eating a pack of insect based chips while he was standing in the wind and rain waiting for the bus

People like him are literally why public transport in America is avoided like the plague';

'>transportation board
>but constant whining about why transit is bad (mostly americans)
>anti bike sentiments
>concern trolling about 15 minute city conspiracies
what the fuck happened to this board? is it /o/ or just general election tourists? the only things you can discuss on this board now are bike parts and specific train models.';

'>>1989003
election tourists, note how they're very concerned about being polite';

'>>1989003
It's because you faggot communists go to every other board to shill your communist bullshit. You invited this upon yourselves. And it's very telling you're getting completely shit on and can't a single good argument.';

'>>1989003
>what the fuck happened to this board?
Urban planning threads started being allowed';

'>>1989007
i don't see anything about urban planning outside /n/ apart from the occasional politicsbait thread on /v/, which you should have the good sense to ignore';

'>>1989012
Lol. It's everywhere. On /tv/, /k/ and especially /o/ of course. Even one of my friends IRL spouts communist talking points about heckin' 15 minute cities, big trucks bad and heckin' middle housing.';

'>>1989016
sounds like someone can't handle hearing different political opinions';

'>>1989017
>spam retarded disingenuous communist garbage which sole purpose is to harm people, especially the middle class and middle upper class
>shocked when people get real tired of your dumb bullshit';

'>>1989018
>>1989016
>>1989007
samefaggot. as I thought it is buttmad election tourists';

'>>1989020
>wow a guy directly replying within a conversation is the same guy
Truly next level 80 IQ sleuthing. I've been here for 18 years. Probably longer than you've been alive.';

'>>1989007
This except that it's mostly not people coming from other boards specifically to pick fights with the dumbass commies. What happens is that people come here genuinely interested in discussing some form of non-automobile transit and instead of real discussion it's just a crowd of dumb and ignorant* shills spamming low-effort propaganda.

* specifically, the moro/n/ic transportation and urban planning shills here fail at
- Geography
- Economics
- History
- Mathematics (geometry, logic, algebra, calculus, you name it)
- Physics
- Life

All they can do is parrot shallow meme opinions about how cars are evil and copy/paste links they got from some dumbass shill account on social media. And they have the gall to complain that they can't discuss anything without getting a bunch of pushback from people who aren't retarded and ignorant.';

'>>1989032
It’s funny because I believe public transport is a good thing. My issue (as with most other so called car brains) is that these people and the government tax us to the grave then tell us no you can’t have your own car, you’ve got to use what we provide and comply with our timetables and our routes.

We are also unfairly vilified because the WEF type organisations have successfully convinced people that cars are bad despite being one of mankind’s greatest inventions.

You unfortunately can’t discuss PT without the political ideologies of socialism and globalism coming up, because by far the most common type of public transport advocate/car hater is a socialist who wants to do away with the concept of private ownership, especially your car and house/apartment.

They always show up with ants in their pants, whether it be on here, Reddit, Twitter or the MSM';

'>>1989037
>>1989032
you typed a whole of points despite the argument you are trying to make not being sensible at all. you argue against people that only exist at the far fringes to justify your inane opinions about public transit and despite being "totally authentic /n/ posters who like transit an bikes guys!" you take any idea that cars have too much of a prevalence in city design as an attack by commies, you never say anything about how you'd make transit better, just that the evil commies and twitter fags want you to live in controlled cities and eat the bugs.';

'You can make a post saying the price of peas is too high or the neighbours are playing music too loudly and they’ll be along to explain why this could be solved by reducing car use. It’s ridiculous.';

'>>1989039
Nothing I said was insane.

Let me tell you a story.

Many years ago I was a kid walking to get a late night train with my mother. It was dark as you’d expect. My mother observed someone was following us so she called a taxi.

Have you ever stopped to consider the absurdity of claiming that everything I say is incorrect?

You are now making a totally baseless claim that I disapprove of or hate public transport. I have only stated that I don’t want to be legislated out of my car, especially after all the taxes and hoops I had to jump through to get it.

You’re a first class idiot and a troll. But by all means keep making yourself and your cause look bad, you’ll only further convince us of the wisdom of staying insure our comfy cars';

'>>1989041
>I have only stated that I don’t want to be legislated out of my car
that isn't happening and this very claim is the disingenuous thing that every concern troll does on this board. the only thing getting regulated are gas cars, people are jUSTt being pushed into the new thing to consume which is the electric vehicle and companies like tesla make sure that the conversation is centered around how these electric cars are the solution instead of public transit so that shitty urban design continues to be the status quo. anyway, in many american cities the thing is that cars are the standard and are catered to heavily so the unfortunate reality is that for transit and biking/walking to get any better, something has to give, you can't have a rainbow land where every mode has enough share for no traffic and where the city is still nice to walk around because that's just not possible with the basic geometry the automobile, I have a car, I know cars are useful and are important to work, I do not want or think cars need to be removed from all roads, but I imagine you think even a single road changed to be car light is "commie"?';

'>>1989043
“Bad urban design”.

That’s entirely your opinion. I’ve no desire to live in a shoebox apartment with a 3 generation mortgage or obliged to rent at extortionate rates. Go live in a place like Singapore if that’s what you want. Oh and it’s like $10,000 for a car ownership license over there. You’ll be in paradise. The lot of you can go, it’ll make life better for the rest of us. Or you can go to that other place you bicycle fanatics rave about - the Netherlands. But I suspect they don’t want you there either as they’re only biking out of convenience in their specific scenario';

'Oh and many cities are trying to ban private cars. It’s no secret.

They could be banned from every road in the country except one specific highway and you’d say they aren’t being banned. You can talk technicalities but that’s irrelevant when it’s effectively impossible or inconvenient for Joe Public to have one. Move along troll';

'>>1989044
>I’ve no desire to live in a shoebox apartment with a 3 generation mortgage
none of that has to do with a reduction in car usage and is a retarded argument that shows you aren't here to discuss anything logically, the rest of your post is rambling nonsense. btw car ownership in singapore and netherlands are still pretty high, taxes are high in singapore so I wouldn't own a car there but that's not an issue, and noone is trying to turn the US into singapore (nor would it ever have such good public transit and social cohesion). again, you didn't answer the question if you think even a single road changed to have less car lanes is an attack on car owners, if you do, you do not care about bikes and public transit and only claim to as a shield for your retarded opinions on this board.';

'>>1989046
Except your urban planning is centred around extreme population densities that cause house prices to skyrocket.

And blocking off roads only causes more congestion. And it discourages people from visiting as access is more difficult. Then jobs are lost, people get poorer, colder and hungrier. Ask the residents of London, quite a few of them are out of work thanks to their pea brained mayor’s hatred of cars';

'>>1989048
>Then jobs are lost, people get poorer, colder and hungrier. Ask the residents of London, quite a few of them are out of work thanks to their pea brained mayor’s hatred of cars
that never happened, you live in a false reality given to you by echo chambers.';

'>>1989049
Tell me why so many people have time to stand around blocking ULEZ cameras then. I’ll wait.';

'>>1989048
>extreme population densities that cause house prices to skyrocket
This only happens when the dense urban area does not actually have enough housing. Compare to Tokyo, where housing CPI has remained flatlined since 1995 despite an increasing metro population. Tokyo has built a LOT of housing to keep ahead of demand, and that's why they have the lowest housing costs of any world city.';

'>>1989018
Define "disingenuous" faggot.
>>1989045
>Oh and many cities are trying to ban private cars.
Such as? If you say Bristol I know you're a retarded faggot.
>>1989048
m8 if you're going into London in a car you're mentally fucking retarded';

'>>1989161
>Compare to Tokyo
The real estate markets aren't the same. Most housing in Japan depreciates in value over time. Only the land itself holds value. It's normal to knock down a 30+ year old home and rebuild it.

The differences between the US and Japanese real estate markets are so vast that comparisons between them are mostly useless.';

'>>1989162
Here we go with the insults again. The sign of a true loser. Paris has a “No Cars Sunday” at the start of every month.

Glasgow’s low emission zone outright fines you for not having a compliant car. Not an outright ban on all cars but a total ban on certain types - actually the types that were most popular across Europe for decades until recently *cough* those diesels people were advised to buy by the governments

“Driving into London makes you a retard”. No it doesn’t. That’s your opinion. Nobody drives for fun in London. They do it because they need to. You go outside the city limits for fun in a car, or to a race track. It’s an awful place to drive. Cameras and entrapment designed to fleece you round every corner. Huge congestion (thanks to over 7 million residents) and the public transport isn’t great at all. The Underground is one of the most toxic places open to the public in the entire countries so consider me confused if using that instead of a car is somehow supposed to be better for your health.

Sorry, call me selfish but if I have to visit London I’ll be staying in a car of some description, I’m less likely to get lung cancer.

On the other hand why visit that heap anyway? Nice way to get stabbed or mugged, if you ask me. Horrendous crime rates.

And again, I’m not in any hurry to shard transport of any kind with strangers as long as rude creatures like you are around. But by all means keep discrediting yourself and everything you’re trying to convince people of';

'>>1989176
>Paris has a “No Cars Sunday” at the start of every month.
The one that literally exempts Paris residents?
>Glasgow’s low emission zone outright fines you for not having a compliant car. Not an outright ban on all cars but a total ban on certain types
OH BOY I LOVE AIR POLLUTION
>“Driving into London makes you a retard”. No it doesn’t. That’s your opinion. Nobody drives for fun in London. They do it because they need to. You
Really? Everyone driving in London is a rational ubermensch who's objectively determined that driving is the most efficient to get where they need to go?
>The Underground is one of the most toxic places open to the public in the entire countries
[citation needed]
>And again, I’m not in any hurry to shard transport of any kind with strangers as long as rude creatures like you are around.
You are on fucking 4chan, if you can't handle the bants get out.';

'>>1989162
>Define "disingenuous" faggot.
I would say it's the usual "transit" mindset of wavering between parroting misquoted statistics and outright making things up';

'>>1989182
Grow up child. There’s tons of videos of people taking air quality meters into the Underground. It’s just about the worst place for your health in the entire country.

