The Nonexistent War on Cars (suburban, transportation, landscape, major)

[wburg]

Often it seems like advocates of TOD, public transit, bicycling and other less-suburban modes of living are accused of hating automobiles or wanting to eliminate cars altogether. This article and its accompanying study point out what seems obvious to me: there is no such thing as a "war on cars," just as nobody is trying to force all Americans to live in Soviet-style apartment blocks or Manhattan-style skyscrapers.

The latest battle in the nonexistent ‘War on Cars’ | Grist

Critics are wrong to claim that raising road tolls, parking fees or fuel taxes is unfair. Does charging admission at movie theatres constitute a "war on film viewers"? Does charging for bread constitute a "war on eaters?"

The truth is, as Litman points out, that no one is calling for an obliteration of cars from the American landscape. Reform advocates instead want policies that give more people more choice -- which might be nice, considering the way gas prices are going.

And choice is really what it is all about--the ability to choose between different modes of living and different modes of transportation, which varies from place to place.

Recently, The Washington's Post Ezra Klein wrote a post (in response to the recent anti-rail screed from Newsweek's George Will) called "Can't I just be pro-transportation?" Here's how Klein puts it:

My household owns a car. When it breaks down, we will purchase another car. And yet, I think it'd be good for this country to have better mass transit and better high-speed rail lines. Why? Well, my car is good for some things and bad for others. It's good for going to get dinner in the suburbs, or furniture from Ikea. It's bad for driving around Washington's insanely crowded city streets during rush hour. It's good for picking up a used chair I bought on 14th Street. It's bad for driving to work, as parking costs $15 a day. It's good for getting to places an hour or two away. It's bad for getting to New York, as I don't have a place to park, don't want to drive while I'm there and would like to use my transit time to get some work done.

Nobody is saying that rural residents have to trade their autos for public transit, nobody is threatening to plow up all the suburbs and shove suburbanites in a "Trail of Tears" into cold-water flats and inner-city tenements. But the myth of the "War on Cars" persists somehow--this article (and its linked references) provides some solid evidence to the contrary.

[Chango]

I admit it. I LOVE cars. I love the mobility and freedom I get from owning a couple nice cars. I love going fast and 4wheeling up/down crazy-hard trails..I really do.

But damn... I will not be able to afford to pay for future gas prices that will make today's prices seem like a bargain.

I will cry bucketloads of tears when I can no longer regularly hear the roar of gas engines, but it's gonna happen, sure as winter comes every year. Hell, it's already happening...

[wburg]

Chango: I don't agree. The automobile is going to be with us for a long time. Your hobby may be more expensive, but you will still be able to engage in it--the difference is that your hobby may not continue to be a requirement for living and working in most of the United States.

[Tobias C]

Cars don't need to go away. Imposed car based lifestyles do however. Owning a car should just be more akin to owning a boat, ATV, or snowmobile. Still a transportation option, but more of a personal toy, than a necessity. Maybe we would see way less cars everywhere and those driving them would just be leisure driving and not driving like reckless a-holes. Perhaps then we could put stiffer penalties on driving recklessly. That would be better.

I shouldn't need a car though.

[AJNEOA]

Nice post wburg. I don't see how anyone can argue against having options. This says it all:

Well, my car is good for some things and bad for others.

I've mentioned many times how I hate driving. However, it's mostly a product of not having options, as Klein wrote. Most places in the US provide little-to-no practical choices, thus my current reliance on a car.

[pvande55]

I do not think cars and trucks should have a monopoly on transportation. There is also the impression that since electric cars are being introduced, we will be forced to switch. Equally ludicrous.

[uptown_urbanist]

I would absolutely love a "war on auto dependency." I agree that in an ideal world the car would be a nice option, but not a necessity for life for most Americans. Cars certainly have their uses and their place, but it's a major problem that for so many Americans living without a car is not a realistic option.

Although as an aside, I hate it when former LA residents talk about "lack of options" living there; I've lived in LA and in DC, and I found LA's mass transit to be FAR better than most people realize. I think it's just the fashionable thing to do to bash LA on that front. I think the constant bashing of certain cities for lack of public transit (when it does exist, and is better than most places) and the simultaneous rhapsodizing about the public transit in a few select other cities, makes it easier for the general public to say "yeah, well, I don't live in New York or DC, so I don't have any choice but to rely on my car." I'd like to see more encouragement of people even in the non-traditional public-transit cities to give it a shot as it exists currently, and then build from there.