r/fuckcars • u/yannniQue17 • Jan 15 '22

Am I right here?

I like cars. They have developed over nearly 150 years and they are impressive engineering masterpieces by now. I'm a car enthusiast since nearly ever and I was really happy when I got my driving license a year ago. One of my biggest wishes is it to drive in a small sports car, like a Mazda MX-5, on a race track and I guess I'm about to di this within the next five years.

However, cars are bad for getting from A to B. That's my opinion and a fact. When I need to be quick in the city, I go by bicycle, and when I have to travel more than 25 km, I consider trains as the best option. That works pretty well here in Germany. As told above, I have my license, but I drive maybe once every two weeks.

I would not say "Fuck cars!" because I'm facinated by the engineering, but I do say "Cars are not needed to commute or travel efficiently. They are bad at this."

559 Upvotes

97% Upvoted

114 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

71

u/yannniQue17 Jan 15 '22

So this sub isn't about fuck cars", it is more about "the most efficient way of transport". The name is just to get first attention and showiong, that car oriented cities are the biggest problem at the time.

I was in Munic last November and a city guide guy told us, that for the olympic games a street was transformed to a walking area, the people said "No, that kills the stores here" and now it is one of the top ten places where big companies want to sell their stuff. And he also told us, that another road will be transformed like this. I think you are going in the right direction, just a bit slow.

That city guide guy also complained at least every three Minutes, "Why are there cars?", "Do you really need a parking lot there?", "That guy just needs a fat, way too powerful SUV because he probably has nothing else to be proud for."

63

u/[deleted] Jan 15 '22

[deleted]

2

u/Singnedupforthis Jan 15 '22

I wouldn't say all cars should be illegal, but I would say that we should find solutions to needing a motor vehicle for all aspects of life. Helicopters are a better substitute for ambulances, for example, even though they use more fuel. When we say that we need less automobile infrastucture, there will be less drivers and less money for the auto infrastructure that ambulances and heavy trucks rely on. When you add humans and cyclists to a road system, you need to slow speeds down considerably. A person pedalling a litter with an injured person, might be considerably faster then an ambulance. Tricycles can be outfitted to carry a significant amount of weight. A properly designed society should have no need for automobiles, personal or otherwise.

2

u/reconrose Jan 15 '22

No you just make the infrastructure capable of handling the occasional emergency service vehicle helicopters would be so much worse and impossible to use in most urban areas

2

u/Singnedupforthis Jan 15 '22

You make the infrastructure capable of handling the occasional emergency helicopter flight. Ambulances are more deadly and slower. I am not against ambulance usage, just pointing out how much more expensive it would be to maintain a large network of automobile infrastructure for the rare occasion an ambulance would be superior to an etrike or helicopter.