Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Living Car Free
Reload this Page >

How Cars Divide America - from Citylab

Notices
Living Car Free Do you live car free or car light? Do you prefer to use alternative transportation (bicycles, walking, other human-powered or public transportation) for everyday activities whenever possible? Discuss your lifestyle here.

How Cars Divide America - from Citylab

Old 08-01-18, 09:54 AM
  #26  
JoeyBike
20+mph Commuter
Thread Starter
 
JoeyBike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: New Orleans, LA USA
Posts: 7,030

Bikes: Surly LHT, a folding bike, and a beater.

Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1153 Post(s)
Liked 95 Times in 62 Posts
Originally Posted by cooker View Post
Where's your LCF content?
Or any content. Ever. 26,500 posts on BF and he has STARTED 22 total. Years and years of trolling and calling everyone out but never adding one useful thing around here over many years. I don't block him only because I don't block anyone here. It's all entertainment good, bad, and ugly.

Last edited by JoeyBike; 08-01-18 at 09:58 AM.
JoeyBike is offline  
Likes For JoeyBike:
Old 08-02-18, 07:31 AM
  #27  
Jim from Boston
Senior Member
 
Jim from Boston's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,384
Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 800 Post(s)
Liked 215 Times in 169 Posts
Originally Posted by Jim from Boston View Post
How Cars Divide America - from Citylab A major premise of this article is:

“For one, the geography of car use tracks with income and wealth: Car-dependent places are considerably less affluent. Metros in which a higher share of people depend on their cars to get to work are poorer, and those where more people use transit or bike or walk to work are considerably more affluent. The share of commuters who drive to work alone is negatively correlated with both wages and income

Conversely, in more affluent metros, a higher proportion of commuters use transit, walk, or bike
Originally Posted by Jim from Boston View Post
Actually, I think the OP is germane to Car Free Living, because it purports that Car Free Commuting may actually be a sign of affluence, rather than impoverishment, and perhaps necessity, e.g due a DUI.
Originally Posted by Mobile 155 View Post
however the idea that the people riding the bus to work in LA are more affluent than the BMW drivers in Beverly Hills and even Santa Monica is pretty far out there.

It makes interesting party fodder for the elite living on the top floors of a co-op building with door security but I would need hard numbers to prove we are divided political and socially by cars. Or maybe a solid idea of what the person thought was car free. Having a company limo and a private jet could be car free to some. Taking a taxi every day to others might be car free to others.

I would need a side by side comparison of Liberal car free people in the Hamptons compared to car driving conservative oil men in Houston. It was the point of the link that people were better off financially by taking mass transit. Yet world wide wealth is demonstrated at what point people can start affording personal transportation.

If someone is going to make the connection between politics and cars ell us what the connection is? Tell us how the car people vote and how the car free vote. Tell us if the very wealthy are car free. Tell us if more doctors or astronomers are car free and if not explain the education claim. If so what is their political bent.

I see it as all rainbows bows and unicorns.
Originally Posted by Mobile 155 View Post
Look I know this whole link is not LCF related even if some can find a tenuous connection. But for the link to be true it would have to explain the statements and conclusions on links like this one.

Get Into My Car: The Congested Future of Worldwide Auto Ownership - Freakonomics Freakonomics
Originally Posted by cooker View Post
He didn't claim that. He compared "Metros", and presumably Beverly Hills and LA are part of the same Metro. The claim is that wealthier cities have more diversity of transportation while poorer cities only have cars and not much else.
I think of “Car Free Living” transportation as of two different modalities: “biking and walking” (skateboarding, cross-country skiing...) as dependent on the physical energy of the commuter, vs. “transit” (busses, subways, taxis, limos, private jet..) as requiring an extraneous, almost always a fossil fuel.

Those individual expenditures of personal energy are more dependent on the personality of the commuter than the location of the commute whereas those commutes dependent on extraneous fuels depend more on the location of the commute rather than the personality (including social status, political persuasion…).