A ban is a ban. A ban that exempts politicians is still a ban. Keep splitting hairs';

'>>1989184
Or outright ignoring part of a post while pretending you said something else.

Let’s not forget the age old “nobody is trying to take your car away” while gleefully celebrating every restriction that’s imposed upon private motorised traffic and begging the State to regulate cars into oblivion.

Oh look here’s a 50 ft stretch of public road you’re allowed to drive your car on. It’s the only stretch in the entire country but cars are still legal here - literally every every car hater ever. Find some obscure technicality to give an illusion of freedom and choice that doesn’t exist.';

'>>1989182
I’m on my second diesel and the only smells I’ve ever had was when my old car had a cracked manifold and rolled coal like a boss. It was sold to a metal recycling plant shortly after due to needing thousands of dollars worth of body repairs as well as a new manifold and possibly fuel injectors. Loved it to death but the previous owners had neglected it. At least it had a good run for the last year of its life while I had it.

My current diesel is so clean you would barely know it was running even on a cold start. It’s also at least as quick as a Tesla despite its age.

Cope';

'>>1989184
>wavering between parroting misquoted statistics and outright making things up
And where have I done that?
>>1989185
>There’s tons of videos of people taking air quality meters into the Underground. It’s just about the worst place for your health in the entire country.
Again, [citation needed]. A video of an air quality meter is not a source absent a comparison to other locations.
>A ban is a ban. A ban that exempts politicians is still a ban. Keep splitting hairs
And where is this "ban that exempts politicans"?
>>1989186
Where have I "found obscure technicalities"?
>>1989187
Ah yes, the most objective test of air pollution - how much does it smell when it's the only car around?';

'>>1989203
>A video of an air quality meter is not a source
Nta but listen to yourself lol

It's a known problem in the US and presumably everywhere else.';

'>>1987587
>Commute times are low despite being a massive country
>Nature is massively preserved and not entirely destroyed like in Europe to build train tracks, concrete sidewalks and bike lanes
I do not see a single issue what we're doing here in America';

'>>1989203
You’re an utter retard. “Citation”= a simple YouTube search. Literally nobody including Transport for London deny the air quality in the Underground is the worst in the whole city and poses a health risk.

Smell is a very good measure of emissions. That’s why we have noses and why we start coughing and spluttering if we inhale significant quantities of smoke. My car also has to pass an emissions test in order to be road legal (which it is fully legal). You know nothing whatsoever. Go snack on a plate of bugs, I’m just about to sit down for some roast chicken.

If there’s anything I’ve learnt it’s that the government can’t be trusted. If it says to not use my car then I know I should do the opposite, because governments only act in their own internet and never for the people. Time after time its proven. Vaccines, wars, you name it. All about extracting as much money and freedom from the masses as possible. Multi billion dollar contracts involved. Do the math and it all adds up.

But once again, keep going with your rude and arrogant rhetoric. Somebody else already posted evidence about metro networks being bad for health.

Those electric buses they got in London caught fire 2 or 3 times in a single month. The environmental damage and risk to health for passers by is truly horrendous. But sure my old car which is well over a decade old and still runs immaculately with tire shredding levels of power is evil? Sure buddy. Also all those battery minerals mined for by literal children in the Congo and assembled with slave labour in China. Not saying cars are perfect but don’t pretend public transport is any better, either. Disgusting hypocrisy.';

'>>1989203
>And where have I done that?
Because of the anonymity of this board it's impossible to say if (You) personally have said anything or not about that. It is, however, endemic to this board, and I can list common examples if you're interested.';

'Ironically the most polluted area any human being bothers to visit in the area is wait for it…

The train/railway platform.

Coupled with the coughing and spluttering every time I get passed by a bus on my bike.

I think we are seeing a pattern here..';

'Socialism is the political ideology of envy. That’s why every time someone dares to disagree or post a fact or piece of evidence that contradicts them, they come seeking like angry bees.

Plenty of traditional minded/conservative “far right extremists” like and use public transport. The difference is they don’t get angry at other peoples decisions.

None so intolerant as the tolerant =)';

'America and most of Europe are democratic countries.

I see plenty of protests about anti car regulations and taxes, but not seen a single crowd of people take to the streets over pedestrian access.

Maybe I’m wrong but it would appear the people prefer cars despite them supposedly being so bad. And the peoples wishes are what matters, not statistics or ideologies.';

'>>1989165
>Most housing in Japan depreciates in value over time.
This is because Japan builds a lot of housing, and we do not. As a US example, Austin has seen rent growth recede sharply after it exploded in 2019-2020 (they aren't building enough, but are building a lot), compared to every other major US city. Houston's has stayed relatively low, mainly riding the massive wave of pre-2008 collapse construction. Picrel.

Housing is a need. It is an inelastic commodity. People NEED a house, will generally only have one house, and can't survive long without one. If you build a lot of housing relative to your population, you have a high supply and low housing costs and rents. This is what happens in Tokyo. If you don't build, or like London/SF don't build while also increasing jobs and population (the demand part of the housing market), demand outstrips supply and drives the price up. This is also why the remainder of your post is inane bullshit.

>>1989176
NTA but fuck off';

'>>1989251
The difference is I'm on a train platform for 20-30 minutes tops, while highways are dumping pm2.5 particles nonstop at all hours of the day right next to the places people actually live and work in.';

'>>1989256
>you gotta keep building housing bro, it's not like things will change and they become slums for years to come';

'>>1989257

Fails to see the point that public transport’s pollution reducing benefits are exaggerated*

Not saying the service isn’t needed, just before you try to pretend that I think trains should be axed.';

'It’s all founded on lies and manipulation. Governments only serve themselves. They’re like parasites. Removing cars is part of a dangerous cultural shift designed to make people increasingly dependent on the state.

1) purposely create population density runaway

2) services can’t handle the demand

3) raise taxes to fund better services, causing a runaway feedback loop

4) use traffic and public service overload as an excuse for government regulation

5) house prices skyrocket as people rush to get jobs in the overly developed areas

6) banks move in and buy up everything

7) you own nothing and rent everything

8) you are now a serf';

'>>1989266
Cars make you 10x more dependent on the state
>have to go through the licensing process and give the state all your details; if you don't follow correspondence from them you can lose your license
>furthermore have to keep up to date on your car's registration and fulfil safety checks set by the government
>in some areas are even forced to take out third party insurance by the state
>all of this takes up 10x more of your disposable income than public transport, further putting you at the mercy of the state
>have to obey strict code of conduct on the road or else have your license taken away by the state
>can only drive on roads built by the state
>whenever you're on the road you're fully at the mercy of some cop on an ego high who can pull you over for a random reason
Also please stop reddit spacing';

'>>1989272
>*cancels bus lane in your area*
Your move?';

'>>1989272

And you’re telling me I don’t have to go through a registration process for a bus pass or railway discount card? Don’t be daft.

Cars cost more than public transport? Dear me there goes the envy again. Just because you don’t value the benefits doesn’t mean other people feel the same. Again, where are all the pro public transport and pedestrian access demonstrations? Nobody has pointed to a single one. All you guys do is play keyboard warrior on the internet and play victim.

Are you suggesting we scrap traffic laws so we end up with pure chaos and vast numbers of people getting hurt and property being damaged? Society can’t exist without order. Clown.

Cops? Never been pulled over despite being a prime target - I’ve got a very quick car that most young(ish) drivers could only ever dream of owning. Dont know of anyone else being pulled over either, my dad once turned up a one way street not being familiar with the area anc the popo thought he might be drunk, but that’s about all. Don’t drive like an idiot and be polite, it goes a long way. Trust me. Again. You like your big cities with high crime rates, you’ll get pulled over more as the police are more suspicious of everything and on edge.

Insurance is self explanatory, without it people will be left out of pocket. Again jf encourages responsible driving as premiums skyrocket if you hit someone. Not sure why a bike/bus zealot like you would have an issue with this.

What about buses and pedestrians? They use State built roads too. Sorry champ you’re not shortcutting through my back yard, it’s called trespass.

Your whole entire argument is useless.

And sorry no I’ll keep typing as I always do. At least I’m not rude to people :))';

'For what it’s worth, my car costs a lot but it’s worth it. People in my area have easy access to buses and trains. They can walk anywhere they may need to, but the local authorities still want to close roads to cars. How do I know the accessibility to non car transport is fine? Because I did it for many years. So why block roads and slow things down when nobody has any complaints about the current state of affairs.

Oh yeah it’s because the authorities get money from central government for implementing anti car policies, whether they’re beneficial to the public or not. Or you have a bunch of virtue signalling vegans in charge. That can be another reason. Or both.

This is what drivers are irritated by and it’s perfectly reasonable. But car hating zealots will celebrate anything that makes driving difficult or expensive, because it’s an ideology based on envy.

