The person on the left is carrying bags, the one in orange is a delivery driver and a couple of people are wearing backpacks. Aside from car brained, Damaris is also blind.
Who made up that rule lol
But I mean, it doesn’t matter if you can’t carry a single 2x4x24ft lumber from home Depot to your house or from the lumber hard to home Depot. We got the main roads for that so big trucks can do that. Just commuting yourself from your house to work and back is enough.
In Amsterdam I got to see lots of little human powered delivery vans though. Mostly DHL. It was awesome to see. So it is doable in flat locations for sure.
I’d gladly remove every car from the roads that is not carrying a sofa, table or desk.
They already move an entire sofa, audiovisual center and HVAC.
I’m even willing to add “large amounts of water & a big ladder, or sick/injured people” to that list.
to be fair riding bikes around is pretty recreational too, i wish we had the infrastructure to ride pedal bikes around more safely over here.
Looks at literally the front bike in the picture…
Here in São Paulo, services and goods can only be hauled at night, so I guess the argument doesn’t stand in its legs if you think about it a bit.
Skill issue.
The Dutch absolutely use bikes to carry goods.
I’ve seen people with TVs on their bike. I’ve seen them with multiple crates of beer on the handlebars (kingsnight).
I saw three people on one (regular) bike.
Also these:
Yup and if we really NEED to transport big things, sure, we might need a van. But that’s probably a once every once every year thing max.
You can stack at least 3 crates on the back of the bike if you have a bag carrier, 2 otherwise. Then 1 or 2 on the bar between your legs, and 1 on the steering bar, or 2 if you also have a bag carrier there.
Ebike recommended if they’re full, but it’s way doable when bringing them back to the store.
I’m sure that works well where it’s flat. Try that in a city with tons of hills and you’re gonna have a much harder time.
Ebikes can take a lot of the pain out of that. They’re very powerful now.
And most cities are very flat.
I live in the very non flat south East of the Netherlands. We still do everything on bike. Groceries, mail, like 4 children while carrying groceries and being on the phone.
These morons are insufferable because they don’t believe anything exists outside the frame of the photo. they have worse object permanence to babies
Yeah. That building is probably an office block.
And those guys usually have loading/unloading areas in the back (if not an actual car park).
The right building is a clothing store. There are indeed often back entrances for smaller vans for supplies
I think that’s slightly critical of Damaris.
They are asking a question regarding something they do not understand.
It is a true statement that roads are used to transport goods and services.
They then simply ask who in the video is carrying goods and products into stores/homes, and how workers move goods from ports to the stores.
They don’t know how a system like this works when it comes to, for example, stocking a grocery store, because they have not worked or lived in a place with infrastructure like this.
It’s just ad hominem and poor practice to call someone blind when they aren’t familiar with something, particularly when they seem interested in how it works, and works contrary to convincing people of the cause.
If someone has worked with punch cards to program a computer all their life, and someone showed them software written the python programming language and they said:
“But the punch card is so that the computer can read in bytes to know what to do, in this text I don’t see any bytes, there’s nothing telling the computer if this is little endian or big endian, it all looks like a book. How does the text tell the computer what to do?”
Then my response would NOT be “Well the list comprehension here is yielding a range of numbers which are sent to the print function, and this class is acting as a signal handler. Aside from punch card brained, you’re also blind”.
My response would be a very happy opportunity to explain to them the benefits of a modern programming language versus punch cards, and how it works in comparison.
Unless this is a person known to be explicitly anti-bike and pro-car, it is bad to be this critical of them and works in no one’s favor.
I’m skeptical of all that - surely they understand that roads carry more than just goods and services. It’s such a basic part of society that you’d have to be from another planet to be confused about that and build a whole argument based on it.
It is a true statement that roads are used to transport goods and services.
They then simply ask who in the video is carrying goods and products into stores/homes, and how workers move goods from ports to the stores.
It’s a very simplistic and reductive view of roads, though, in response to a post that specifically mentions another function of roads, namely, facilitating people’s travels as individuals for their own purposes. It’s like you telling someone you like using lemmy because you’ve found communities you enjoy participating in and individuals you like talking to, and they go, “But the internet is for commerce, the buying and selling of goods! Who is selling and who is buying in these instances?”
Your example is overly charitable, in my opinion. Not everyone is being malicious with these sorts of questions, but the person is ignoring some pretty clear context explaining other uses of roads to go attach a strawman. At the very least, it seems like a bad faith argument.
i must consume!!!
Clearly they’re not bringing the goods, they’re bringing the services. That clown even said it himself. Refers to goods and services then only talks about the goods.
I’m all for way less cars on the road, but, what do all these people with some form of physical disability that limits their movement abilities? I rarely ever see this brought up in the debate, what form of independent travel can these people use in a carless society that won’t be impeded by their physical issues? Something that gives them the freedom to live their life and not rely on some form of ride sharing experience that takes their freedoms from them?
We can’t leave people behind for a quick solution.
-
None of this is about total 100% bans on cars, just making the option of not using a car nicer than using one. Even where car bans exist options still exist for delivery vehicles.