I presume that public transit in Beverly Hills is scarce, yet the climate is conducive to walking and biking all year round. Here in Boston, as I described on several posts,
Originally Posted by Jim from Boston View Post
Boston is probably one of the most Car-free cities in the world, and having a car is often detrimental. We live near the transportation hub of Kenmore Square…
Except perhaps for the Super-rich, buses, and particularly the subways are well-accepted for getting around. Our former Governor, Mike Dukakis routinely commuted by the subway. And even though the weather can be sketchy, here in (affluent) Boston, it’s not unusual to see suits on Bike-Share bikes. My wife once bought a print of obvious office workers strolling in the early morning rain through the Public Garden, entitled “Walking to Work.”

So as they say in Real Estate, also for Car Free Living, “Location, Location, Location.” Again, IMO, in the premise of the OP, biking and walking may be more prevalent among the affluent as a personality characteristic, whereas using public transit, may also be more prevalent too, depending on where they live.
Jim from Boston is offline  
Old 08-02-18, 10:22 AM
  #28  
jack pot 
Fxxxxr
 
jack pot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: falfurrias texas
Posts: 914

Bikes: wabi classic (stolen & recovered)

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2605 Post(s)
Liked 1,072 Times in 810 Posts
Atlas was not LCF

Originally Posted by Rollfast View Post
Fascism, Fords...I want my Duster back.

The usual dead end has been reached here. You are on a roundabout with no outlet .
>>> ATLAS SHRUGGED as he drove his MERCEDES through the less affluent areas of america
__________________
Nothing is true---everything is permitted
jack pot is offline  
Old 08-02-18, 01:49 PM
  #29  
JoeyBike
20+mph Commuter
Thread Starter
 
JoeyBike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: New Orleans, LA USA
Posts: 7,030

Bikes: Surly LHT, a folding bike, and a beater.

Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1153 Post(s)
Liked 95 Times in 62 Posts
Originally Posted by Jim from Boston View Post
Again, IMO, in the premise of the OP, biking and walking may be more prevalent among the affluent as a personality characteristic, whereas using public transit, may also be more prevalent too, depending on where they live.
Just to qualify, the term "affluent" - it means a person or community have easy access everything they need. "Wealthy" has an entirely different meaning. You don't have to be wealthy to be affluent. (See: "The Original Affluent Society"). On this note, not owning a car is one of many "tricks" I use to remain "affluent" without monetary wealth. By living a car-free existence I can take a job making $8-10,000/year less than the same qualified person who needs a dependable car to get to work. Or I can take the extra money and use it elsewhere. A healthy person can live as Spartan a lifestyle as they desire cutting costs all sorts of ways. So for me, the car going away was the PRECURSOR to "affluence". And just one of the puzzle pieces albeit a big one. When I owned cars it seems I was always broke, or near broke, with maybe $50 in the bank and no way out other than to get a "better" job. As soon as I ditched the motor vehicles money began piling up. From there I learned more and all of a sudden didn't have to work very hard (or very long) to make ends meet plus some.

In short: I got rid of the car, then became "affluent" because of that (and other) similar decisions.
JoeyBike is offline  
Old 08-02-18, 05:30 PM
  #30  
Mobile 155
Senior Member
 
Mobile 155's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Dallas Fort Worth Metroplex
Posts: 5,058

Bikes: 2013 Haro FL Comp 29er MTB.

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1470 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 43 Times in 34 Posts
Originally Posted by JoeyBike View Post
Just to qualify, the term "affluent" - it means a person or community have easy access everything they need. "Wealthy" has an entirely different meaning. You don't have to be wealthy to be affluent. (See: "The Original Affluent Society"). On this note, not owning a car is one of many "tricks" I use to remain "affluent" without monetary wealth. By living a car-free existence I can take a job making $8-10,000/year less than the same qualified person who needs a dependable car to get to work. Or I can take the extra money and use it elsewhere. A healthy person can live as Spartan a lifestyle as they desire cutting costs all sorts of ways. So for me, the car going away was the PRECURSOR to "affluence". And just one of the puzzle pieces albeit a big one. When I owned cars it seems I was always broke, or near broke, with maybe $50 in the bank and no way out other than to get a "better" job. As soon as I ditched the motor vehicles money began piling up. From there I learned more and all of a sudden didn't have to work very hard (or very long) to make ends meet plus some.

