# Why Are American's Afraid of a Car-less Future?



## EVDL Archive (Jul 26, 2007)

It turns out that reducing automobile access in urban cores not only encourages more active mobility like cycling, but actually leads to improved business for local firms.

More...


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

Why does every Luddite Eco-Freak think people are "afraid" of living without cars?

Somehow the idea that we actually prefer the usefulness of cars never enters their tiny little minds....


----------



## Jason Lattimer (Dec 27, 2008)

If all of America was an urban center it could be done,but last time I checked we had huge swaths of country without a city anywhere near.


----------



## onegreenev (May 18, 2012)

Used the city light rail system in Sacramento for a year and quite frankly don't like sharing with other nasty dirty smelly folks or riding cattle cars. I like my private little transport pod much better than the noisy public transportation. I also won't be riding my bicycle to work any time soon either. Not with a 44 mile round trip. How'd that be in the pouring down rain and 45 degrees out side.


----------



## eva-michael (Apr 13, 2010)

That's no reason to afraid.
Before car, there are horse. People needs vehicle. Then there must some thing instead even we don't have fossil oil.
I believe that we always have energy for car because we have a sunshine. All power comes from sun.


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

Jason Lattimer said:


> If all of America was an urban center it could be done,but last time I checked we had huge swaths of country without a city anywhere near.


All of America an urban center? Sounds like a science fiction nightmare.


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

eva-michael said:


> That's no reason to afraid.
> Before car, there are horse. People needs vehicle. Then there must some thing instead even we don't have fossil oil.
> I believe that we always have energy for car because we have a sunshine. All power comes from sun.


Don't give credibility to the article. We aren't "afraid," we are simply saying:

HELL NO!


----------



## evmetro (Apr 9, 2012)

I have this thing about freedom...


----------



## favguy (May 2, 2008)

We get even more of this hippy anti car crap in the UK, as we don't have such large areas of wide open spaces.

Apart from the fact I don't want to walk to a bus stop or train station, then wait ages for transport to turn up, put up with annoying idiots blathering on their phones, or worse drunk or smelly losers, then another walk at the destination.... they just don't understand that, unlike them, many people don't see a car as a white good to do a job, it's a lifestyle, a piece of art, a hobby, a satisfying job well done after a hard days detailing, a social like minded gathering, it is so much more than transport.

They can stick their horrible public transport where the sun don't shine! I just want rid of the Edwardian ICE, I'm keeping my cars thank you


----------



## Jason Lattimer (Dec 27, 2008)

favguy said:


> We get even more of this hippy anti car crap in the UK, as we don't have such large areas of wide open spaces.
> 
> Apart from the fact I don't want to walk to a bus stop or train station, then wait ages for transport to turn up, put up with annoying idiots blathering on their phones, or worse drunk or smelly losers, then another walk at the destination.... they just don't understand that, unlike them, many people don't see a car as a white good to do a job, it's a lifestyle, a piece of art, a hobby, a satisfying job well done after a hard days detailing, a social like minded gathering, it is so much more than transport.
> 
> They can stick their horrible public transport where the sun don't shine! I just want rid of the Edwardian ICE, I'm keeping my cars thank you


Perfectly said. I couldn't have said it better. And with the recent train wreck in Spain, you ain't gettin me on one any time soon.


----------



## Siwastaja (Aug 1, 2012)

It's interesting that people are the most anti-car in places where public transportation works badly, i.e., where you really need the car. (The exception would be places where there is no practically public transportation _at all_. There people mostly understand the realities.)

In fact, a well-functioning public transport serves everybody's interests; it's nice to use for anyone (for the car people, too; you don't _always_ have the car for whatever reason, or sometimes just want to use the alternative just for fun), and then using a car is also more fun due to less traffic.

But these anti-car people _never ever_ say anything about making public transportation better; it seems they want it to be horrible, like some kind of punishment.

(See Japan as a great example of working public transportation. Visiting Tokyo is quite an experience; local trains going _literally _through the buildings, air quality is good for a big city, relatively speaking no traffic jams, those use cars who want/have to, and they can, because streets are not jammed due to the fact that _most_ people do not use cars because there is a _real_ alternative which is --- wait for it ----- as FUN as driving a car!)

The problem cannot be solved by removing cars. The public transportation needs to be really usable first. Then the number of cars will decrease by itself, and the remaining cars stop being a problem because of their lower number.

Of course there are many areas where public transportation simply doesn't make sense. There, a car is usually the only option; and we should try to prefer small, aerodynamic cars as much as possible.

I agree with the green hippies that driving a 5000# pickup/SUV with horrible MPG just as a status symbol is not the way to go. Still, it should be an option. Taxation is a good way to control this; you pay for your choice.


----------



## PStechPaul (May 1, 2012)

Where I live, and where I work, public transportation would not be an option. But I also choose to live in a rural area where I can take a walk at midnight with no fear of 2-legged beasts such as infest the cities. When I absolutely have to go into the city, I will take the light rail, but I don't really feel safe unless it's to/from an event like a ball game where the cars are packed with "normal" people. I'll feel better about Baltimore City and maybe venture there if a week goes by without any shootings, stabbings, and other major violence. Maybe even if a day passes without such ugliness. I think I will have a long wait.

I fully support the idea of intentional communities and transition towns where people can live and work in fairly small, mostly self-sufficient entities where walking, bicycling, and small electric vehicles can suffice for most transportation needs, but I can see that it will never work in any city in the US unless the social, economic, and crime issues are effectively addressed. Mass transit and bicycling and city living is possible in fairly homogeneous, affluent, and "polite" societies such as Japan and Germany where it is relatively safe. But as long as the cultures of violence, drugs, and extremism exist and thrive, there is no way that I, at least, will consider moving to and working in the city. 

I'd rather live in a tent in the woods with my dog and take my chances with bears and coyotes and mountain lions, than have modern conveniences but live in fear of random or targeted violence. At least an enclosed vehicle provides some protection when one must travel through dangerous neighborhoods, and tiny, funny looking EVs may have an advantage as being less likely targets of carjacking and "trophy joyriding".


----------



## PhantomPholly (Aug 20, 2008)

Siwastaja said:


> In fact, a well-functioning public transport serves everybody's interests; it's nice to use for anyone (for the car people, too; you don't _always_ have the car for whatever reason, or sometimes just want to use the alternative just for fun), and then using a car is also more fun due to less traffic.


Except that public transport does not serve everyone's interest, and creates a wasteful drain of resources subsidizing those who use it. Like the Post Office, AAmtrack never makes a profit...

I know this is a common human failing. People always think they know better than anyone else what YOU need, and are quite happy to demand that force (laws) be used to "make the un-enlightened comply with what is best for them." 

Only, it isn't best for anyone but the control freaks in question.

I'm keeping my car, will rent if it is in the shop, and I will only ride public transport if nothing else is available and I cannot get out of going.


----------



## IamIan (Mar 29, 2009)

Part of the Society / Culture of the U.S. is that which includes transportation that the 'car' gives... that's it... not about fear at all.

The alternatives have their pros ... as the advocates for them are happy to point out ... but they also have their cons ... that the advocates often down play.

Their is no fear about it ... for those that the pros out weigh the cons ... great for them ... for many people the cons out weigh the pros.

It would be more productive if the advocates of the alternatives tried to address the cons of that alternative ... often instead they just criticize or guilt trip people ... which just isn't all that effective ... as is evident by the wide spread usage of cars , over the alternatives.


----------