The super rich don’t want to share with the poor and the scum classes don’t want to see anyone better off than themselves. So the hard working tax payer who just wants to get his family around safely and quickly gets left with the bill';

'>>1987587
Now post the average commute time to get some eggs and milks and to the local pub';

'>>1988417
This is based. People get live in new (albeit small) houses or small apartment complexes despite literally living in the biggest city on earth with tons of amenities within walking distance. They could have had some tall dystopian tower blocks with a bunch of nothingness in between that wouldn't actually house more people than this.';

'>>1989260
Single-family zoning and low density development does not prevent slums you utter fuckwit.';

'>>1989265
>he can't fathom the idea of putting platform barriers in stations or adding additional ventilation and filtering to improve air quality
Many such cases';

'>>1989322
Doesn’t change the fact the air quality is bad. The ideas either don’t work as well as you claim or the government isn’t interested, which confirms that it’s about money and control rather than the people.';

'>>1989330
>The ideas either don’t work as well as you claim
Anon, amount of air pollution in a confined space is entirely a function of ventilation power and filter size. The faster air is filtered, the less pollution is present in it. This is not a Byzantine concept.

>the government isn’t interested
Metro systems around the world have already made ventilation and platform barrier upgrades. NYC is adding platform barriers literally as we speak, though right now theirs are designed solely to prevent people going on tracks rather than improving platform air quality. WMATA is planning to add them. Things are improving no matter how much your scream about "muh goberment", even despite US transit systems in particular being perpetually hamstrung by a certain class of congresscritter.';

'>>1989319
Quit moving goalposts. Overbuilding housing DOES have consequences.

>>1989333
Pollution in enclosed environments is different than pollution in outside environments. Outside, weather and topography usually blows off pollution and particulates, unless you live somewhere like LA where the sea air will blow in but nothing can blow off from the city because it gets trapped by the mountains.';

'>>1989333
Why is the air quality in them still so bad then? Not enough has been accomplished. I’m not talking money spent, I’m talking actual tangible results. You’re more likely to get lung cancer on a metro than almost anywhere else aside from smoking';

'>>1989336
Their reply to everything is shove ever more people into a patch of land until they’re metaphorically suffocating and then they’ll say there’s too many humans and we all know where that leads to';

'>>1989235
>Nature is massively preserved
??? trees beside houses is not preserved nature, suburban sprawl and excessive highway construction destroy nature more than any other development type simply due to how far reaching they are.';

'>>1989300
AKA Corbusier which most every modern urban planner thinks was a massive retard.';

'>>1989232
But is that air pollution worse than that of cars, retard?
>>1989235
>suburbs
>preserving nature
lmao
>>1989249
>Literally nobody including Transport for London deny the air quality in the Underground is the worst in the whole city and poses a health risk.
https://www.london.gov.uk/who-we-are/what-london-assembly-does/questions-mayor/find-an-answer/air-pollution-tube-1
>London Underground (LU) air pollution is not unacceptably high, and LU air quality is well within the Health and Safety Executive specified limits (4mg/m3). It is important to note that the air in the Underground system is very different from that found on the surface, where pollution is mainly due to vehicle exhaust emissions. While particulates found above ground are known to be carcinogens, those on the Underground are not known to have that effect.
>If there’s anything I’ve learnt it’s that the government can’t be trusted. If it says to not use my car then I know I should do the opposite, because governments only act in their own internet and never for the people.
This is glue-eater logic.
>But once again, keep going with your rude and arrogant rhetoric.
YOU ARE ON FUCKING 4CHAN
>Somebody else already posted evidence about metro networks being bad for health.
The question is not "do they have potential negative health impacts", the question is "are those impacts worse than those of cars"
>The environmental damage and risk to health for passers by is truly horrendous. But sure my old car which is well over a decade old and still runs immaculately with tire shredding levels of power is evil?
And I presume you have studies that compare the health impacts?
And tire shredding is a health hazard';

'>>1989250
List common examples in this thread.
>>1989254
People tend to be reactive when they protest - you usually don't see protests *for* something. Try to take away existing transit and pedestrian infrastructure or try to bulldoze houses for a new road, then you'll see protests.
>>1989285
>And you’re telling me I don’t have to go through a registration process for a bus pass or railway discount card? Don’t be daft.
>implying the registration process for those is anything other than a formality
>At least I’m not rude to people :))
YOU ARE ON FUCKING 4CHAN
>>1989286
>when nobody has any complaints about the current state of affairs.
[citation needed]
>>1989352
The world is at zero risk of overpopulation.';

'>>1989336
>Quit moving goalposts
You did by insinuating that building housing causes slums. My position hasn't changed, I'm just informing you that single-family housing does not prevent slums.

>Overbuilding housing DOES have consequences.
Oh no, the consequences of affordable market-rate housing in desirable areas close to jobs and amenities! The horror! How could anyone want a variety of housing stock to accommodate people in each stage of their lives without forcing them to drive 10 miles just to get groceries! Oh the humanity!

>Pollution in enclosed environments is different than pollution in outside environments
Yes, it's much easier to filter and collect for disposal.

>Outside, weather and topography usually blows off pollution and particulates
Into the rivers and agricultural zones, where it then contaminates the food we eat and the water we drink.

>Why is the air quality in them still so bad then
Provide proof that the air quality in foreign metro stations is still poor even with platform barriers and updated ventilation. Because right now you're taking one example, NYC, and assuming that it applies across the board despite NYC being an incredibly old and underfunded system.

>Not enough has been accomplished
That's a great argument for providing more and consistent funding for transit agencies so they can make the same improvements other countries have.

>You’re more likely to get lung cancer on a metro than almost anywhere else aside from smoking
Strange, US asthma and heart and lung disease rates are climbing, but very few people are riding metro systems. So the exposure has to be coming from somewhere else. Countries that also use metro systems more than the US also aren't experiencing heart and lung disease epidemics. Hm, this air quality map seems to show that cars are driving up the PM2.5 concentration in the air, rather than metro rail. LA and the Inland Empire certainly don't have a metro system that big, but they all drive a lot.';

'>>1989386
The idea that "we should just build apartments anywhere and everywhere" is a common urbanist position. Problem is that when neighborhoods change (through new construction or just time), you're somehow scum for wanting to move out or create a new area where those problems don't exist.';

'>>1989392
You are scum for replying to my post with completely unrelated bullshit';

'>>1989379

2 hours on the Underground is comparable to about 24h standing next to london’s most polluted road. You’ll literally be sneezing black stuff if you spend a lot of time down there. Well documented fact that everyone knows - highly toxic environment. TfL would be obliged to shut the service if they admitted it was as bad as it is. Asbestos brake dust down there. They don’t even want to touch it in case it gets even worse. Easier to tax car users and blame them for london’s health issues instead.

“Glue eater logic” that’s been proven over and over. Are you even old enough to remember the Iraq war? Lol…

Yes the underground is worse for your health than being around cars. Air quality meters have proven it. As we already told you. But you ignored that bit.

4chan doesn’t give you an excuse to be rude. You only do your cause a disservice.

Coincidentally I don’t shred my tires whenever I get in the car. It’s well over $600 for a set. I’m not one of those morons who goes to takeovers in a dodge charger and acts like a brain damaged monkey. You purposely took that out of context and you know it.';

'>>1989397
Dude just get out of here. You’re throwing out more pm2.5s than the entirety of London, LA and NYC combined with your salty rhetoric.';

'>>1989437
>2 hours on the Underground is comparable to about 24h standing next to london’s most polluted road
[citation needed]
>Well documented fact that everyone knows - highly toxic environment.
[citation needed]
>Asbestos brake dust down there.
[citation needed]
>“Glue eater logic” that’s been proven over and over. Are you even old enough to remember the Iraq war? Lol…
Iraq War = public health is a lie? What?
>Yes the underground is worse for your health than being around cars. Air quality meters have proven it.
No they haven't, because you refuse to post comparisons.
>4chan doesn’t give you an excuse to be rude.
You are a normalfag parasite. Get the fuck off 4chan.';

'>>1989443
He's right';

'First thing on google you muppet';

'Iraq war= proof governments don’t care about the citizens and only serve themselves. You wilfully take everything out of context because you take a fat L on everything';

'Oh look what I found. Here’s another fat L for you to hold';

'>>1989443
>>1989450
>>1989453
urbanist status = obliterated';

'It had to be done. The guy is just going back and forth to waste peoples time. Every single thing you point out either gets “citation needed” when it’s easily verifiable by a 5 second google search or taken wildly out of context to deflect attention from the fact he’s repeatedly proven wrong. I hope you guys enjoy laughing at how much of a fool he’s made of himself. In the meantime stay safe and I wish you all a wonderful day :))';

'I was neither of the people in the discussion but "london underground has traces of asbestos" is not an "own" against public transit nor does it have anything to do with pollution, of which automobiles are significantly worse in every way compared to trains, especially tire particles.';

'>>1989458
>Asbestos vs tire particulates
I'll take my chances with the tire particulates';

'It’s not just London.';

'>>1989450
>>1989451
>>1989453
>>1989456
>phoneposting without even giving links
>still fucking obsessing over politeness
>not knowing how to reply
Jesus Christ you really are a fucking election tourist boomer, aren't you?
With regard to your claims:
>asbestos
All sources agree that there are no asbestos brake shoes in use on the London Underground and that the asbestos that is there is unlikely to escape and pose a health risk.
https://www.oracleasbestos.com/blog/asbestos-on-the-london-underground/
https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/transparency/freedom-of-information/foi-request-detail?referenceId=FOI-2244-1718
>London Underground pollution study
This was heavily misreported by the media; the study only found that PM2.5 particulates were more present in the Underground than on the surface, not that pollution in general was worse. It also stated that "We do not think that the travelling public is at any serious or substantial risk from travelling underground".
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/769884/COMEAP_TfL_Statement.pdf
>Iraq war= proof governments don’t care about the citizens and only serve themselves
And how do you get from that to "always do opposite of what government says"?';

'You have drunk the kool aid.';

'>>1989512
>the study only found that PM2.5 particulates were more present in the Underground than on the surface
Exactly, thank you';

'Imagine Khan telling people diesel particulates are bad for health then telling the public to use a subway that’s littered with more and worse types of particulates.