In short: I got rid of the car, then became "affluent" because of that (and other) similar decisions.
isn’t that social anthropology? I had that in college. It was always one hour of debate and disagreement. Is there a dictionary that uses that definition? I couldn’t find one.

i did find this in search of the 20 most affluent neighborhoods in the U.S.

https://www.forbes.com/2008/12/08/america-affluent-neighborhoods-forbeslife-cx_ls_1209realestate.html


Last edited by Mobile 155; 08-02-18 at 06:13 PM.
Mobile 155 is offline  
Old 08-02-18, 08:18 PM
  #31  
350htrr
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Canada, PG BC
Posts: 3,849

Bikes: 27 speed ORYX with over 39,000Kms on it and another 14,000KMs with a BionX E-Assist on it

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1023 Post(s)
Liked 53 Times in 46 Posts
Just because you own a car, it does NOT mean you are "affluent" or, just like if you don't own a car it doesn't make you a "bum"... JMO...
350htrr is offline  
Likes For 350htrr:
Old 08-02-18, 10:09 PM
  #32  
Mobile 155
Senior Member
 
Mobile 155's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Dallas Fort Worth Metroplex
Posts: 5,058

Bikes: 2013 Haro FL Comp 29er MTB.

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1470 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 43 Times in 34 Posts
Originally Posted by 350htrr View Post
Just because you own a car, it does NOT mean you are "affluent" or, just like if you don't own a car it doesn't make you a "bum"... JMO...
oh man. That makes the link in the OP just rhetoric.
Mobile 155 is offline  
Old 08-03-18, 03:54 AM
  #33  
Machka 
In Real Life
 
Machka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Down under down under
Posts: 52,099

Bikes: Lots

Mentioned: 141 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3192 Post(s)
Liked 510 Times in 297 Posts
Originally Posted by 350htrr View Post
Just because you own a car, it does NOT mean you are "affluent" or, just like if you don't own a car it doesn't make you a "bum"... JMO...



Yep ... I've been middle class with and without a motor vehicle.



I think it has more to do with education than vehicle ownership.
Machka is offline  
Old 08-03-18, 08:26 AM
  #34  
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,150

Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked 903 Times in 600 Posts
Originally Posted by 350htrr View Post
Just because you own a car, it does NOT mean you are "affluent" or, just like if you don't own a car it doesn't make you a "bum"... JMO...
Of course not. Just as commuting to work by the subway, train, bus, taxi, foot or pedal does not make/mean a person is car free, or is a person desiring to be "LCF", or is an ascetic zealot in search of a simple life.

Just as no one should assume that people using Bike-Share bikes or walking somewhere (even if wearing suits!) are car free, or have any interest in the LCF lifestyle, or share any of the views on P&R issues constantly raised on this list by a few LCF "critical thinkers".

Last edited by I-Like-To-Bike; 08-03-18 at 08:32 AM.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline  
Old 08-04-18, 10:06 AM
  #35  
cooker
Prefers Cicero
 
cooker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,848

Bikes: 1984 Trek 520; 2007 Bike Friday NWT; misc others

Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3923 Post(s)
Liked 92 Times in 76 Posts
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike View Post
Of course not. Just as commuting to work by the subway, train, bus, taxi, foot or pedal does not make/mean a person is car free, or is a person desiring to be "LCF", or is an ascetic zealot in search of a simple life.

Just as no one should assume that people using Bike-Share bikes or walking somewhere (even if wearing suits!) are car free, or have any interest in the LCF lifestyle, or share any of the views on P&R issues constantly raised on this list by a few LCF "critical thinkers".
They've all chosen, for whatever reason, to use non-car transportation in that situation. What they all share is that those modes were available, and they availed themselves*. There doesn't have to be any one overarching or unifying mentality.



* I never really noticed before that "to avail" (obviously, duh) means to take advantage of something which is "available".

Last edited by cooker; 08-04-18 at 10:48 AM.
cooker is offline  
Old 08-06-18, 08:30 AM
  #36  
JoeyBike
20+mph Commuter
Thread Starter
 
JoeyBike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: New Orleans, LA USA
Posts: 7,030

Bikes: Surly LHT, a folding bike, and a beater.

Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1153 Post(s)
Liked 95 Times in 62 Posts
Originally Posted by Mobile 155 View Post
oh man. That makes the link in the OP just rhetoric.
Exactly. You win the cookie!
JoeyBike is offline  
Old 08-06-18, 08:35 AM
  #37  
JoeyBike
20+mph Commuter
Thread Starter
 
JoeyBike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: New Orleans, LA USA
Posts: 7,030

Bikes: Surly LHT, a folding bike, and a beater.

Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1153 Post(s)
Liked 95 Times in 62 Posts
Originally Posted by Mobile 155 View Post
isn’t that social anthropology? I had that in college. It was always one hour of debate and disagreement. Is there a dictionary that uses that definition? I couldn’t find one.


British Dictionary definitions for affluent society

affluent society
noun
  1. a society in which the material benefits of prosperity are widely available
======================================

Second link from the top in my Google search for "Affluence defined". Not a word about "rich" or "poor" because in an affluent society everyone is solid middle class as compared to everyone else around them. People living in mud huts APPEAR to be poor. Don't be fooled. They might not think so.
*
*
*

Last edited by JoeyBike; 08-06-18 at 08:40 AM.
JoeyBike is offline  
Old 08-06-18, 10:04 AM
  #38  
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,150

Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked 903 Times in 600 Posts
Originally Posted by JoeyBike View Post
People living in mud huts APPEAR to be poor. Don't be fooled. They might not think so.
People living in mud huts in the U.S. think so; as well as most people residing on the street, or in homeless shelters and hobo camps. Even if they feel blessed with a car free/car-lite halo and ride a bicycle. You might be an exception.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline  
Old 08-07-18, 12:06 PM
  #39  
JoeyBike
20+mph Commuter
Thread Starter
 
JoeyBike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: New Orleans, LA USA
Posts: 7,030

Bikes: Surly LHT, a folding bike, and a beater.

Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1153 Post(s)
Liked 95 Times in 62 Posts
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike View Post
People living in mud huts in the U.S. think so; as well as most people residing on the street, or in homeless shelters and hobo camps. Even if they feel blessed with a car free/car-lite halo and ride a bicycle. You might be an exception.
I know several persons who are full or part time homeless on purpose in the US. Mostly during milder months. They get a government check every month due to mental illness and make it last by camping out around town. They hang out in coffee shops, librarys, parks, malls all day. They get free healthcare. Most use bicycles as transport and local bike shops do what they can to keep them mobile. Not one of them has told me they wished it otherwise. They have everything they need.

But I wasn't talking about Hobo camps anyway. Indigenous people all over the world, of which there are likely none left today, did not look at themselves as poor. Everyone had access to the same "riches" that could be easily acquired by any of them if they so desired. I believe Ben Franklin termed it "Few artificial wants".

Maybe you should get out more and talk to people. The "poor" people I know in New Orleans wouldn't trade places with me, I know that. They pity me working five days a week and paying $740/month for health insurance just for starters. Healthcare that is basically paying a "cartel" for access to a doctor whom I am expected to pay for his/her services at that time. So I don't throw the word "poor" around too much.
*
*
*

Last edited by JoeyBike; 08-07-18 at 12:11 PM.
JoeyBike is offline  
Old 08-07-18, 08:23 PM
  #40  
350htrr
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Canada, PG BC
Posts: 3,849

Bikes: 27 speed ORYX with over 39,000Kms on it and another 14,000KMs with a BionX E-Assist on it

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1023 Post(s)
Liked 53 Times in 46 Posts
I would say, you are "poor" if you think you are poor.... (even when you seem to be rich).

I would say you are "affluent" if you think you are affluent... (even when you make an average wage)

I would say you are "rich" if you think you are rich... (even when you only have a part time job, but are happy with your life)

I know people of all three backgrounds, and... some of them are deluded, but most seem to be able to place themselves in their "proper" category from where I see it...
350htrr is offline  
Old 12-19-21, 09:40 PM
  #41  
rossiny
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 712

Bikes: Trek 970, Bianchi Volpe,Casati

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 320 Post(s)
Liked 82 Times in 62 Posts
Originally Posted by tandempower View Post
What do the technologies that make IT and media possible have to do with motor-vehicle and highway building? They are completely different technologies.