-
Public transit exists and is often better than driving depending on the disability.
-
In the current system we leave behind everyone that can’t afford to buy and maintain a car, which is a staggeringly large number already.
-
Mobility scooters, public transport, ect. Because of the overfocus on cars, acessibility is badly neglected and this needs to change.
What about the people that are unable drive a car because of physical or mental disabilities or age? Or the people that are allowed to drive but shouldn’t? There are vastly more of them than people who couldn’t ride a bike but can drive a car.
And yeah, unfortunately getting rid of cars completely is not going to happen, but cars will work so much better when the only people driving are those with no other alternative.
Fuck cars is about using our resources better to improve mobility for all.
it’s not like a lot of disability that would still allow them drive in the first place, and if they need someone else to get them around, other form factors still work just as well. Just making places walkable will still accomodate mobility devices better than roads for cars anyways.
People lived before cars, people will live without them.
Not if cars destroy the planet with us first.
Throughout history, most people have lived within an hour of work.
The biggest difficulty is retrofitting cities that have developed in the last century. Places that have been around for centuries were developed with walking in mind. Places that were developed around the automobile and climate contril are very difficult to convert.
The world has both quadrupled in population and urbanized over the past century as the car became the primary mode of transit in much of the world.
The only thing that makes transitioning even possible is that the landlord class would love to return to feudaliam.
It’s actually still doable, but requires some creative thinking to undo the damage done for half century. Train can carry people from suburb into the city, the last mile can be solved either by brt, tram, or by micromobility. Bus, tram, and bicycle need their own dedicated lane for this to work nicely. This won’t necessarily prevent people from driving but it will make driving not the only way to go to work.
Places that were developed around the automobile and climate contril are very difficult to convert.
Iirc Amsterdam is basically that, it used to be car-centric but the government take away that monopoly and give it back to bicycle and micro-mobile. Paris is another recent example on how bicycle usage is rising if given the proper safety infrastructure to ride around. It’s also a car-centric city before this.
It’s not that it’s hard, it’s just lack of political will and dinosaur way of thinking. It’s something that never crossed their mind.
Your examples are cities that are hundreds of years old and we’re absolutely initially designed around walking.
Cities design around walking is technically harder because the space limitation if they want to share it with car, but tend to have everything in close proximity, which in that case it’s far easier to just ban car from entering and cater the street to just pedestrian and bicycle/non-electric scooter. Cities design around car however, is easier to convert, as they tend to have wider road and more lane for car. They just need to take away one lane and give it to cyclist and that’s it. The only hard part is going through the legislation and carbrain.
Okay. Great. Downtown is now walkable.
How do people get downtown?
The thing about auto-centric design is that it covers transportation from end to end. Other methods require a much more complicated network of fist and last-mile solutions that aren’t easily adapted.
“Just use park and rides” doesn’t solve the problem. It just moves the traffic to the transit stations. And now it’s more expensive and slower than the existing system.
Houston put in a light rail system that costs 1% of every dollar spent in the city, costs a ton to ride, adds 45 minutes to a trip downtown, and drastically increases the odds of your car getting broken into at the park-and-ride. So yeah - there’s pushback against expanding it.
@chiliedogg @Annoyed_Crabby @fuck_cars
I’d bet that a lot of that inefficiency was built in as a precondition of its passage. That’s how it works in red states. Let blue islands implement “woke” policies, but only in ways that kneecap them from the beginning, so you can campaign against their “failure” in a few years.Edited for clarity.
#texas #publictransit #tx #houston #waroncars #fuckcarsThere’s also inherrent difficulty when the city is so spread out (The Grand Parkway outer loop has a 60-mile diameter, compared to Paris’s 15), and walking outside is a health hazard 3-4 months out of the year.
It just moves the traffic to the transit stations
The first step and the mindset is already wrong, focusing on moving traffic instead of removing traffic. So yeah, of course it wouldn’t work. Houston failed at it doesn’t mean other city would fail too.
People can’t travel 30 miles from their home to the office entirely using public transit. Walkable cities and light rail are Last-mile. Heck - throw in high-speed for the majority of the transit and you still have a huge first-mile problem, which is by far the hardest to solve.
The reasons modern cities are designed around cars is because cars are flexible. Add a street for a new row of houses and every single one of those points is connected to every end point in a single step. No new scheduling, routing, or transit lines required. Problem solved with a little asphalt.
It’s an easy solution, and backing out of it is very, very difficult because it must be replaced with a complicated, expensive solution that’s less-convenient for most users.
I’m not anti-transit at all, but people around here seem to believe that a city can be fixed with the power of wishes and fairy dust just because another city that covers 1/10th the area and was developed hundreds of years before auto-centric decelopment ago managed to do it.
Apart from cargo bikes, in London City ULEZ, buses, cabs, and utility trucks are allowed. It’s amazing how little traffic they generate.
Even Belfast only allows access to the city centre for vehicles doing deliveries. It’s not uncommon to see one, but I mean a single one generally in the centre of a capital city
Car brain