Governments are only interested in securing multi billion dollar contracts for their own benefit on a personal level and controlling the masses.

Iraq War - lied to the public about WMDs

COVID-19 vaccinations - more horrifying side effects are being exposed every week it seems

Ukraine aid - billions for nothing

Borders out of control - more worried about Ukraine and Israel than the Mexico border

US FDA - especially Fauci

Diesel promotion bait and switch in Europe

EVs are undergoing the same bait and switch scam as diesels did in Europe.

That’s not even all of it. If they’re telling you to use buses and trains it’s because they’ve got a nasty little surprise for you down the line and/or lining their pockets and aiming for a promotion after they get booted out the government by angry voters.';

'>>1989634
>If they’re telling you to use buses and trains it’s because they’ve got a nasty little surprise for you down the line
There is no surprise.
Car vs public transit is nobles vs plebs eternal fight.
See for ages convenient and comfortable transportation was reserved for elites. It's elites who rode horses and carriages and plebs were dodging to side showered with mud, and if pleb got under nobles horse hooves that pleb was responsible.
Initially car continued that lane, cars was expensive so they price out plebs. But with time plebs suddenly can afford cars and they flooded streets. And that make elites cringe. Plebs that supposed to be behind wall are now invading living space of elites, clogging streets and slowing down elites carriages. Even more if elite driver hit pleb he can be responsible.
This what about, elites want to put genie back into bottle, remove plebs and their cars from the street and put them into cattle wagons. Elites themselves never plan to part with their personal carriages. See what London Mayor Khan drives.';

'>>1989668
Spot on.

In communist Russia the party members had their own lanes. Says it all';

'For perspective, Mayor Khan takes not one but three bulletproof Range Rovers worth £400,000 each.

In contrast the President of Argentina flies on business class to save the tax payers’ money.

Ones a socialist zealot and the other wants to reduce government and regulations. There’s this thing called leading by example. It’s very effective you know.';

'>>1989634
>Imagine Khan telling people diesel particulates are bad for health then telling the public to use a subway that’s littered with more and worse types of particulates.
[citation needed]
Do I have to repeat the report's conclusion again?
>We do not think that the travelling public is at any serious or substantial risk from travelling underground"';

'>>1989668
>And that make elites cringe
Elites dgaf. They have private jets and helicopters, superyachts, mansions, etc, all out of reach of the masses. If they want to drive their fancy cars with no commoners around, they go to a track and have fun with no speed limits or traffic. You are completely retarded thinking there's a conspiracy to turn regular streets back into rich-people only motorways, when they still have to deal with traffic from freight trucks, delivery and moving vans, city works and emergency vehicles, the list goes on.

>all this butthurt about the London mayor
He rides in a motorcade because of his position as mayor of the UK's capital city, not because he's rich. When he's no longer mayor, he may still have a chauffeur to drive him around, but you bet your ass he won't be in a motorcade.

>>1989695
>Mayor Khan takes not one but three bulletproof Range Rovers worth £400,000 each.
>conflating government vehicles with personal vehicles
Sadiq Khan's net worth is only like $5 million as far as I can tell. He's got money, but he's a far cry from being able to afford 1/5 his net worth in luxury vehicles to drive him around forever. ULEZ exemption is also only going to be a thing as long as he's mayor, once he leaves office he'll have to pay to drive into that zone.

>In contrast the President of Argentina flies on business class to save the tax payers’ money.
No fucking wonder Milei flies around, Argentina is 1/3 the size of the contiguous USA. It's a very large country. It would literally be more expensive if Khan flew everywhere in London on a helicopter.';

'>>1989746
>Elites dgaf.
lol';

'>>1989746
Ok tranny, keep licking that boot.';

'>>1989757
>>1989758
>he thinks Melon Husk is trying to get the middle class to stop driving just so he can get stuck behind an 18 wheeler in his CyberBeast™
ngmi';

'>>1989746
Milei flies business class instead of taking a private jet. Once again taking things out of context on purpose.

Mayors aren’t VIPs. The old mayor used to use the buses. This one doesn’t. I wonder why…

£12.50 a day is a drop in the bucket should he continue to live in London when he’s got a job that pays millions with even more influence and power lined up';

'Clearly you forgot that planes are public transport but because they are too effective (public transit that actually works) the state doesn’t like them.

Fact is the conservative one is taking measures to save his country money while the socialist cruises around in 3 bulletproof SUVs while telling Doris to scrap her Smart car and take the bus.

Hypocrisy. Such hypocrisy.';

'>>1989789
>Milei flies business class instead of taking a private jet
Ha found it. He flew business class to Davos. I can't find anything about him flying the country's airline within Argentina itself, and if he flew Lufthansa rather than Aerolineas Argentinas to Europe, I doubt he would fly the national airline domestically. Undoubtedly he has a military or private aircraft for that. Knowing Argentina, his business class flight on Lufthansa was probably cheaper and nicer than Aerolineas Argentinas too.

>Mayors aren’t VIPs
Depends on the mayor. Mayor of a national capital, or a major multi-million person city? You could make a case for that. Mayor of a city of 30k-100k? Definitely not.

>The old mayor used to use the buses
I hope to god you aren't looking at fucking Boris through the rose colored glasses just because he was better at LARPing as middle class

>£12.50 a day is a drop in the bucket
Yeah, the congestion pricing should be higher to drive in London, but if he wants to pay it for the privilege of driving, that's his choice. I understand why he's exempt during his tenure in city office however.

>Fact is the conservative one is taking measures to save his country money
Imagine being so easily fooled by those optics lmao. He flew Lufthansa because Argentina's so fucking poor nothing in the country even meets that bar, and Lufthansa is cheaper than Aerolineas Argentinas either way.

>while the socialist cruises around in 3 bulletproof SUVs
Seeing as Khan has continually cut funding for London's public transit, I'd have a hard time classifying him as one even if that's what he calls himself.

>Doris to scrap her Smart car and take the bus.
I don't think you want to experience the congestion when every person in greater London tries to drive at once. You are geometrically illiterate. Maybe give this 10 minute explainer a go so you can understand why making everyone drive makes driving worse for everyone.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHSCmQnGH9Q';

'>>1989794
Dude you’re missing the point on purpose AGAIN.

The Argentinian president uses public transport. Mayor Khan does not despite claiming to be the one for the working class and equality.


Why should politicians be exempt from the rules they impose on the masses? Rules for thee but not for me. Proves everything I said is true.

Boris got off his bike to assist a lady who was being assaulted. It was in the news ages back. I agree with anyone who says he should be in The Hague but that’s another point. The one before him used to ride the London buses however, so yes it’s just Khan being a waste of tax payers money.

Khan is a socialist through and through. He’s a member and represents the most left wing of the main political parties in the U.K. - Labour. Cutting investment in public transport doesn’t mean he’s not a socialist. It means he’s run out of money or would rather spend it on vanity projects.

If he gets booted out the mayoral office he’ll clear off to a private island or country estate, the £12.50 charge won’t impact him no matter what car he uses. Should he choose to stay in London he’s so rich it won’t matter. He’ll be offered a much better paid job in the UN or something in return for his efforts in destroying London. That’ll easily offset a £12.50 charge should he have to pay it in the future.

And yet another deflection. He should lead by example. Yet again if London wasn’t full of LTNs and cycle lanes that nobody asked for the traffic wouldn’t be at a standstill. Create a problem then give a solution that still doesn’t fix it. Something governments are absolutely brilliant at. Your answer to everything is to regulate more. And it never works. It strangles economies. It makes life difficult. It makes people poorer. Have fun getting a tradie in London. Many are boycotting the zone because it’s costing them too much money. Or they add it to the price you pay. London is poo anyway. Same with LA and NYC';

'I’ll be avoiding all these left wing dominated cities. They’re full of poverty and crime. You’re welcome to live in them. I’ve no reason to. Have fun getting mugged by a heroin addict while you’re waiting on the subway platform. Even worse for women, I might add. “Safe and effective” it most certainly isn’t. Rather like a certain medical procedure we heard an awful lot about recently. That was supposed to be for the peoples benefit too and look what happened.';

'>>1989818
>Why should politicians be exempt from the rules they impose on the masses?
>The city should pay itself every time one of its vehicles enters the congestion zone
Fucking logically bankrupt lmao';

'>>1989820
No u';

'Literally not gonna discuss with someone who supports a two tier society';

'>>1989761
>screeching about muh elon out of nowhere
You will always be a worthless buck broken commie';

'>>1989794
>don't believe your lying eyes, here's a deranged anti-car rant instead
Hello rabbi';

'>>1989746
>Elites dgaf. They have private jets and helicopters, superyachts, mansions, etc, all out of reach of the masses. If they want to drive their fancy cars with no commoners around, they go to a track and have fun with no speed limits or traffic.
Here is the thing streets are only places where elites intersect with plebs, and do it with ose status.
Everywhere else you are right. Plebs are separated from elites by wall. Elites live in their closed community mansion and condos, where pleb can only enter if he was hired as servant. They shop in their boutique stores with face checks, eat on expensive restaurants, their "workplace" neo palaces are obviously are wallaed off to, with guards at the entrance.
Everywhere elites don't mix up with plebs. Except streets. When they're drive from their mansion to palace they encounter plebs driving over same streets, and more horrors they do it nearly with equal status. If elite driver t-bones pleb shitbox to the death elite driver has real chance to go to jail (of course rich have their ways withlaw but still it's not like it was during sweet feudal times).
Public streets are the Big problem. This is why elites so relentlessly assault plebs cars.';

'>>1989841
Cars are the only thing considered a weapon by law that’s legal for public use in broad daylight across the world.

