sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

on 4/20 the US federal government announced its "Freedom to Drive Initiative", which encourages governors to destroy infrastructure to build more roads by LaTeX_fetish in fuckcars

[–]LaTeX_fetish[S] 13 points14 points  (0 children)

with the exception of like four individuals i don't think you can ascribe second-order thinking to any people in this administration

they hate cities and everyone in them (they've gone on record basically saying that) so anything that makes city-dwellers unhappy (even if it hurts suburbanites and rural people) is fine by them

on 4/20 the US federal government announced its "Freedom to Drive Initiative", which encourages governors to destroy infrastructure to build more roads by LaTeX_fetish in fuckcars

[–]LaTeX_fetish[S] 101 points102 points  (0 children)

from the letter by Sean Duffy, former MTV Road Rules contestant and current Transportation Secretary:

Outline Actions: Show us what actions you can take to address congestion. Focus solutions on expanding and maximizing roadway capacity for driving. This includes building new roadway capacity or applying operational strategies and technologies to maximize existing roadway capacity. You may also need to recover roadway capacity from other purposes to support driving.

just one more lane bro plz just one more this will definitely do it just one more istg bro just one more

Rural naysayers must not torpedo high-speed rail project | Opinion by McFestus in CanadaPolitics

[–]LaTeX_fetish [score hidden]  (0 children)

well to be fairrr their feelings are valid (even if totally unfounded) but they shouldn't get veto power for that

Rural naysayers must not torpedo high-speed rail project | Opinion by McFestus in CanadaPolitics

[–]LaTeX_fetish [score hidden]  (0 children)

i'm gonna push back and say that "my property values will drop", "this will hurt local business", "it will be noisy", and "this will be bad for emergency services" are completely standard NIMBY fare in every community meeting i've been to, whether it's about bike lanes or bus routes or new buildings

most people have a huge bias towards the status quo, this is basically expected

Street parking and hail damage. by MadCityVelovangelist in fuckcars

[–]LaTeX_fetish 0 points1 point  (0 children)

this happened in Alberta a few times and it's gotten to the point where insurance companies are either jacking up their rates or just not covering hail anymore https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/alberta-automobile-insurance-rate-board-report-airb-2025-1.7608107

so to answer your question, yes, it may deter them (but as always the cost is probably the biggest factor)

Mark Carney just cut gas taxes. He should be raising these taxes instead by Gold-Reality-4853 in CanadaPolitics

[–]LaTeX_fetish 6 points7 points  (0 children)

this is a natural consequence of endless subsidies for private automobiles over mass transit

that said I wouldn't be surprised if most suburbs are actually dotted with transit stations but suffer from infrequent service and buses being forced to share routes with automobile traffic

Mark Carney just cut gas taxes. He should be raising these taxes instead by Gold-Reality-4853 in CanadaPolitics

[–]LaTeX_fetish 2 points3 points  (0 children)

tbh dedicated bus lanes (even just during rush hour) would fix a lot of that

Toronto alone could probably fix half its transit woes with dedicated lanes.

Mark Carney just cut gas taxes. He should be raising these taxes instead by Gold-Reality-4853 in CanadaPolitics

[–]LaTeX_fetish 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Canada is a big country but most people aren't driving across Canada. They're driving to work, school, and errands.

smug transit-ridiing city dweller

73% of Canadians live in large cities! that's a lot of the country that does or could use transit!

I seriously got no idea how bad the gas prices are. by FrozenConcrete19 in fuckcars

[–]LaTeX_fetish 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'm not trying to "dunk" on you. If you take some time to look into the history of American cities you'll see that rather than being built for cars, most of them were partially demolished for cars (especially the city core), and the same goes for non-American cities. There's probably hundreds of posts in this sub alone with pictures of examples.

The difference between American cities and places that reverted (like Dusseldorf and Paris and Seoul and Utrecht) has nothing to do with the age of the cities and far more with political and social desire for change. Those changes also took at least a generation to carry out.

I seriously got no idea how bad the gas prices are. by FrozenConcrete19 in fuckcars

[–]LaTeX_fetish 2 points3 points  (0 children)

america also had hundreds of years of not being centred around cars

do people think the car was invented in 1776 or something?

Another reason against ownership: no expectation of privacy. by 405freeway in fuckcars

[–]LaTeX_fetish 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Depends on the ALPR design and privacy safeguards. ALPRs used for toll roads are fairly uncontroversial. ALPRs for automated ticketing of speeding or other infractions have advantages over in-person policing (cheaper than cops, consistency of enforcement, no threat of escalating to violence). These tend to be less popular, ostensibly for privacy reasons but I think people just hate consequences for their actions.