Causality is never proven by statistical research.


Suburban sprawl was overstimulated by people trying to escape cultural and economic divisions. People have been moving out to the country to get away from urban problems since at least the time of ancient Rome, but the culture of mass automobile reliance created a culture where people don't just move out the country/suburbs, they drive back and forth to the city daily, as well as to other areas, so you end up with sprawl in all directions. Plus the sprawl isn't composed of numerous more-or-less self-contained localities. Instead, employees are living miles and miles from their workplaces, and they are shopping and running errands in other places miles and miles away. It gets to the point where LCF within any single local area is like a form of isolation, and that is what creates driving-dependency. If you had sprawl where each local area has sufficient economic opportunities for people who live in that local area to also work and shop there, then no one is dependent on traveling miles and miles for things. They can if they want, but if they just stay within a couple miles of home biking/walking, they don't feel they're missing out on life and opportunities.
QUOTE "sprawl" , from what I have seen with suburbia it creates vast driving areas, and you just always have to go to get something in your car. The subdivision is just a living area for humans, there are no jobs there or any productive activity of any kind except soccer moms driving.

Last edited by rossiny; 12-19-21 at 09:58 PM.
rossiny is offline  
Old 12-19-21, 09:50 PM
  #42  
rossiny
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 712

Bikes: Trek 970, Bianchi Volpe,Casati

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 320 Post(s)
Liked 82 Times in 62 Posts
Yup

Originally Posted by tandempower View Post
Just think about it in terms of a suburb or subdivision, which is basically built as an investment offering. You take a piece of undeveloped land and build a bunch of houses on it. Then, you set an introductory price, e.g. "starting in the mid $100k' you'll see on advertisements. Then, if people can drive between the subdivision and jobs elsewhere, it sets a precedent where others will see that the houses are selling and think, "hey, I can buy into that market and maybe sell for a profit a few years down the line after the neighborhood is established and keeps appreciating." Then, if people are living there, there is also impetus to build businesses, schools, etc. to serve the community.

There's really no agricultural motive for people to build and move out to these suburbs. It's just that they can take money from income and invest it in a new (real estate) stock offering, and then drive back and forth to their place of employment to shuttle the money back out to the suburb (figuratively shuttle it, I mean, because really they are just shuttling it to the bank to pay off the mortgage). So it really is just pure driving-facilitated growth. It is land-waste that destroys the environment and creates sprawl, but it is a way to convert green forests and countryside into green money. It is just one part of the money printing-press that keeps so many investors happy at the expense of the environment and sustainability (and ease of LCF), for those of us who care about that more than (printed) money.
Quote : invest
not to mention the office building craze in the 80s.
I installed wall covering and painted as a young man for a company a couple years. It always creeped me out when you would see bulldozers parked at the end of the road. 1 side road and offices, the other side of the bulldozer was farm land or nature. One day I was working alone and I looked out in the field out of the office. I kid you not I felt something looking in , then something moving fast outside. I had to put down my tools and immediately leave the empty building I was working in and drive away... This was 30+ years ago. I still remember the feeling....😳

Last edited by rossiny; 12-19-21 at 10:00 PM.
rossiny is offline  
Old 12-19-21, 09:54 PM
  #43  
rossiny
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 712

Bikes: Trek 970, Bianchi Volpe,Casati

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 320 Post(s)
Liked 82 Times in 62 Posts
Brain twist

Originally Posted by tandempower View Post
Cars, bikes, and other vehicles are different methods for producing mobility. When Ford started, they were towing the chassis from one assembly station to the next using a rope. You could say they were working 'conveyor-free' at that point, and the factory was probably organized differently. Then, when they started using conveyors it changed the way they worked, the layout of the factory, etc.