Cars are ideal candidates to replace the proverbial pitchforks';

'>>1989888
Cars are legally considered weapons in at least some countries. It usually appears in prosecutions following police pursuits. You could swerve to avoid a collision or a spike strip and if a LEO happens to be in the way, you’ll get charged as such - even if you had no intention to run anyone over. So yes cars are considered weapons in law.';

'>>1987587
i'd really like to see the source for this graph.';

'>>1989895
Google it.';

'>>1989921
fuck you you dumb fuck. you post a source for your graph or it came out of your ass.';

'>>1989790
yes because it's not like the us government subsides air travel outside the big cities because they wouldn't have it otherwise
oh wait it does
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essential_Air_Service';

'>>1989929';

'>>1989954
Government also subsides Amtrak , it still sucks.
Thereare good and working public transit services, and there are others.';

'>>1990038
the point is that a) the state evidently doesn't hate air travel and b) without subsidies there'd be no air travel outside of the big cities you hate so much';

'>>1989366
Literally a larger undeveloped forest to the left in your very specific cherrypicked example then I have ever seen in Europe
If this is the worst you got America is doing an amazing job';

'>>1990055
Government doesn't create legislation, current government not the one that advocate this act in the past.';

'>>1990071
why haven't they repealed it then retard';

'>>1990099
Why does military aid bill for country fighting against Russian invasion is tied to US border control against illegal immigration bill?';

'>>1988038
>It additionally disproves the constant communist propaganda that Americans "sit in traffic for 4 hours a day!!" when the reality is that Americans have relatively very short commutes.
You faggot, the ones lowering the average american commute time are people working in the countryside and those living in the inner city. Your suburban ass can get bent you disingenuous scum. Get gangraped by the nearest (((Dodge))) shareholder assembly you fucking cumguzzling son of a zoophilic freak.';

'>>1988428
/thread, now let's just post pretty pictures.';

'>>1988026
America is an ESL country, daily reminder.';

'>>1990069
america is gigantic, of course it has more forests. there's no excuse what the UK and germany did but that's what happens with hundreds of years of human occupation using mostly wood as a resource in a small area, it has nothing to do with american development being better for the environment. russia also has a shitload of untouched forest and nature and much of europe still does, japan is also one of the most urbanized countries in the world and retains much of it's nature, if the culture of the US was in any smaller of a country the entire thing would be parking lots.';

'>>1990292

Vast majority of Americans live in suburbs. In fact more Europeans work on farming villages and urban cities than Americans. Farming is essentially a nonfactor in commuters vs the urban population. More urban populations have higher commute times since they don't have point to point commutes and have to have different modes of transport to commute.';

'>>1990292
I live in the surburbs. My commute is 17 minutes. You commie faggot.';

'>>1987587
now control for traffic fatalities';

'I think the land use is a huge obstacle in most of the US. I was checking out some of the new stations that are about to open in Seattle's Link Light Rail, which seems to have one of the most ambitious expansion programs in the US. Pretty disappointing to see these new stations are located either in the middle of nothing or next to very low density residential areas.';

'>>1987587
i really dont think its as simple as this gtraph makes it out to be';

'>>1990680
>middle of nothing or next to very low density residential areas.
if the rail company is smart they're invested in the cheap property and going to develop it. this is what the Japanese rail companies did. they bought whatever was the cheapest land they could connect to the nearest city. then they built the line. then they built housing on all the cheap land along the line. all the men would ride twice a day to work and back. two fares per day per household. THEN they built a park with rides and shit at the terminus of the line, so then the wives would go there with the kids. that's one adult and however many children's fares there and back each time. then they paid admission to the park. they got rich.
I have no confidence any American rail company is smart enough to do this, but that's a proven way to make money and give your clients a better quality of life, so I'm sure they won't because who cares about the poors that ride the train lol';

'>>1992773
>I have no confidence any American rail company is smart enough to do this
They're government entities not companies and the government isn't interested in speculative real estate when they already have 100% guaranteed revenue';

'>>1990292
But he's right. Transit advocates like yourself unironically believe that most people in major cities travel an hour in each direction every day. I'm not sure why this is the case, either accidentally doubling one-way commute times, or deliberately lying. You can look at some maps here, and there are other sources that in most American metros, commute times are not nearly as long as it's pretended to be.

https://www.geotab.com/time-to-commute/';

'>>1992777
and you faggots act like transit takes forever when you've just proven that it's usually only a 10-20 minute time penalty';

'>>1992837
Which incidentally is probably not so high that the economic costs of the car make sense for the consumer. Theoretically cars give consumers leverage in their housing preferences, so housing prices might be more competitive since homebuyers can be serviced by developers that are building units at ever more distant, cheap locations, but for most of the job centers that relationship is collapsing as even new suburban homes become too expensive for the average worker. So no there is just expensive housing AND expensive transportation, which is really why this whole thing has become such an issue recently among millenials and zoomers. This didn't just come out of nowhere, it's literally just that millenials in particular are at a loss for how they benefit from this system because they can't afford houses where the jobs are, so at best they're renting in little shitholes within the city or decent apartments out of the city, and in the latter case they're driving on the highways and seeing their car as a money suck, and they're not getting equity in their housing for it.';

'>>1993299
>This didn't just come out of nowhere, it's literally just that millenials in particular are at a loss for how they benefit from this system because they can't afford houses where the jobs are
Or maybe the jobs millenials are after are filled with useless managerial positions that only exist to bloat companies and make emancipated plebs wholly dependent on the system with no leverage of their position.';

'>>1993315
Maybe you're gay.';

'>>1993317
Maybe you shouldn't seek for partners as a replacement for your dad molesting you.';

'>>1993318
Maybe.';

'>>1987587
>commute by car
>post made by ford bot

>BEGONE DEMON
in the name of the father the son and the holy spirit';

'>>1993315
That doesn't matter, housing prices are still absurd for even above median incomes. The type of job doesn't matter, even if millenials were all working trade jobs and making 70k doing it they're trying to save a downpayment while renting and paying car notes, and the housing prices keep going up and the interest rates are high. AND car prices are high now even in the used market, so you have to scrounge for local deals. This is all an immense headache and feels like you can't get a break, and then boomers are blaming you for it while they sit on their own houses. You can make up whatever narrative you want to tell yourself but that is why this is happening. Car culture wasn't an issue throughout the post-war period. Traffic has been a thing and car ownership has been expensive for a long time, but people felt like it was shaking out because in general they were getting wealthier. Now, higher and higher percentages of young people are struggling to build wealth, so the obligatory costs of car ownership are irritating more of them. That's the whole explanation. I don't like cars, but I'm not delusional about this. If housing was generally affordable again I'd bet you anything that a significant chunk of the anti-car millenials would dissappear. Some would remain because of green politics and inertia, but if millenials could've had their yard and 3 bedroom house in their late 20s they'd probably just be doing the jaded office space thing, just lamenting how boring their comfortable life is. Instead they're staring at their bank accounts and living in apartments into their mid to late 30s and feeling like they don't have security, and their biggest asset is likely a depreciating car.';

'>>1993370
By fixing the immigration problem and putting a stop(or even a dent) to the unrestricted and coddled real estate investment market 99% of the housing issues would be solved. But fed will import millions of people with low standards that will accept any housing and bail out the overinflated markets as long as it can so it won't get solved.';

'>>1993372
Ah yes, all those welfare queen illegal immigrants who sit around all day collecting food stamps while they drive up the prices of housing by purchasing entire tracts of mcmansions in cash. Another brilliant /n/ take on "the housing crisis" which becomes a pretext for "here's a pile of really bad ideas we need to implement nao and these are the only ways for you, a zoomer, to get free giebs"';

'>>1993375
Sorry didn't see any reason in your buzzwords, could you put it into coherent speech so that white people can understand what you're trying to say?';

'>>1993376
I'm familiar with these types, I'll translate:

"actually it's white people's fault, you racist."';

'>>1993377
Thank you for your service, nigger whisperer. At last i truly see.';

'>>1993376
I just took >>1993372 and distilled it down to its basic "argument" which, as you now see, was incoherent';

'>>1993383
wypipo call that a strawman because it's fallacious but i can see a POC having trouble comprehending basic English language';

'>>1993386
Let me help you out because you clearly didn't go to college nor are you a participant in the real estate market: You don't need to be an immigrant to buy housing in the US. You don't even need to be a resident. Wetbacks swimming across the rio grande are not why you can't afford a fancy loft apartment in the cool part of town. The reason you can't afford that is that you are a NEET. No amount of crying about this on /n/ is going to fix that.';

'>>1993391
I didn't say any of those things, which is why i mentioned strawmanning. You're clearly angry at me for poinging out that immigrants are a big part of the housing problem so now you're trying to get back at me like that. I don't care, go pick some cotton or rob a store or something.';

'>>1993393
It's ok to admit you don't know what you're talking about. I'm sure it's nothing new for you.';

'>>1993396
I would if i didn't know what i'm talking about. Unfortunately for you, i do and talk about it instead and that makes you seethe relentlessly.';

'>>1993398
It's pretty obvious you don't understand the basics of capitalism, but those of us with an IQ that starts with "1" (i.e., not you) don't consider an ongoing string of "nu-uh no u" to be an interesting discussion, so I guess you'll have to post your snarky reply, confident that you pwned another libtard/nignog/whatever.';

'>>1993400
I'll have to post a snarky reply bemusing a nigger talking about IQ because that's the most substance your whining has ever produced, communist rambings about capitalism notwithstanding.';

'Hey guys I'm real smart and you should listen to me. I'm one of the smart people. I have a high IQ. I went to college. I'm not like those people who didn't go to college, I'm smart.';

'>>1993361
Praise be to JR';

'>>1987991
the two statements are not unrelated. Both are about commute times.
Be better (next time)';

'>>1988562
look at these BUGPODS lmao';

'>>1988562
Amerisharts build their shelters like parking lots
Dios mio
At this point it’s some kind of freaky fetish';

'I can’t believe this thread is still going. Too many people in America that simply shouldn’t be there. Illegal immigration and urbanism are an absolute plague.

