People Hate the Idea of Car-Free Cities—Until They Live in One - eviltoast
  • Hello1000 [comrade/them, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    If you urgently need to quickly take someone close to you somewhere far away, is that also a problem with skills? Especially if you need to take two people at once to the hospital or, for example, to a nightclub or to the forest outside the city for fishing and barbecue or somewhere else.

    • ped_xing [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Nobody’s proposing banning ambulances. You should be able to take the metro to the club. You should also be able to take it outside of the city and you can figure out the remainder of your journey from there. Reclaiming land from cars would also allow more space within cities for parks and such and decrease the need to get out of the city to escape dickheads leaning on their horns.

      • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        How would ambulances work in a car free city? They seem kind of bulky for a city built for bikes. Unless we’re assuming those cities will still have huge roads to drive on?

        • ped_xing [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          8 months ago

          The roads are huge because of multiple lanes in two directions with street parking on the side. An ambulance only needs one lane.

          • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            Probably need two in case multiple emergency vehicles need to be on the scene. Imagine a bombing - you need ambulances, fire trucks, police, etc. That’s easy with huge car-based infrastructure but a bike-city seems complicated.

            Unless you just build huge roads everywhere despite the lack of cars, which would be sad.

    • ProfessorOwl_PhD [any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      if you need to take two people at once to the hospital

      ambulance

      to a nightclub or to the forest outside the city for fishing and barbecue or somewhere else.

      shut up, those aren’t remotely urgent. Get on your bike.

        • ProfessorOwl_PhD [any]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          8 months ago

          What if the wheels fell off every single car in the world at the same time? I can come up with ridiculous hypotheticals too.
          What about all the ambulances that no longer have to pick up to traffic collision victims? What about the ambulances being able to transport people faster due to the roads being clear of traffic? It’s not just a ridiculous hypothetical, it’s one that’s much more likely to happen with cars around.

    • CascadeOfLight [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      8 months ago

      If you need to go to the hospital, you can call an ambulance that will be able to quickly and easily reach you due to there not being any car traffic. (The utterly ludicrous cost of US healthcare is its own separate problem)

      Going to the countryside? Take a bus to the outskirts, or even out into the country itself, and cycle to a particular spot. Going to or from a club? Take the metro, take the bus, maybe even (depending no the strictness of ‘no cars’) a taxi, which you can afford on special occasions with the literally tens of thousands of dollars you’ll have saved by not needing to buy, insure, repair and fuel a car.

      You have to also understand that for a car-free society to even be on the table, a number of other social changes will have to have been made too. So just arguing that going without cars is impossible due to the limitations of the car-centric society that currently exists is just circular reasoning. There SHOULD be ways to do the things you’ve listed without using a car, and the reason there aren’t is BECAUSE of cars.