Motor vehicles are basically conveyors for humans and other deliveries. The infrastructure they drive on and where they drive are the 'factory' of human life. The question is what we're producing, how, and why? Some people want to make the factory parts expensive to stimulate business activity and growth. Others want to make the factory produce more green growth, trees, forests, wildlife, etc. by organizing 'the factory' with environmental consequences in mind. Others want to use bikes and walking because we find it easier to stay fit and healthy when we're using our bodies to get around instead of sitting inside a conveyor. Still others don't like the expense/liability of having to be insured operating a powerful vehicle that can do serious damage and cause injury or death. Others just don't love cars enough to want to keep them clean and maintained and would prefer simpler options with less responsibility and maintenance demands.

But however you look at it, motor-vehicles are the equivalent of a motorized conveyor outside the factories, so it really is part of industrial production, even if you don't want to see that way because you prefer an image of the world where industrial production is distinguished from something else that is different somehow.
ok you just twisted my brain ..🥸🤥
rossiny is offline  
Old 12-19-21, 11:45 PM
  #44  
base2 
Doesn't brain good.
 
base2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 1,940

Bikes: 5 good ones, and the occasional project.

Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1005 Post(s)
Liked 652 Times in 387 Posts
Poverty is a state of not having "enough." It is a state of mind independent of wealth or status. I'd wager this belief of never having "enough" is what drives many of the most motivated capitalists industry has ever known.

To see how car dependent America is, all you've got to do is take a drive down the ol' shoulder-less 2 lane country road to any rural community & observe the disheveled rows of worn out cars in the side yard of any "farm house" that hasn't been a house for a farm in the better part of a century.

In the burbs, the story really isn't that different. Look for the cars parked on the front yard, the 2 in the side yard, or the ones street parked to avoid the shuffle of the 2, double parked in the driveway.

America needs it's cars. Indeed it's only the major metropolitan area that have other options available. Those options empower opportunity. That opportunity is freedom to choose how & where to live. The power to choose an employer. The vibrant & dynamic community for an employees to thrive in. Freedom to create. Freedom to start & run a successful business. The freedom is self determination. Metropolitan areas are where affluence (as defined by this thread) happens.

I, for one do not like my car. I have come to despise driving. As such, if one was to be a necessity, then I chose a hybrid, then an electric & taxed the -ish out of myself (& my cars) to install a light rail line. The line is currently under construction. I drove 10 miles to the nearest functioning station on a Sunday afternoon. By the second stop, the train was FULL. It seems that many others feel the same as I do...All those on the train has also lightened the load on the adjacent freeway as well. Speeds are up, travel times are down.

Peoples time has value. I'm curious as to how it will be spent. Creating more prosperity, in a more prosperous metropolis, no doubt.

I genuinely feel sorry for the disempowered, car dependent & indignant in the rural vacant lands who just can't see how rich & strong, & affluent America truly is. How anyone could afford such a singularly large drain in their expenses; To be obligated to such a large ongoing cost just to get to civilization for basic necessities like food is beyond me.

Last edited by base2; 12-20-21 at 01:33 AM.
base2 is offline  
Likes For base2:
Old 12-20-21, 06:20 PM
  #45  
takenreasy
Senior Member
 
takenreasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 423

Bikes: ’83 Bianchi Special ’96 Specialized Stump Jumper Comp ’09 Gary Fisher Paragon ’09 Surly Cross Check ’11 Surly Long Haul Trucker

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 68 Post(s)
Liked 66 Times in 44 Posts
Originally Posted by base2 View Post
Poverty is a state of not having "enough." It is a state of mind independent of wealth or status. I'd wager this belief of never having "enough" is what drives many of the most motivated capitalists industry has ever known.

To see how car dependent America is, all you've got to do is take a drive down the ol' shoulder-less 2 lane country road to any rural community & observe the disheveled rows of worn out cars in the side yard of any "farm house" that hasn't been a house for a farm in the better part of a century.

In the burbs, the story really isn't that different. Look for the cars parked on the front yard, the 2 in the side yard, or the ones street parked to avoid the shuffle of the 2, double parked in the driveway.

America needs it's cars. Indeed it's only the major metropolitan area that have other options available. Those options empower opportunity. That opportunity is freedom to choose how & where to live. The power to choose an employer. The vibrant & dynamic community for an employees to thrive in. Freedom to create. Freedom to start & run a successful business. The freedom is self determination. Metropolitan areas are where affluence (as defined by this thread) happens.

