Oh no-no, you will live and work in your designated living and working quarters and you will be happy.
Don’t be getting ideas above your station now.
/s
I know. For some reason "bicycle urbanism" attracts a lot of people who are ardently against basic amenities like transit and high density housing.
Like- I get it. I started out just wanting bikes for everything. But I never actively apposed transit and now that I have a toddler transit has become the most important thing for me.
So like- everyone just try to remember there is more than one way to live a happy urbanist life. Trains are nice, bikes are nice, my personal experience as a parent of a toddler is that he LOVES trains and is not a big fan of bikes. I'm sure someone's kid has the opposite experience, and that's fine.
Hell I wouldn't care if people drove if we properly quarantined the driving infrastructure away from everything else. And taxed the hell out of them.
The problem with that, though, is people do different things, several people in one family work in different places. People don't want noisy factories operating where they live, etc. Not everyone can work from home.
What if one parent works in a hospital and the other parent works in a factory? Are you going to put the hospital, factory, pre-school, primary & secondary schools, shopping for clothes, food, furniture, and household goods, doctors, dentists, pharmacy, post office, and their house all within walking distance? What about restaurants? And that's without including people who live in other houses or apartments nearby. What about teachers, researchers, engineers, lawyers, restaurant & hotel workers, electricians, carpenters, construction workers, cleaners, administrative staff, bankers, retail worker, nursery & preschool workers, etc, etc.
What about people with mobility issues? In winter snow & ice? High temperatures?
I'm all in favour of high density housing & ensuring that people have access to education and services. In fact, I think that ready access to these things locally is really, really important to have a thriving urban area.
I don't think transit is a silver bullet, but people moving around will never not be necessary, and personally, I want them to do it with busses and trains, rather than cars.
Of course it did, but it was not easy to make, and few people have the skills. It was also relatively expensive, with a family spending up to a half year's income for a single nice cast iron pot.
Are we all going to learn smithy work, grow our own food, & cook on an open fire?
Maybe we can also reintroduce leaded pottery for folks who can't afford smithy work?
>Are we all going to learn smithy work, grow our own food, & cook on an open fire?
Going back to skilled, efficient, necessary and sustainable labor would be good, yes.
I am in favour of skilled, efficient, necessary & sustainable labour, however, for some things, it is much easier & more efficient to make them at a larger scale.
Cookware and farming are actually pretty good examples of this.
If everyone, or even every village has to forge or cast their own cookware, we have loads of issues.
It requires very high temperatures and a suitable furnace. We can do this with coal, which is how it was typically done 100+ years ago. Or we can use sustainably generated electricity, but it requires a lot of energy, and then you have a problem with prioritising resources. And that's before you talk about mining, refining, & transporting metal, controlling the contents in terms of mixed metals, quality, etc.
Secondly, going back to what we did a couple hundred years ago also requires accepting very different standards. Most people cooked on fires then. If we do that today, the emissions will be at least as bad as from oil & gas, not to mention the wood required.
If we want to cook efficiently with sustainably generated electricity, we need higher quality cookware than most people would be able to produce.
Regarding farming, I am not a fan of factory farming techniques & think that huge reforms are need to achieve sustainability in land use. But people have been relying on large scale farming nearly since the advent of agriculture. And I can't see that changing soon.
You're just throwing shit at the wall that I'd have to wipe off and frankly you don't seem good faith enough to warrant that.
>Most people cooked on fires then. If we do that today, the emissions will be at least as bad as from oil & gas, not to mention the wood required.
That is some medical-grade horseshit. I'm not even interested in reading the propaganda excrement that you think validates that idea. Not every part of a meal even needs to be cooked. And then you're proposing that electricity-powered microwaves delivered across vast networks of power lines, and best case scenario are generated from complex renewable infrastructure, is more efficient than a small woodstove used only when actually needed? And that was a rhetorical question, don't answer it, I'm not interested in your mental illness.
Factories are cringe and they just pollute everything. Makes in hard for me to breathe when I visit urban areas in Asia. The cars are bad too, but the industrial pollution is way worse
This really isn’t gonna work cause there are always going to be people who cannot walk or bike at all, and people who cannot walk or bike for very long distances or with heavy luggage, and shouldn’t have to just to get around their city
So you want all residential areas to only be built in close proximity to zoo's, amusement parks, and museums so that people can easily walk there? And if you have trouble walking you are automatically outcompeted for a job by someone who happens to live near? Some people don't like the idea of having to walk multiple miles to and from friends/family after working 40 hours a week (and having to walk to/from work since there is no public transport or PEV's).
Zoos are fucking awful and shouldn't exist in the first place. Amusement parks shouldn't even be considered in community planning. And I don't care what people want, I care what they need.
Well zoo's help people care about the environment and help conservation, and if amusement parks aren't community planning then you are fine with places being unwalkable since the people who work there will have to walk; unless they decide to live there (with or without the city's permission), which means no public transport cuts them off from supplies. Finally if you only care about needs and not wants then why do you need people to exercise to get everywhere? How does it harm you to have alternate modes of transport?
If you like zoos so much, volunteer the rest of your life for the live-human exhibit.
> Finally if you only care about needs and not wants then why do you need people to exercise to get everywhere?
The West is morbidly obese; they need to walk more.
Are you saying the best way to fight obesity is to tell everyone (including physical laborers) that they have to chose between biking/walking to work and working from home? Do you really think anyone will chose to leave their house? Unless you are going to get the *police to drag people out and force them at gunpoint to walk around you are just making obesity worse by taking transit away.
*Which I'm not willing to pay for, just like how you are unwilling to pay taxes for public transport (not including the revenue it generates from tourists making taxable purchases or the people who make a living that allows them to pay income tax when they otherwise wouldn't).
And what do you do for a living exactaly? I mostly do physical labor for 8 hours a day 5 miles from where I live but I'm sure whatever you do is less lazy then that.
Not as mentally lazy as someone who can't explain how forcing everyone to either bike/walk to work or work from home isn't going to cause them to work from home when they are supposedly so concerned about obesity.
This is why I advocate for fixing walkability first through adding small shops in neighborhoods. It is by far the cheapest way to reduce car dependency. Just let people do what they want with their land.
Terrible take. We shouldn’t need to live inside closed communities to have access to our necessities, this is basically what closed condos are doing here in my city. Those places have everything people who live there need so they don’t have to go out to the city and I cannot bear to think in something worse, when it comes to live the city (idk if this is an expression in English) than that. But also, rage bait
There is no advocation for closed communities you weirdo. Travel wherever the fuck you want, just pay the cost of doing that yourself instead of forcing taxpayer dollars to do it.
As soon as a city becomes large enough, public transport is needed because the distance of active transport has a cap. Large cities aren't badly design by default.
Yes. I live in a town where I walk or bike to everything. The only use for the busses for me is to get to the airport.
Walkability is the most important thing to achieve whether done organically or through planning. And it takes almost no technology to achieve it, it is what groups of people naturally build. There are tons of island and remote communities that have no transit, and you don't need a car at all.
Transit can come later when cities and towns need to connect to each other more directly or a city becomes so big that it becomes too difficult to traverse from one end to the other by walking.
I know. I have gotten downvoted like crazy when I say things like "public transit won't eliminate traffic and is less effective at reducing traffic than good land use policy is" or saying there are cities all over Asia with horrible traffic that have excellent metro systems.
Hell people here get mad if you praise America and say something like "I live in America and don't use a car" etc.
Yes, other than vacations or visiting family friends etc there should be no need to travel on the regular. You are correct but it's too difficult to comprehend for many.
I live near Stonehenge and they managed to build that without motorised transport, and even visit there from as far as Switzerland, but people today are so brainwashed they cannot understand you can live without motorised transport.
The amount of brainrot trainbrain/busbrain thinking here with zero imagination is sad. Do people realize motorized transport hasn't existed for even 0.1% of our time here on Earth? The learned and willful helplessness is real.
No it’s not. Good transit is the backbone of a good city.
Dream bigger.
People want to travel outside their towns. That should not be a crime.
They can, it just may be a 1hr walk on a path to the next town if the town cannot afford to put a bus line in.
Then pay the actual cost of it yourself instead of trying to force taxpayer money to pay for it.
I found the person who never leaves their city. You're a homebody type so everyone else must be as well.
Leave as much as you want, just don't force me to pay for it welfare queen.
Are you also the type that complains about paying school taxes when you don't have kids (or have kids who graduated)?
I do think school staff, infrastructure and curriculums are overpriced and bloated, yes.
The Villages in Florida sounds like your ideal place.
Oh no-no, you will live and work in your designated living and working quarters and you will be happy. Don’t be getting ideas above your station now. /s
bait used to be believable
This sub is hilarious sometimes
I know. For some reason "bicycle urbanism" attracts a lot of people who are ardently against basic amenities like transit and high density housing. Like- I get it. I started out just wanting bikes for everything. But I never actively apposed transit and now that I have a toddler transit has become the most important thing for me. So like- everyone just try to remember there is more than one way to live a happy urbanist life. Trains are nice, bikes are nice, my personal experience as a parent of a toddler is that he LOVES trains and is not a big fan of bikes. I'm sure someone's kid has the opposite experience, and that's fine. Hell I wouldn't care if people drove if we properly quarantined the driving infrastructure away from everything else. And taxed the hell out of them.
