Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Am I the only one who prefers a car to shared trains/rideshare/walking? Knowing I have a portable climate controlled space when the weather isn't to my liking? Knowing I can conveniently leave things fairly securely near where I happen to be (if not at home)? Knowing that no-one has recently barfed in my car, or have to wonder: ugh, what's that stain on the seat? Not having to run my life around a transit schedule (or deal with a full or very crowded bus/train) is great. The freedom cars give is absolutely wonderful relief from these things that you encounter in the city.

Personally, I don't get pro-urbanization: it's crowded, loud, smelly, and for all that wondrous enjoyment (and more), crazy expensive. I like not being able to see/hear my neighbors and for them not to see/hear me. I like that my views are very pretty. I like that the noises I hear are nature, and not man/machines. I like that I get to spend more of my money on things other than rent (other things are cheaper in the 'burbs too). And to someone else's point -- I live in a city, but looking around, you'd never know it.

But maybe I'm just weird.




uh, you may be missing the point. Few if any are against cars because the experience is poor. Absolutely the experience is individually superior. The point is that car usage is selfish, wasteful and generally worse for society as a whole.

in the west we are used to and loath to give up these comforts. personal cars, large suburban homes.. look at places that have modernized more recently, like in east Asia. Density, verticality, public transportation, these are the name of the game. Of course they would prefer to have their own cars and large homes, but the reality is that it's too inefficient for society to support.


Selfish? Really? That's your socialist dogwhistle right there.

Wasteful? That's in the eye of the beholder. It all depends on what you value. Some people value things differently than you.

Worse for society? Is it better to have to have millions of people burn substantially more time of their lives to live in cities due to the added expense? Is that really better for the poor?

Density is not a virtue. Misery of crowded, smelly, noisy and expensive, cities is not a virtue to inflict. Some people prefer cities. Good for them. Many do not.

Too inefficient? For whom? Funny, it works really well for many millions.

If you're pro-misery, claim it and own it. I just find it ironic that people from smoggy smelly cities are judging people from the comparatively, beautiful, clean, and low crime suburbs.

Try exiting your bubble.


Please don't cross into personal attack on HN. We ban accounts that do that repeatedly.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: