• MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    Right because everyone needing a car means everyone who can’t afford one just automatically gets one.

    Step one of reducing car-dependency is to reduce their number on the road. Then you can start bulding shit that accommodates the poor through actually nice-to-use public transit, bicycle paths, and walking routes.

    Charge the rich. Build for the poor.

    • Ulrich@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      Step one of reducing car-dependency is to reduce their number on the road. Then you can start bulding shit that accommodates the poor through actually nice-to-use public transit, bicycle paths, and walking routes.

      Why can’t you start building shit before reducing their numbers? I don’t see what one has to do with the other.

      • MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 days ago

        Of course you can. I’m using “step one” as a figure of speech to express importance.

        Controlling vehicle numbers is a very “low hanging fruit” that can do a lot to improve things for a very low cost.

      • ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        6 days ago

        Cut to me dramatically removing my “fuck cars” jacket to reveal a “fuck private property” t-shirt