|
|
|
|
|
|
by terryf
3341 days ago
|
|
|
Yes, of course they aren't free. I also live in a house, that's more expensive than an apartment because I like it more this way. I often don't buy the cheapest food, but the food that I like. I don't want to force cars on anyone - it should be an individual choice of course. What I'm saying is that there are a lot of reasons people want to own cars. It's the choice between working with the existing system to make it better versus demanding that everyone adapts to a new system that you claim is better. Maybe it is, but getting the whole world to change at once to a completely different and in many ways harder system is very un likely to happen. |
|
|
Ah, and this is where we come to the root of the discussion. Because ultimately the question isn't "Why would ANYONE want to drive cars" (though I confess it was originally presented to you as such), but rather "Why should society and governments INCENTIVIZE continued use of cars."
The Boring Company's proposal here directly benefits people like you (and by the way me - I also love my car), those who can afford that privilege.
But our tax dollars and policies should be going towards systems that benefit the most people, and that will only happen in North America if we fall out of love with the "freedom" promised by our cars and realize that waiting 2-5 minutes at two different transfers, with a total trip length of 15-25% longer (optimistic, but that is realistic in cities with good public transport) is a worthwhile tradeoff for the greater good.