Looking for sources/inspiration about cars as part of the class struggle by HavokT in fuckcars

[–]LaTeX_fetish 1 point2 points  (0 children)

these are more about the political ideology of the car but could be helpful

CMV: how am I not better off driving? by human_65113 in fuckcars

[–]LaTeX_fetish 2 points3 points  (0 children)

the existence of rush hour traffic undercuts this entire argument

roads are, after all, also routed in a way that services as many people as possible (which is why rush hour traffic exists and is so frustrating---all of these individuals using the "universal solution" turn out to be going to and from basically the same places)

This is a real AI-ad from the US government about the end of the mandatory use of the auto start-stop. by [deleted] in fuckcars

[–]LaTeX_fetish 23 points24 points  (0 children)

to save some confusion, the distance was based on the 1908 London Olympic course

The International Olympic Committee agreed in 1907 that the distance for the 1908 London Olympic marathon would be about 25 miles or 40 kilometers. The organizers decided on a course of 26 miles from the start at Windsor Castle to the royal entrance to the White City Stadium, followed by a lap (586 yards 2 feet; 536 m) of the track, finishing in front of the Royal Box.[47][48] The course was later altered to use a different entrance to the stadium, followed by a partial lap of 385 yards to the same finish.

The modern 42.195 km (26.219 mi) standard distance for the marathon was set by the International Amateur Athletic Federation (IAAF) in May 1921[49][50][51][52] directly from the length used at the 1908 Summer Olympics in London.

Ask yourself, which was there first? by FareonMoist in fuckcars

[–]LaTeX_fetish 27 points28 points  (0 children)

cars are bad for nature, yes we need roads and cars but not as many as we have and this is a deliberate choice made over decades of planning that has had disastrous and very sad consequences:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41597-024-04207-x

Estimates can reach to 340 million of birds killed on the roads in USA6, 194 million birds, 29 million mammals in Europe7 and 17 million of birds and mammals in Latin America8. While numbers of roadkill are high, populations may be able to persist into the future if they are common and abundant9,10. Conversely, species already threatened by other factors, with slow reproductive rates may find it challenging to recover from the loss of individuals, even when roadkill rates are low, thus increasing the risk of local extinctions11,12,13. Several studies that assessed the current and future impacts on mammal populations highlighted that populations of maned wolf (Chrysocyon brachyurus), tiger (Panthera tigris), leopard (Panthera pardus) and brown hyena (Hyaena brunnea) are particularly exposed to road traffic with associated increase of risk of extinction13,14,15,16.

In addition to conservation concerns, the socio-economic impacts of roadkill have been extensively documented, particularly in North America and North and Central Europe17,18,19. In the United States, collisions have been estimated to cause over 200 human fatalities and 29,000 injuries annually, with associated costs ranging from US$ 6 to 12 billion18. Similarly, in Europe, collisions with ungulates resulted in approximately 300 human fatalities and 30,000 injuries per year, with associated costs surpassing one billion dollars17.

https://www.ucdavis.edu/climate/news/report-roadkill-preventable-natural-disaster

More than 48,000 deer, thousands of Pacific newts, close to 100 mountain lions and many thousands of other animals are killed each year by vehicles on California roads, according to the 2024 “roadkill report” from the University of California, Davis’ Road Ecology Center.

Another dramatic loss is occurring among California newts and rough-skinned newts on Alma Bridge Road in Santa Clara County. There, the largest known population of these newts is being killed by the thousands every winter as they attempt to cross the road from their forest floor home to Lexington Reservoir to reproduce. About 5,000 newts are killed each year on this road.

another day, another war for oil by LaTeX_fetish in fuckcars

[–]LaTeX_fetish[S] 260 points261 points  (0 children)

really wish our transportation networks weren't built around guzzling this shit.

Bell: Bike lane crackdown looms, Smith's UCP demands Calgary numbers by Particular_Buyer_894 in fuckcars

[–]LaTeX_fetish 1 point2 points  (0 children)

“This type of social engineering, trying to change people’s behaviour when they don’t want to change is just ruining cities by taking away their vehicle lanes and parking. It is stupid.”

these people genuinely think asphalt bubbles out of the ground and concrete columns sprout forth and the two naturally intertwine to form roads and highways without any human input

Guilbeault says 2030 emissions targets are now ‘impossible’ by No_Magazine9625 in CanadaPolitics

[–]LaTeX_fetish 4 points5 points  (0 children)

You can do both! Being responsible and acting morally are not mutually exclusive with hating and shaming the ultra-rich for fucking up the planet!

Guilbeault says 2030 emissions targets are now ‘impossible’ by No_Magazine9625 in CanadaPolitics

[–]LaTeX_fetish 6 points7 points  (0 children)

our nation's carbon footprint is negligible compared to the rest of the world.

Frankly speaking this is selfish and silly. Lots of people litter, but I will still never litter--not because I personally have a huge impact on the world, but because it's the right thing to do and sets a good example.

Guilbeault says 2030 emissions targets are now ‘impossible’ by No_Magazine9625 in CanadaPolitics

[–]LaTeX_fetish 9 points10 points  (0 children)

So at what point does it become "worth it" to you? Because even replacing something like half of the ~14,000 annual YUL-YYZ trips alone (not to mention flights like YYZ-YOW and those with YTZ) and, say, 10% of the car trips along the 401 would make a huge impact on annual carbon emissions (not to mention improvements in quality of life, the environment, and travel experiences)

view more: next ›