A lot of urbanist Americans who point to Europe don’t have a clue what they’re on about, frankly. Much of Europe is very much pedestrian friendly and you can get buses or trains in most areas. My friend in Poland uses the bus all the time with no issues. It’s great that the choice is there.

The problem is these urbanists don’t stop there. They won’t rest until we are all equal. I mean more accurately, all equally poor. They’ll block off roads under the pretext of making it better for pedestrians and cyclists yet there were never any access issues in the first place.

I could totally get behind adding sidewalks and all that. But it costs money so instead the local authorities simply narrow the road and install a bike lane. Not many people use it and the huge numbers of drivers start complaining about congestion that previously didn’t exist. The urbanists then say it’s a cultural problem and that society needs an overhaul. It’s literally cultural Marxism in action.';

'>>1993653
I think you're confused, urbanism is all about ethnic cleansing and eugenics. You're on the same team here bud. Friendly fire. Blue on blue.';

'>>1993668
Eh, I just want to be able to use EITHER method without being subject to government overreach, but the huge number of illegals is overloading public services including the road network and public transport. Making this possible would mean spending tax payers money on the citizens for once, instead of throwing it down the drain on vanity projects and foreign wars. We should be worrying about our own borders, not Ukraine’s. I like what Vivek Ramaswamy said about how we can build a better world by focusing on ourselves rather than flying off to globalist conferences';

'>>1993673
>I like what a brown immigrant said about banning immigration and international travel';

'>>1993674
Ngl that’s pretty funny';

'>>1987587
Now post carbon emissions, roadkill, amount of car crashes, strodes and cost';

'>>1993805
Not my problem.';

'>>1993805
CO2 is not a pollutant, you should become a roadkill.';

'>>1987587
The USA was built from the ground up in not too recent time. Alot of development is fairly recent even. Most of the infrastructure was originally built for the motorcar and with the motorcar in mind.
You are comparing this situation to areas that have naturally grown for millenia without the motorcar even being a thing yet. People there jumped om the bandwagon of cagie craze and tried adapting existing infrastructure to the motorcar.
There is no reason to be surprised it works even worse than in an area like mentioned before.
Also italians have low commute times because if you don't work your commute is 0.';

'>>1993653
There are two types of urbanist, regressives and revivalist. Revivalist want to make neighborhoods more beautiful, quieter, and less like a freeway by actually understanding the traffic situation and finding areas of improvement. They want transit so that people can get around in different ways. They want to emulate good models of transit from elsewhere in their own home city.
Regressives see urbanism as a path of social justice. They go on Plebbit and whine about cars all day. They once watched a Vox video telling them how highways were racist and tore up black neighborhoods, and now think tearing down every highway is a solution, and their ideas of "traffic calmed neighborhoods" means absolutely no vehicles, even ignoring delivery trucks and haulage. They're a lazy imitation of the nuanced opinions you see on most urban revival forums.';

'>>1993855
A lot of them are throwing quality of life out of the equation. So many arguments are centred around efficiency. And if you say anything contrary you’re a selfish bigot, according to them. The interesting thing is that a lot of urbanists are left wing or at least left leaning, but at the same time the government and big businesses absolutely love urbanism because they can maximise profits and control. It’s like intensive farming. Same basic principles. A lot of it is driven by envy or general dislike for cars, as it has become fashionable to dislike private motorised transport.

I was recently in a village. It was beautiful. But it was also empty. Nobody there. About the most life you saw was some birds or something. It’s an unfortunate fact that humans are loud, noisy, smelly and messy. If you live in a city you have to put up with it. If they’re not revving cars with pop and bang maps at 4 am they are playing loud music in the apartment next door or letting their dogs bark for hours. Part of the reason public transport works so well in Japan is the culture of respect. You’d get thrown off if you tried to be one of those stereotypical loud mouths who has to tell the whole room your life story. I’m all for minimal regulations and dealing with the actual troublemakers instead of laying down blanket rules and ruining everyone’s fun or quality of life';

'>>1993860
>A lot of them are throwing quality of life out of the equation
>being able to afford to live within walking/biking distance of your job, friends, public spaces, grocers and stores, and healthcare is poor quality of life
Grow the fuck up man.

>It’s an unfortunate fact that humans are loud, noisy, smelly and messy
>proceeds to bitch about car noises
Like pottery';

'>>1993868
Not complaining about car noises, I’m literally planning to run a high flow exhaust with a resonator delete among other things. Difference is I don’t go 2 step rev banging or drifting in the hood. Furthermore I have a shop in walking distance. Two actually. Both are expensive cause there’s little competition unless you hop in a car and drive some distance. You urbanists don’t have a clue what you’re talking about most of the time. As the other post said, some want to improve transport links and others are just moaning about traffic for the sake of it';

'>>1993868
You’re also assuming your job and needs will (A) all be provided for and (B) affordable. It’s common here to hop in a car and drive to get to shops that are further away because it saves money. If I’m only able to go to one within walking distance you bet they’ll put the prices up. They can and they do. Then you’ve got the fact that rich people will get all the best stuff while the poorer of society will have second rate services. You’ve basically introduced segregation, well done. There’s absolutely no guarantee a job will be available for my skill set in the locality either. unless we all go back to farming and have work on our literal doorstep, you will continue to see commuting. But nobody wants that life, it’s hard and stressful.';

'>>1993872
>Not complaining about car noises, I’m literally planning to run a high flow exhaust with a resonator delete among other things
>complains about other people's car noises
>is literally modifying his car to make it louder and more annoying to everyone else';

'>>1993905
I just said the problem is with people making a huge noise in residential areas at night you moron. Not people driving past my home going to work in a vehicle they’ve customised. All you can do is take what I said out of context. Cope.';

'>>1993905
Plus you don’t know what car I have, where I live or when I drive it. You know absolutely nothing at all. I have to listen to kids revving dirt bikes round and round the area but it’s just part of living in a society with human beings around. Go to the countryside and you’ll have roosters waking you up at the first ray of sunlight. Clown';

'Funny thing is, I actually spent a lot of time in an apartment in the middle of a city. The type of lifestyle urbanists drool at. It was awful. Allow me to explain.

>sleep was impossible on weekends due to nightclubs being so loud you can hear the bass up and down the street

>drunks and generally noisy people at all hours of the day and night

>buses making the windows rattle

>no yard or garden

>drunks urinating on your front door

>generally noisy and dirty environment

In short, inner city urban life sucks. If you like it, great. But there’s a reason people moved to suburbs. The automotive industry simply cashed in on what the public already wanted.';

'>>1993909
>I lived in a shitty apartment above a nightclub
Are you an undocumented day laborer or a sex offender or why did you choose that particular apartment?';

'>>1993913
Again you misrepresent what I said. I clearly stated the noise was so loud you could hear it up and down the street. As for choosing to live there, who are you to judge? You’ve absolutely no idea. When people are poor they take what they can get. You still can’t address the other issues I mentioned because you know it’s true, as does everyone else. You’re welcome to it but suburbs are much nicer places to be. I’m so sorry I don’t want to live next to a nightclub (even though I love underground EDM) or have a warehouse with forklifts and trucks beeping next door. Or live next to a railway depot. I’m so sorry I don’t want to have drunks using my front door as a toilet or have drug addicts and beggars accosting me as soon as I set foot outside my home. If you want to put up with it for the convenience of shops nearby, go for it. It’s not like you can’t already do it. But please don’t ruin life for the rest of us';

'Because all that I mentioned before is the reality of urban life. It’s awful. Or you might have noisy neighbours moaning loudly at the weekends.. dog poo all out by your front door. I could go on and on and on. It’s not what it’s cracked up to be. Hey I’ve when had dogs chase me while riding my bike home from work (mountain bike not a motorbike). So once again, the real problem is PEOPLE. The higher the population density the more annoyances per square kilometre you have. It’s disgusting in my opinion. But nobody is stopping you from living that dream if it’s what you want for yourself.';

'>>1993915
Didn't know I was giving free therapy sessions but I hope you feel better now.

Shitty places exist for poor people in the suburbs too, you just don't notice until later when you have stage 4 bone cancer at 31 because your house was built on a dump site. Or did you think suburbs magically had an egalitarian way of sharing out the good land to poors.';

'>>1993919
All you can do is throw insults at me because everything I said about mixed urban planning is true. You can get poor quality housing anywhere but that doesn’t change the validity of what I said. Go to Africa and you’ll find people sifting through toxic garbage dumps and doing informal mining without appropriate PPE or health and safety. again, none of that changes anything I’ve said. I have literally had dogs chase me while riding my bicycle to work as any “model citizen” would. My brother got bitten by a dog while running. It’s the kind of problem you get when you have people around. The more people you have the more problems you get, hence for decades families preferred lower density suburbs with more space for their kids.. yawn';

'You can’t comprehend that someone could have experienced both sides and decided that urban life isn’t a utopia. It shows how narrow minded and absurdly ideological you are. Spoiler alert most people can’t afford millionaires housing. I’m not gonna squash up with room mates because the rent is 4x higher than I can afford on my own. That’s typical of big cities like New York, London, etc.