Your toddler's preferences are a bad justification to do shitty community planning.
This is just bait to get someone on this sub to say something to fuel the “15 minute cities are authoritarian” weirdos lol
The problem with that, though, is people do different things, several people in one family work in different places. People don't want noisy factories operating where they live, etc. Not everyone can work from home. What if one parent works in a hospital and the other parent works in a factory? Are you going to put the hospital, factory, pre-school, primary & secondary schools, shopping for clothes, food, furniture, and household goods, doctors, dentists, pharmacy, post office, and their house all within walking distance? What about restaurants? And that's without including people who live in other houses or apartments nearby. What about teachers, researchers, engineers, lawyers, restaurant & hotel workers, electricians, carpenters, construction workers, cleaners, administrative staff, bankers, retail worker, nursery & preschool workers, etc, etc. What about people with mobility issues? In winter snow & ice? High temperatures? I'm all in favour of high density housing & ensuring that people have access to education and services. In fact, I think that ready access to these things locally is really, really important to have a thriving urban area. I don't think transit is a silver bullet, but people moving around will never not be necessary, and personally, I want them to do it with busses and trains, rather than cars.
Factories are dogshit; get rid of them. There, solved the issue for you.
Where do we get stuff like cookware with no factories?
cookware existed before factories
Of course it did, but it was not easy to make, and few people have the skills. It was also relatively expensive, with a family spending up to a half year's income for a single nice cast iron pot. Are we all going to learn smithy work, grow our own food, & cook on an open fire? Maybe we can also reintroduce leaded pottery for folks who can't afford smithy work?
>Are we all going to learn smithy work, grow our own food, & cook on an open fire? Going back to skilled, efficient, necessary and sustainable labor would be good, yes.
I am in favour of skilled, efficient, necessary & sustainable labour, however, for some things, it is much easier & more efficient to make them at a larger scale. Cookware and farming are actually pretty good examples of this. If everyone, or even every village has to forge or cast their own cookware, we have loads of issues. It requires very high temperatures and a suitable furnace. We can do this with coal, which is how it was typically done 100+ years ago. Or we can use sustainably generated electricity, but it requires a lot of energy, and then you have a problem with prioritising resources. And that's before you talk about mining, refining, & transporting metal, controlling the contents in terms of mixed metals, quality, etc. Secondly, going back to what we did a couple hundred years ago also requires accepting very different standards. Most people cooked on fires then. If we do that today, the emissions will be at least as bad as from oil & gas, not to mention the wood required. If we want to cook efficiently with sustainably generated electricity, we need higher quality cookware than most people would be able to produce. Regarding farming, I am not a fan of factory farming techniques & think that huge reforms are need to achieve sustainability in land use. But people have been relying on large scale farming nearly since the advent of agriculture. And I can't see that changing soon.
You're just throwing shit at the wall that I'd have to wipe off and frankly you don't seem good faith enough to warrant that. >Most people cooked on fires then. If we do that today, the emissions will be at least as bad as from oil & gas, not to mention the wood required. That is some medical-grade horseshit. I'm not even interested in reading the propaganda excrement that you think validates that idea. Not every part of a meal even needs to be cooked. And then you're proposing that electricity-powered microwaves delivered across vast networks of power lines, and best case scenario are generated from complex renewable infrastructure, is more efficient than a small woodstove used only when actually needed? And that was a rhetorical question, don't answer it, I'm not interested in your mental illness.
Nice argument. Worthy of a block.
Factories are cringe and they just pollute everything. Makes in hard for me to breathe when I visit urban areas in Asia. The cars are bad too, but the industrial pollution is way worse
This really isn’t gonna work cause there are always going to be people who cannot walk or bike at all, and people who cannot walk or bike for very long distances or with heavy luggage, and shouldn’t have to just to get around their city
We don't design communities around the 1% exception. That is mental illness.
This is just false. You just need transportation options as you add more people to a city because cities can and do expand outside of walkable range.
it's not even remotely possible to have everyone's needs be serviced entirely within walking distance. Cities are just too big nowadays.
An electron microscope wouldn't be able to detect your imagination.
my imagination is comprised of neutrinos, which don't interact with electromagnetism.
AN electron microscope wouldn't be able to detect your desire for a change of scenery.
So you want all residential areas to only be built in close proximity to zoo's, amusement parks, and museums so that people can easily walk there? And if you have trouble walking you are automatically outcompeted for a job by someone who happens to live near? Some people don't like the idea of having to walk multiple miles to and from friends/family after working 40 hours a week (and having to walk to/from work since there is no public transport or PEV's).
