6 ms·

Reducing car dependency will increase social activity. Cars are isolating socially and geographically. Everyone should try live car-free and see how much more

Reducing car dependency will increase social activity. Cars are isolating socially and geographically. Everyone should try live car-free and see how much more connected to your community you'll become.

ghaff 3y ago
It depends on the activities. I’m less active in the local outdoors group than I was but basically everyone has a car, even if they live in the city which I don’t, because it gets very old seeking out carpools for specific trips all the time.
TurkishPoptart 3y ago
In my city (west coast), public transport is simply not safe anymore (especially as a woman) due to lack of law enforcement or deterrents from crime. In my car - I feel safe. I am taking Krav Maga classes, but man, it didn't used to be this bad.
- asdff 3y ago
  I think the perception of risk is what is off more than anything. LA metro for example saw about 180 violent crimes on it last year. For a system that sees almost a third of a billion boarding a year, the risk of violent crime happening is so low it doesn't make sense to consider. I expect the crime rate is similarly low on other transit systems. https://libraryarchives.metro.net/DPGTL/CrimeStatReports/2023-May-CrimeStats.pdf https://libraryarchives.metro.net/DPGTL/CrimeStatReports/202...
  - presentation 3y ago
    That said the risk of crazy people ruining your day for no reason is not low. Ultimately the problem isn’t transit (rather it’s part of the solution), the problem is that the US social fabric is messed up.
    - asdff 3y ago
      Its the same risk you face walking on the sidewalk or going in a grocery store though where you are also liable to find these crazy people.
- JPws_Prntr_Fngr 3y ago
  I strongly recommend finding a gym for Brazilian jiu jitsu, judo, muay thai, boxing, etc. They're constantly being testing and evolved through MMA fights, and they'll get you some full-contact, full-intensity sparring experience.
  - watwut 3y ago
    I am not sure I want to travel on the bus with a scared man trained in multiple martial arts. All the stats say that criminality is pretty low, I am safe on the bus, but fearful scared trained dide sounds like someone who will make it less safe for all of us.
    - TurkishPoptart 3y ago
      You have no idea what you're talking about, but I'm glad you feel safe on the bus. Criminality stats are low, so the chances of being assaulted on our light rail or buses is indeed low, but it only takes one incident to lead to loss of life or injury. I'm not a "scared man", I'm trying to prepare myself for unhinged situations, which we've been witnessing at an increased rate after 2020, when our city/county reduced police and law enforcement presence. Here's an article about the massive rise in homicides in our county since 2019 [1]. Maybe the numbers are "low" to you, but it's 1000x higher than in countries such as Japan. I won't go further into the reasons why due to risk of being downvoted by people unwilling to accept the new reality of west coast urban life. [1]: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/law-justice/seattle-has-surpassed-2022-homicide-toll-with-3-months-left-in-2023 https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/law-justice/seattl...
      - ianburrell 3y ago
        I couldn't find historic chart for Seattle but most cities are having a similar spike in crime so I'm using NYC. The rise in crime from pandemic is from historically low numbers. The jump is big but the absolute numbers are still low. NYC had the same murder count in 2019 as 1948. 2022 was same as 2012. The peak in 1990 was 5 times as much as last year.
- BobaFloutist 3y ago
  I encourage you to check the stats, driving is one of the most dangerous things people routinely do, and nearly always far more dangerous than taking public transit.
  - TurkishPoptart 3y ago
    Here's a case of rationalists misinterpreting risks based on data. Driving is a risk I accept. Being mugged or assaulted by someone on fentanyl with limited police or law enforcement on public transport is a risk that I cannot account for.
    - lmm 3y ago
      > Driving is a risk I accept. Being mugged or assaulted by someone on fentanyl with limited police or law enforcement on public transport is a risk that I cannot account for. Why the difference? Maybe you feel like you're more in control of what happens when you're driving? But realistically however safely you personally drive, you'd still be at risk of being driven into by someone else (and there's a parallel breakdown of the rule of law where uninsured, unlicensed drivers are everywhere nowadays) and there's not much you can do.
      - the_doctah 3y ago
        You can't compare getting raped to getting in a car crash. This line of argument is ridiculous.
        BobaFloutist 3y ago
        I would rather get raped than die. Most people would. Edit: Actually, now that I think about it, what cases are you talking about where people get full on raped on public transit? That seems vanishingly rare, if at all extent.
        TurkishPoptart 3y ago
        Right. I don't understand their thinking process here.
eschulz 3y ago
I think in the US cars can increase your time with friends and family. Many people are lucky to live within a 60 minute drive from close friends or family, but without access to a car those trips become an epic trek. This is especially the case for people as they age, have kids, have a tight schedule, etc. Furthermore, I'd venture to propose that this is not merely the case in the US. My family in Mexico City often use public transportation for work, but frequently drive to visit each other on weekends because that's much easier.
- ryandrake 3y ago
  Pretty sure OP's comment assumed city life. In most rural and suburban USA towns, cars are the only thing that enables connection to others. If cars suddenly disappeared, half of America would effectively become hermits (not to mention starve due to lack of access to basic necessities like groceries). Ending Car Dependence basically means move to a denser city, which you're never going to convince everyone to do.
  - ericmay 3y ago
    No - car dependency isn’t a problem in rural areas, it’s a problem in metro areas. Places like Columbus, Indianapolis, Tampa Bay, San Diego, etc. are all completely 100% reliant on cars for transit. People already live in the cities, there isn’t anything to convince them of for that. Instead we have to build transit that allows people to not rely on a car for their daily needs. Not that you can’t have one, of course. But walking, biking, and rail infrastructure need much, much more funding and then we can reduce how we handicap society with car-only transit.
    - asdff 3y ago
      What is interesting is that there are pockets of car free living even in these examples. E.g. in Columbus you have 45000 undergraduates at Ohio state, the bulk of whom live within a half hour walk of campus and all their friends from college, and might only use their car to shuttle themselves and all their roommates to the grocery store once a week.
i_am_jl 3y ago
I'm lucky enough to have moved, but my last home was 4 miles from the closest store, 3.8 miles from the closest sidewalk. The closest bus stop was at the aforementioned store. These numbers weren't even that big for the area where I was living. If I didn't have a car I'd spend too much time coming and going from the places I'd need to be to engage with my community. I'd say "everyone should try living somewhere they don't need a car", but that's not feasible for everybody.
- wizofaus 3y ago
  It's only not feasible because that's how the infrastructure and town planning in many urban areas has been done, and has somewhat succeeded because the degree to which you'll be dependent on a car to get everywhere isn't a super high priority for most when first choosing somewhere to live. The challenge is convincing governments and home buyers that the pros of less car-dependent cities massively outweigh the cons (which are mostly around accepting being closer to your neighbours and having less yard space/more stairs, plus governments having to focus on more than a single mode of transport when building roads etc).
anthomtb 3y ago
>Reducing car dependency will increase social activity My social life (and sense of community) took off when I graduated from college, where I was largely living car-free, and started driving 45 minutes to my full-time job each day. How do you explain that? Living in a car-dependent community, and choosing to go car-free, sounds like adding another layer of social isolation to me.
- presentation 3y ago
  I would suspect most people are far more social in college than after, probably your circumstance is individual.
Eumenes 3y ago
My social circle activities involves hiking, camping, hunting, fishing. Reducing car dependency won't work for everyone. Mostly works in cities.
balfirevic 3y ago
It was the same - I just used public transport instead of the car to meet up with my friends. I never knew nor hung out with my neighbours, cars or no cars.