One of the biggest reasons people aren’t having families is because urbanists are forcing people into sky high population densities where it’s impossible to get family sized accommodation. Personally it doesn’t affect me but an awful lot of experts believe there won’t be enough young workers paying into the pension funds. Also the fact it’s normal for people to want a family. Urbanism makes it much more difficult. Imagine trying to go to sleep as a new mother and you get woken up 5 minutes later because the neighbours downstairs decided to start violin practice or the pitbull started barking? Awful';

'>>1993922
Nothing I said was an insult to anyone. Yes, it sucks to be poor. You're either living on top of a landfill, or in a landfill, or inside a bus depot. The logical thing to say here would be that we should work on solving poverty but you're just going to scream about communism so let's just agree to disagree on everything, even though I was initially somewhat sympathetic to the points you looked like you were attempting to make.';

'>>1993924
Specifically it was a place my relatives got while studying at university. They’ve since moved on and live amazing lifestyles but I digress. I live in a reasonably decent area with low crime rates and good public transport nearby but I usually either drive or walk, or use my bike for leisure. As per the communist stuff all I want is the government to quit regulating everything and taxing us to death. It wouldn’t be so bad if they actually spent the money on public services but they don’t. It gets thrown away on Ukraine and Net Zero. We could have decent transit and cheaper housing if those two things + proper border control was a thing. The other issue is as a society we need to have more respect. As I’ve said before in Japan you can’t be a blabbermouth on public transport or you’ll get kicked off. Stuff like that. Tidy up the subway networks. It’s rather disconcerting hearing warnings about violence and theft in such places. I know because a relative recently heard such a warning announcement in a railway station. I’ve no doubt you’ll probably disagree at least on net zero but I firmly believe we need to get the basics right first before we try anything more advanced. I’m pretty fortunate having the best of both worlds so to speak. But I fear the anti car crusade will continue to make my options narrower despite the place currently being great for any method of transport you choose to use.';

'>>1993926
Oh, it's you again. I see what the insult was. It was being compared to a migrant worker. You didn't have any issues with the sex offender part because libertarians are all about getting big gubmint off our backs (you're not a pedophile you're an ephebophile!) Except when it's about getting medical care, in which case the government's role is to make women give birth, so that there will be more adults to shoot and toss in gravel pits later.

It would be ideal if you could get a trip so I can spot your craziness sooner and just not bother replying.';

'>>1993929
Lol as if anyone would take you seriously anyway. I pointed out the real world implications of urban life and you blamed me for being too poor to afford an expensive condo type home built for multi millionaires. It’s not what it’s cracked up to be and you know it. This is why urbanism is a plague. It’s all based on a fictitious utopia that’ll never exist, it’s based on the presumption that everyone will be nice and respectful to each other. It’s based on corporations not cheating out on the services they’re supposed to provide. It’s based on the authorities not using bait and switch tactics to generate enormous revenue at our expense.

My points still stand and I’ll wait for someone to provide any significant evidence to the contrary';

'>>1993874
all that's still true if nothing's in walking distance retard, because there's a limit to how far driving is practical';

'>>1993874
It is currently unaffordable to live in close to major job centers, IE urban areas, because there is not enough housing in those areas. The YIMBY platform is literally to densify those areas. More housing in desirable areas = lower prices for housing. It is literally as simple as supply and demand.

>If I’m only able to go to one within walking distance you bet they’ll put the prices up
First off, what would prevent you from shopping at a store several miles away as opposed to across the street? Second, stores charge what the market will bear. If they're somehow so expensive that it makes sense for people to bike/drive/take transit to somewhere farther away, they won't be in business for long.

>Then you’ve got the fact that rich people will get all the best stuff while the poorer of society will have second rate services
As already happens now because incumbent landowners vehemently lobby against building new homes while their own home values skyrocket and working class people get pushed to the periphery? And then they have the temerity to bitch about their property taxes being high? Miss me with that bullshit, even under the current broken property tax system in the US more density would mean more city revenue, and ergo a greater ability to fund police, fire departments, transit, and other city services. Land-value tax reform, which is another part of the YIMBY platform, would go even further in ensuring that incumbent landowners are paying their share by making them pay the value of their land, not the value of whatever shitty parking lot or crackhouse is sitting on it. Land is finite, so it makes sense that if you want to keep a valuable plot of land near downtown for your own personal use, you should be paying for that luxury. Otherwise, you can get yourself a cheaper plot outside the city and commute in. That's a tradeoff you can make.';

'>>1993906
>I just said the problem is with people making a huge noise in residential areas at night you moron
And cars without mufflers do that. Cars with mufflers also do that because we've put incentivized car travel over everything else, even in the densest areas of our country where it makes the least sense. I've looked at homes adjacent to freeways because they were more affordable. I chose not to move there because even late in the evenings, the sound of traffic is a constant roar that isn't fully blocked out by the building's soundproofing. Fuck that shit.

>Plus you don’t know what car I have, where I live or when I drive it
Don't need to fag, I also live in society. I've heard every fucking manner of customized and stock car. They're all noisy unless it's an EV creeping through a parking lot, no matter if you live in the city or a suburb.

>bitching about roosters
>thinking anybody fucking cares about a rooster crowing for 5 minutes
Absolutely hysterical';

'>>1993956
I rarely drive my car at night plus it’s still quieter than the average loudmouth Karen you see on the bus kek';

'>>1993954
>All the blue states that’ve gone all urbanist are outrageously expensive to live in. Developers build on every bit of land they can get their grubby mitts on already, whether it’s suitable for human habitation or not.

>The mixed development can’t possibly keep up with local job demand. You’d have to have accommodation bolted onto factories and offices made specifically for the staff. You’re still going to need commuting.

>who lugs heavy bags of shopping several miles home, possibly with kids in tow? You probably will already be walking or biking at least 15 minutes so it’s reasonable to add another 10-15 on top of that for a few extra miles. Again you presume weather is nice, there’s no drug addicts waiting to help themselves from your bike’s basket..

You clearly fail to understand basic economics. Once competition is reduced, businesses charge more. It’s what they always do. It gets even worse as urbanist city authorities tend to be run by democrats who have practically decriminalised shoplifting. Watch the shops migrate to areas outside the city limits to get away from the thieves who are less likely to have access to a car.

>My point about the segregation was this:

When the cars and motorbikes have been taxed and regulated out of existence for the masses, you’ll be restricted to whatever is within walking distance. Bicycles are already getting more and more expensive, I might add - although that’s a by the way. You will probably need to use public transport to gain access to alternative service providers and shops. So (currently) if you’re from a poor area, nothing is stopping you from getting in a car and travelling to the other side of town to go to the better gym in the rich part of the city. But when the private motorised transport is gone you’ll have to make do with whatever is available locally. If it happens to be poor… well oh dear, too bad. You’ll just have to make do.';

'>>1993954
>More housing in desirable areas = lower prices for housing
Where has this happened?';

'>>1993972
Literally Austin, Texas, picrel
Relative to the rest of the US, Austin's rent is the lowest it has been in a decade.

My own city, Atlanta, also has dropping rents thanks to new multifamily construction, though not nearly to the same extent since we aren't building near as much as Austin is. Rent on the unit I live in is down around 8% from 2020.';

'Typical urbanist ideology:

>weather is always good

>drug addicts and thieves aren’t running riot

>buses and trains actually run on time

>poorer areas are actually served by public transport

>neighbours in high density housing don’t make excessive noise or cause nuisance

>most people can get work suitable for their skill set in walking distance or easily accessible by public transport

>governments won’t use a Chinese style credit score to prevent you from using public transport if you disagree with whatever happens to be the current bandwagon

>people are ok sharing a single room with two or 3 other people in a tiny apartment

>people have stopped dreaming about getting married or finding a partner and having kids

>people no longer want pets

Spoiler alert, none of these things are a reality and unless the government implements theoretical mind control through 5G towers or satellite transmitters nothing will change.

These crazies are seriously telling us to hop on the bus or subway when there’s literal warnings about theft and violence being played by the operatives. Guess they’ve no consideration for women’s safety or the disabled. Even a 6 ft man isn’t gonna get very far against a sneak attack or an armed gang

TL;DR urbanists can’t even get the basics necessary for making a city safe enough for walking to even be a smart idea much less remove the safety net of cars and motorcycles.

I’m considering moving to a third world country if it gets significantly worse here. Illegals get treated better than veterans who put their life on the line to keep us safe. Utterly disgusting and the traitors in government should be thrown in prison along with the dodgy people they allowed over the border without question';

'The urban planning community is suburban commies who can't afford to live in a city. They literally think HSR will take them to every town possible instead of just connecting major cities.';

'>>1993997
“High speed rail” haha what a joke. If the trains aren’t broken down they are some slow creaky things that should’ve been replaced decades ago. Bullet trains would’ve been nice. Well.. we can only dream';

'>>1993993
holy reddit spacing';

'>>1993993
typical suburbanite ideology:
>I'm a pussy and I'm scared of the world';

'>>1993993
tl;dr
>i'm a typical suburbanite pussy and I'm scared of the world';

'You know you’ve lost when all you can do is throw insults. Oh well leftists were always about emotion rather than logic';

'>>1993964
>You clearly fail to understand basic economics. Once competition is reduced, businesses charge more
>anon assumes it's just gonna be bigbox Target serving everyone within a 15 minute walk
Dumb AF. One of the benefits of density is you get the population to support more small businesses. Bakeries, tailors, grocers, etc. In existing dense and walkable areas you have multiple of these and they all have to compete with each other. Prices are marginally higher than big-box because they lack the same economy of scale, but the small grocer isn't going to charge you $10 for a gallon of milk unless you're intentionally buying some non-GMO hormone-free farm-to-table buzzword bullshit. Every place I've lived in and visited like this has a chain grocer anyways.
>inb4 but what if they charge me 5000% over sticker on my new dish washer????
Buy it online you utterly incompetent manchild, all the appliance shops give you free delivery and $50 installation

>It gets even worse as urbanist city authorities tend to be run by democrats who have practically decriminalised shoplifting
>he fell for the FOX bullshit
The stores that closed and moved in SF were already underperforming prior to the organized shoplifting. Shoplifting is just a convenient excuse for them to close the store, since hilariously enough the shoplifting rings were taking less than every other individual shrink factor. Damage/loss during shipment, internal theft, etc. Not excusing it, I and most democrats believe laws should be enforced and it's well known that a vast majority of the viral shoplifting is done by a couple organized crime rings. Several have been recently busted:
>https://moneywise.com/news/top-stories/surburban-mom-arrested-for-crime-ring
The other half of the problem is that police in many blue cities just aren't fucking working any more regardless of what the DA's policies are. You can see this by looking at traffic enforcement stats, police just aren't enforcing shit anymore.';

'>>1993964
>When the cars and motorbikes have been taxed and regulated out of existence for the masses
Give an example of this actually occurring. Because right now the only case for this exists in your conspiracy-addled brain.