I, for one do not like my car. I have come to despise driving. As such, if one was to be a necessity, then I chose a hybrid, then an electric & taxed the -ish out of myself (& my cars) to install a light rail line. The line is currently under construction. I drove 10 miles to the nearest functioning station on a Sunday afternoon. By the second stop, the train was FULL. It seems that many others feel the same as I do...All those on the train has also lightened the load on the adjacent freeway as well. Speeds are up, travel times are down.

Peoples time has value. I'm curious as to how it will be spent. Creating more prosperity, in a more prosperous metropolis, no doubt.

I genuinely feel sorry for the disempowered, car dependent & indignant in the rural vacant lands who just can't see how rich & strong, & affluent America truly is. How anyone could afford such a singularly large drain in their expenses; To be obligated to such a large ongoing cost just to get to civilization for basic necessities like food is beyond me.
110% on this. I ride/walk for everything now. But I do have a partner who says we need to "get out" from time to time. That's what our Chevy Bolt is for (personally I'd rather have a driverless EV pick me up for those outings!).
takenreasy is offline  
Old 12-31-21, 05:29 PM
  #46  
Calsun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 455
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 186 Post(s)
Liked 102 Times in 81 Posts
Until World War II ended people in the USA walked or rode the electric trolley cars or took the train to get to places. Most houses did not even have a garage and the city lots were narrower to concentrate people to provide more riders for the street cars. After WW II a company formed by GM, Firestone Tire, and Standard Oil proceeded to buy up all the trolley car lines and shut them down. They burned the trolley cars and tore up the rails in city after city.

A second factor was the flight of whites to the segregated suburbs so their children would not have to sit in a classroom with children of people of color. This led to sprawl and housing tracts many miles from city centers and the jobs so people needed to buy at least one car per household. After Reagan's time in office with the exporting of good manufacturing from the USA it took two breadwinners per household and so two cars are now needed to be purchased, maintained, insured, licensed, and stored. Add a college student and the household needs to support the costs of three cars.

Any American city of any size requires owning a car to get to work to get to school to get groceries or to go to a park to play. This is unique to the United States.
Calsun is offline  
Likes For Calsun:
Old 12-31-21, 06:37 PM
  #47  
rossiny
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 712

Bikes: Trek 970, Bianchi Volpe,Casati

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 320 Post(s)
Liked 82 Times in 62 Posts
Originally Posted by Calsun View Post
Until World War II ended people in the USA walked or rode the electric trolley cars or took the train to get to places. Most houses did not even have a garage and the city lots were narrower to concentrate people to provide more riders for the street cars. After WW II a company formed by GM, Firestone Tire, and Standard Oil proceeded to buy up all the trolley car lines and shut them down. They burned the trolley cars and tore up the rails in city after city.

A second factor was the flight of whites to the segregated suburbs so their children would not have to sit in a classroom with children of people of color. This led to sprawl and housing tracts many miles from city centers and the jobs so people needed to buy at least one car per household. After Reagan's time in office with the exporting of good manufacturing from the USA it took two breadwinners per household and so two cars are now needed to be purchased, maintained, insured, licensed, and stored. Add a college student and the household needs to support the costs of three cars.

Any American city of any size requires owning a car to get to work to get to school to get groceries or to go to a park to play. This is unique to the United States.
correct, when I lived in Chicago they made the center of Irving Park rd into planters. I was driving by and they were preparing the middle of the road for these planters. A back hoe was digging, and just so happened as I was driving , they were pulling up old rails that were buried there from years ago... no more trolley cars running down Irving Park in Chicago........
its crazy but we are slaves to cars and health insurance . If you don't have one or the other your screwed...
rossiny is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
tandempower
Living Car Free
81
05-28-22 01:09 AM
tandempower
Living Car Free
5
07-31-18 01:41 PM
Artkansas
Living Car Free
98
12-13-13 10:40 AM
AsanaCycles
Living Car Free
8
06-02-12 06:41 AM
gerv
Living Car Free
55
02-19-11 07:26 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.