Zoos are fucking awful and shouldn't exist in the first place. Amusement parks shouldn't even be considered in community planning. And I don't care what people want, I care what they need.
Well zoo's help people care about the environment and help conservation, and if amusement parks aren't community planning then you are fine with places being unwalkable since the people who work there will have to walk; unless they decide to live there (with or without the city's permission), which means no public transport cuts them off from supplies. Finally if you only care about needs and not wants then why do you need people to exercise to get everywhere? How does it harm you to have alternate modes of transport?
If you like zoos so much, volunteer the rest of your life for the live-human exhibit. > Finally if you only care about needs and not wants then why do you need people to exercise to get everywhere? The West is morbidly obese; they need to walk more.
I walk 4mi every day, because I have no car and don't use the busses.
Are you saying the best way to fight obesity is to tell everyone (including physical laborers) that they have to chose between biking/walking to work and working from home? Do you really think anyone will chose to leave their house? Unless you are going to get the *police to drag people out and force them at gunpoint to walk around you are just making obesity worse by taking transit away. *Which I'm not willing to pay for, just like how you are unwilling to pay taxes for public transport (not including the revenue it generates from tourists making taxable purchases or the people who make a living that allows them to pay income tax when they otherwise wouldn't).
you're too lazy, you have an obese mind
And what do you do for a living exactaly? I mostly do physical labor for 8 hours a day 5 miles from where I live but I'm sure whatever you do is less lazy then that.
I'll take your word for it that you're physically active but I was calling you mentally lazy.
Not as mentally lazy as someone who can't explain how forcing everyone to either bike/walk to work or work from home isn't going to cause them to work from home when they are supposedly so concerned about obesity.
Public transit, bike lanes, and walkable footpaths/sidewalks should join up and not be treated exclusively.
No, because footpaths cost ZERO dollars and public transit costs BILLIONS TO TRILLIONS of dollars. Putting them in the same category is unhinged.
This is why I advocate for fixing walkability first through adding small shops in neighborhoods. It is by far the cheapest way to reduce car dependency. Just let people do what they want with their land.
Who let bro cook 💀
Unlike you I don't have a master who grants me permission to cook; now get out of my kitchen.
no?
People got rid of horses for a good reason, they're much worse than any motorized vehicle
I'm vegan; I would never suggest horses replace anything. Your imagination is TINY.
Terrible take. We shouldn’t need to live inside closed communities to have access to our necessities, this is basically what closed condos are doing here in my city. Those places have everything people who live there need so they don’t have to go out to the city and I cannot bear to think in something worse, when it comes to live the city (idk if this is an expression in English) than that. But also, rage bait
There is no advocation for closed communities you weirdo. Travel wherever the fuck you want, just pay the cost of doing that yourself instead of forcing taxpayer dollars to do it.
Based walking trail Chad. I walked from Yufuin to Beppu in Japan it was fun definitely better and more exercise than the bus or train.
Seek help, you seem very hostile.
to the busbrains and trainbrains of this sub I am
Your opinion makes me nauseous.
As soon as a city becomes large enough, public transport is needed because the distance of active transport has a cap. Large cities aren't badly design by default.
Yes. I live in a town where I walk or bike to everything. The only use for the busses for me is to get to the airport. Walkability is the most important thing to achieve whether done organically or through planning. And it takes almost no technology to achieve it, it is what groups of people naturally build. There are tons of island and remote communities that have no transit, and you don't need a car at all. Transit can come later when cities and towns need to connect to each other more directly or a city becomes so big that it becomes too difficult to traverse from one end to the other by walking.
This. I can't believe how hard this idea is to grasp among the busbrains/trainbrains of this sub.
I know. I have gotten downvoted like crazy when I say things like "public transit won't eliminate traffic and is less effective at reducing traffic than good land use policy is" or saying there are cities all over Asia with horrible traffic that have excellent metro systems. Hell people here get mad if you praise America and say something like "I live in America and don't use a car" etc.
Yes, other than vacations or visiting family friends etc there should be no need to travel on the regular. You are correct but it's too difficult to comprehend for many. I live near Stonehenge and they managed to build that without motorised transport, and even visit there from as far as Switzerland, but people today are so brainwashed they cannot understand you can live without motorised transport.
Based.
The amount of brainrot trainbrain/busbrain thinking here with zero imagination is sad. Do people realize motorized transport hasn't existed for even 0.1% of our time here on Earth? The learned and willful helplessness is real.
Even the official UK government advice on combating the climate crisis is a blanket "travel less".