>Bicycles are already getting more and more expensive
Bikes are cheap AF, and even a basic bitch ebike is barely a thousand dollars. That's a fuckload cheaper out the gate than a $20k car, far cheaper to maintain, and even a kid can ride one instead of having to wait till he's 16 for a license.

>You will probably need to use public transport
Expanding the reach and frequency of public transport is a good thing.

>So (currently) if you’re from a poor area, nothing is stopping you from getting in a car and travelling to the other side of town to go to the better gym in the rich part of the city
You have to be underage if you legitimately think people are driving that fucking far in an American city just to go to a gym. This is the dumbest example you could have possibly given.

>But when the private motorised transport is gone
In no developed country is this the case or will this be the case.

>captcha';

'>>1994059
>Dumb AF. One of the benefits of density is you get the population to support more small businesses. Bakeries, tailors, grocers, etc. In existing dense and walkable areas you have multiple of these and they all have to compete with each other. Prices are marginally higher than big-box because they lack the same economy of scale, but the small grocer isn't going to charge you $10 for a gallon of milk unless you're intentionally buying some non-GMO hormone-free farm-to-table buzzword bullshit. Every place I've lived in and visited like this has a chain grocer anyways.
Buy it online you utterly incompetent manchild';

'>>1994061
>Expanding the reach and frequency of public transport is a good thing.
Not when nobody that pays for it is using it.';

'>>1994059
Every single person with a brain knows bakers and grocers are much more expensive than supermarkets kek

Democrat run states have high crime rates. It’s a fact. You literally don’t even maintain public safety. California is absolutely awful. Famously bad. You care to explain why people are moving out? Blue state= woke police chiefs= poor recruitment process and cops having their hands tied. Too busy chasing down hurty words rather than real crime. You admit yourself the police aren’t doing their jobs. You’re right, they’re too busy investigating that one guy with a funny orange hair cut.';

'>>1994061
Are you blind? Skyrocketing gas prices. California wants to restrict the use of old cars. The EU has said they are considering banning the repair of “residual” vehicles aged more than 15 years. Low emission and congestion zones making driving prohibitively expensive for the masses. Absolutely not a theory at all.

In what world do you need to pay $20k for a car. That’s what posers do. Go buy a Kia or Hyundai or small Toyota rather than that huge truck. And I said bikes are getting more expensive. I remember decent bikes being hundreds of dollars cheaper. Prices are still going up. Again that wasn’t even the focal point.

Needing to use public transport is not a good thing even by urbanist logic, you guys always place walking above everything else. Again have fun when the cars are gone and the bus company decides it’s not profitable to run a service in poor areas and cuts it off. No sane person hands control of their affairs over to big businesses or the state except commie ideologues and high school kids who don’t know any better';

'But you know, you can only deflect blame and call everything else a conspiracy theory. The fact blue states are overrun by crime and violence while the more conservative thinking red states have less of an issue is very telling. But hey let’s just blame it on the police being lazy, right? I bet you were crying defund the police after a certain junkie died while being arrested. Like I said, get your cities public safety in order before you start trying to manage people’s transport, you can’t even do that much kek. I’ll stick with my car thanks.';

'>>1994144
>woke police chiefs
That isn't a thing, stop consuming news corp garbage';

'>>1994145
>motoring more expensive
probably the same croud who likes to insinuate on a regular basis
>you must be poor if you dont drive a car
and also
>i can get to more affordable shops by car compared to the overpriced bakery on my block';

'>>1993997
the HSR lines are connected to slower regional lines that act as feeders retard
>>1994145
>The EU has said they are considering banning the repair of “residual” vehicles aged more than 15 years
fake news
https://www.jgclassics.com/en/2024/02/07/does-the-european-union-intend-to-ban-the-repair-of-old-cars/';

'>>1994167
It’s been discussed already. The fact it was even considered is absurd. That was like 2 months ago as well. They’ve got enough worries with angry farmers already without adding to it. Facepalm';

'Thread is autistic anyway. Everything is either a conspiracy theory or deflect blame onto someone/thing else. Urbanism is a left wing ideology and the states/countries that try to implement it all have the same horrendous crime rates and high taxes.

P.S. cars used to be cheap to run. It’s urbanists and net zero shills who’ve made them less affordable.

Just to rattle your cages even more, #Trump2024 =)';

'>>1994169
You're a moron but I appreciate what you're doing which is showing why the cancerous "urban planning" discussion doesn't belong here and should be sent to /pol/ where it belongs';

'>>1994106
That would negate the purpose of buying something fresh from the bakery. Sure you aren't underaged? You can't seem to tell the difference between a perishable and non-perishable good.';

'>>1994109
We live in a society. If you want the benefits, your taxes will continue to fund infrastructure for the good of everyone. If you don't like that, kys.';

'>>1994172
Bakeries sell nothing but carb heavy foods that make you fat. Carnivorous diet is where it’s at but you guys moan at us for eating steaks cause muh climate change. You keep changing the subject to deflect blame. Laughable';

'>>1994171
You’re right it is cancerous and you’re very welcome to disagree with me and all the other “car brains” as we are so often mockingly called. Unfortunately because urbanism demands heavy bias towards public transport they always swarm the transport boards & sometimes pop up in the auto boards to start arguments with car enthusiasts (especially truck owners).

I thought this board was supposed to be about technological advancements and ways to improve things or discuss new ideas rather than cry about the fact the USA isn’t the Netherlands. The admins may as well make a NJB board for them at this point';

'>>1994192
So you're basically just admitting you're not even here to discuss transportation, you just want to shit up the board because someone hurt your fee fees on /o/. You and the urbanist yimby /r/fuckcars crowd are basically fraternal twins at this point, it's a shame you can't be confined to /d/ where you can have twincest together jerking each other off over your irrelevant /pol/ garbage';

'>>1994197
I read a lot more than I post, so make of that what you will. However as has been noted by other people in the past they do like to pop up at every little chance to complain about how walking is impossible and we should aim to emulate the Dutch. It doesn’t matter if it’s someone making a post about rising gas prices or congestion or the trains being broken down, you’ll see them pop up and somehow blame it on traditional American urban planning and the use of private cars and motorcycles.

All that said, it was a thread started about commute times, clearly aimed at the public transport vs private cars debate. urbanists and drivers alike were bound to jump in.';

'>>1994174
We live in a society, if you want benefits, stop being a worthless leech that is a net negative on it even without all the money you siphon into your pointless life.';

'>>1994227
Oh, and if you don't like that you belong in the incinerator.';

'>>1993980
>Anon proves something on a graph without a labeled y-axis
Discarded

>Anon boasts about paying rent
Sorry. I meant real housing';

'>>1987587
Why are westoids like this?';

'>>1994449
There's a lot of uninhabited land in the southwest, so it is impossible to build a decent rail link between NYC and Boston because someone in that uninhabited wasteland might get butthurt. But don't worry elon levy showed that if you just don't build any stops and weld all the doors shut then nobody on board the train can be inconvenienced by handicaps or browns';

'America has objectively the most car deaths in the world.';

'Haven't read everything here. I'll comment on OP's commute time comparison. In the Netherlands and my guess is also for a lot of other Euro countries. Commute time is this "low" because of public transport. If we'd cancel our public transport we wouldn't get lower commute times. Quite the contrary.

American cities are built very grid-like. Which is very specious and allows for multiple lane roads within cities. We do not have that space. Inner city travel is always going to be quicker using public transport here in NL.

Another problem over here is our current housing crisis. Much of that has to do with poor policies. But that's another debate. Amsterdam has over 50% social housing. Anyone with a regular job cannot afford to live in the city. Most people who work in Amsterdam therefore do not live in Amsterdam. Trains during rush hour are completely overloaded. Despite our public transport being the most expensive in Europe by far. Parking in Amsterdam is equally the most expensive in the country. Using a car for many is simply not an option when going to work. Anyways, I hope that explains why our commute times are as high as they are.

I actually didn't know American commute times were this low. When I think of American commuting i immediately think of the dreaded traffic jams in LA. I guess that's just a public image thing.';

'>>1994465
The entertainment industry is based in LA and NYC where commuting is insanity except for a small number of super rich people who can just walk or take a helicopter';

'>>1994467
>Commuting is increasingly insane the more your state is dominated by road closing and illegal immigrant welcoming Democrat bureaucrats.

Fixed';

'>>1994449
>not pictured';

'>>1994594
Chris Christie, a republican, is the one who likes to close roads at random for political reasons.';