ghaff 3y ago

It depends on the activities. I’m less active in the local outdoors group than I was but basically everyone has a car, even if they live in the city which I don’t, because it gets very old seeking out carpools for specific trips all the time.

TurkishPoptart 3y ago

In my city (west coast), public transport is simply not safe anymore (especially as a woman) due to lack of law enforcement or deterrents from crime. In my car - I feel safe. I am taking Krav Maga classes, but man, it didn't used to be this bad.

asdff 3y ago
I think the perception of risk is what is off more than anything. LA metro for example saw about 180 violent crimes on it last year. For a system that sees almost a third of a billion boarding a year, the risk of violent crime happening is so low it doesn't make sense to consider. I expect the crime rate is similarly low on other transit systems. https://libraryarchives.metro.net/DPGTL/CrimeStatReports/2023-May-CrimeStats.pdf https://libraryarchives.metro.net/DPGTL/CrimeStatReports/202...
- presentation 3y ago
  That said the risk of crazy people ruining your day for no reason is not low. Ultimately the problem isn’t transit (rather it’s part of the solution), the problem is that the US social fabric is messed up.
  - asdff 3y ago
    Its the same risk you face walking on the sidewalk or going in a grocery store though where you are also liable to find these crazy people.
JPws_Prntr_Fngr 3y ago
I strongly recommend finding a gym for Brazilian jiu jitsu, judo, muay thai, boxing, etc. They're constantly being testing and evolved through MMA fights, and they'll get you some full-contact, full-intensity sparring experience.
- watwut 3y ago
  I am not sure I want to travel on the bus with a scared man trained in multiple martial arts. All the stats say that criminality is pretty low, I am safe on the bus, but fearful scared trained dide sounds like someone who will make it less safe for all of us.
  - TurkishPoptart 3y ago
    You have no idea what you're talking about, but I'm glad you feel safe on the bus. Criminality stats are low, so the chances of being assaulted on our light rail or buses is indeed low, but it only takes one incident to lead to loss of life or injury. I'm not a "scared man", I'm trying to prepare myself for unhinged situations, which we've been witnessing at an increased rate after 2020, when our city/county reduced police and law enforcement presence. Here's an article about the massive rise in homicides in our county since 2019 [1]. Maybe the numbers are "low" to you, but it's 1000x higher than in countries such as Japan. I won't go further into the reasons why due to risk of being downvoted by people unwilling to accept the new reality of west coast urban life. [1]: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/law-justice/seattle-has-surpassed-2022-homicide-toll-with-3-months-left-in-2023 https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/law-justice/seattl...
    - ianburrell 3y ago
      I couldn't find historic chart for Seattle but most cities are having a similar spike in crime so I'm using NYC. The rise in crime from pandemic is from historically low numbers. The jump is big but the absolute numbers are still low. NYC had the same murder count in 2019 as 1948. 2022 was same as 2012. The peak in 1990 was 5 times as much as last year.
BobaFloutist 3y ago
I encourage you to check the stats, driving is one of the most dangerous things people routinely do, and nearly always far more dangerous than taking public transit.
- TurkishPoptart 3y ago
  Here's a case of rationalists misinterpreting risks based on data. Driving is a risk I accept. Being mugged or assaulted by someone on fentanyl with limited police or law enforcement on public transport is a risk that I cannot account for.
  - lmm 3y ago
    > Driving is a risk I accept. Being mugged or assaulted by someone on fentanyl with limited police or law enforcement on public transport is a risk that I cannot account for. Why the difference? Maybe you feel like you're more in control of what happens when you're driving? But realistically however safely you personally drive, you'd still be at risk of being driven into by someone else (and there's a parallel breakdown of the rule of law where uninsured, unlicensed drivers are everywhere nowadays) and there's not much you can do.
    - the_doctah 3y ago
      You can't compare getting raped to getting in a car crash. This line of argument is ridiculous.
      - BobaFloutist 3y ago
        I would rather get raped than die. Most people would. Edit: Actually, now that I think about it, what cases are you talking about where people get full on raped on public transit? That seems vanishingly rare, if at all extent.
      - TurkishPoptart 3y ago
        Right. I don't understand their thinking process here.

