this post was submitted on 26 Nov 2023
158 points (97.6% liked)

Asklemmy

43939 readers
859 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] el_abuelo@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (18 children)

What would you use in place of cars?

Obviously just outlawing cars tomorrow would cause mass deaths around the world as society isn't equipped to deal with it, so what could we transition to?

My assumption is that you'd suggest public transport for all? But that wouldn't save us, as only about 1/4 of transport emissions come from cars, it'd just make us die a little slower.

Edit: if the next 5 people to downvote this could leave a reply it'd be appreciated. I try my best to do my bit for the environment but I depend on my car to participate in my local community given, and so I'd like to know what the ideal solution is? What should I be asking my representative to be voting for?

[โ€“] feduser934@sh.itjust.works 19 points 1 year ago (11 children)

if you design a city with the assumption that people won't have cars, you can make it easier to bike and walk to most of the things you need. This kind of urban design is superior to the car centered urban design in that it's cheaper, healthier, safer, and more environmentaly friendly.

[โ€“] lemmefixdat4u@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So which city are we going to tear down and rebuild first? And we have to come up with some new laws, like you can only own a home that's within walking/biking distance of your work.

We had a taste of a viable alternative, thanks to the pandemic. Remote work - it accomplishes most of what you propose without totally ditching private transportation. Maybe we should make that a law - business has to show that physical presence is required or they must allow employees to work remotely.

So which city are we going to tear down and rebuild first?

It's not a good idea to tear down a city and build a new one centraly planned. Don't be Bob Moses. We want gradual, community directed, increases to the density of cities, and we want to stop building new stroads.

We have to come up with some new laws like you can only own a home that's within walking/biking distance of your work.

That's a bad idea. We should just tweak the existing zoning laws to allow high density everywhere, and mandate it in some places.

[Remote work] accomplishes most of what you propose

I strongly disagree. The commute to and from work should not be the only transportation need in a healthy life. People should also visit shops, visit friends, and visit parks. These trips should not require a personal car. Not to mention the large (majority?) number of jobs that absolutely cannot be done remotely.

The pandemic did not cause large changes in uban design, and absolutely did not make streets safer for pedestrians, so I disagree that remote work accomplishes most of my goals.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (15 replies)