eschulz 3y ago

I think in the US cars can increase your time with friends and family. Many people are lucky to live within a 60 minute drive from close friends or family, but without access to a car those trips become an epic trek. This is especially the case for people as they age, have kids, have a tight schedule, etc. Furthermore, I'd venture to propose that this is not merely the case in the US. My family in Mexico City often use public transportation for work, but frequently drive to visit each other on weekends because that's much easier.

ryandrake 3y ago
Pretty sure OP's comment assumed city life. In most rural and suburban USA towns, cars are the only thing that enables connection to others. If cars suddenly disappeared, half of America would effectively become hermits (not to mention starve due to lack of access to basic necessities like groceries). Ending Car Dependence basically means move to a denser city, which you're never going to convince everyone to do.
- ericmay 3y ago
  No - car dependency isn’t a problem in rural areas, it’s a problem in metro areas. Places like Columbus, Indianapolis, Tampa Bay, San Diego, etc. are all completely 100% reliant on cars for transit. People already live in the cities, there isn’t anything to convince them of for that. Instead we have to build transit that allows people to not rely on a car for their daily needs. Not that you can’t have one, of course. But walking, biking, and rail infrastructure need much, much more funding and then we can reduce how we handicap society with car-only transit.
  - asdff 3y ago
    What is interesting is that there are pockets of car free living even in these examples. E.g. in Columbus you have 45000 undergraduates at Ohio state, the bulk of whom live within a half hour walk of campus and all their friends from college, and might only use their car to shuttle themselves and all their roommates to the grocery store once a week.

i_am_jl 3y ago

I'm lucky enough to have moved, but my last home was 4 miles from the closest store, 3.8 miles from the closest sidewalk. The closest bus stop was at the aforementioned store. These numbers weren't even that big for the area where I was living. If I didn't have a car I'd spend too much time coming and going from the places I'd need to be to engage with my community. I'd say "everyone should try living somewhere they don't need a car", but that's not feasible for everybody.

wizofaus 3y ago
It's only not feasible because that's how the infrastructure and town planning in many urban areas has been done, and has somewhat succeeded because the degree to which you'll be dependent on a car to get everywhere isn't a super high priority for most when first choosing somewhere to live. The challenge is convincing governments and home buyers that the pros of less car-dependent cities massively outweigh the cons (which are mostly around accepting being closer to your neighbours and having less yard space/more stairs, plus governments having to focus on more than a single mode of transport when building roads etc).

anthomtb 3y ago

>Reducing car dependency will increase social activity My social life (and sense of community) took off when I graduated from college, where I was largely living car-free, and started driving 45 minutes to my full-time job each day. How do you explain that? Living in a car-dependent community, and choosing to go car-free, sounds like adding another layer of social isolation to me.

presentation 3y ago
I would suspect most people are far more social in college than after, probably your circumstance is individual.

Eumenes 3y ago

My social circle activities involves hiking, camping, hunting, fishing. Reducing car dependency won't work for everyone. Mostly works in cities.

balfirevic 3y ago

It was the same - I just used public transport instead of the car to meet up with my friends. I never knew nor hung out with my neighbours, cars or no cars.