Car2Go + DriverlessCar + Uber - Better than mass transit someday? (Austin: rent, transfer)

[gpurcell]

Originally Posted by Komeht

Thread is pretty hilarious: driverless cars are the great white hope of the road warriors. "This will finally save us and our giant failed experiment will finally thrive!!! Viva Suburbs!

Never. Gonna. Happen.

The future is MORE public transit, not less and the answers to almost all of Steve's concerns lies in BETTER urbanism, not worse. The 21st Century will be the century of the city. By the end of it, most of the idiocy auto-dependency of the last 50 years will be a distant memory and a lesson learned. The next 25 years will be the tug of war as the perpetrators of sprawl attempt to save the last bits of failed experiment. By mid century, there won't even be a debate, it'll just be the long slow process of disassembling the bankrupt system and building anew in a way that worked for millenniums but was forgotten in the mad dash to embrace all things automobile.

But let's assume Steve's nutty idea has a 1% chance in actually happening the way he thinks it will. Is that how you design transit policy? Dorm room BS level altered state ideas "dooooood, like cars could just pick us up, you know like wherever and, and take us wherever...it'll be totally rad"

Lol, you guys rock.

Why are you so scared about the independence offered by personal vehicles?

[scm53]

Originally Posted by gpurcell

Why are you so scared about the independence offered by personal vehicles?

That one is easy.

Much of present-day new urbanism is statist. It envisions using the power of government to force people to adopt new urbanist ideas. An example is Portland, Oregon’s “urban growth boundary,” a line drawn on a map by government bureaucrats that tries to stop sprawl by decree. Guest what? It doesn’t work. Not only does it violate property rights, if you actually go to Portland and look what has been built inside the boundary, most of it is still sprawl.

What can be more statist, more elitist, than putting all of your future mobility investments in a fixed, unmoving guideway? To reap the direct benefits, you must live, work, and recreate in a given corridor - that has so much investment, it will never change. More neat lines, more coercion.

Heaven forbid that individuals have choices. They might choose wrong.

[Komeht]

Originally Posted by gpurcell

Why are you so scared about the independence offered by personal vehicles?

Very simple - it's a false completely illusory independence that actually results in the enslavement of mass numbers of people to auto-depedency and the degradation of our cities to the hideousness of sprawl.

[Komeht]

Originally Posted by scm53

That one is easy.



What can be more statist, more elitist, than putting all of your future mobility investments in a fixed, unmoving guideway? To reap the direct benefits, you must live, work, and recreate in a given corridor - that has so much investment, it will never change. More neat lines, more coercion.

Heaven forbid that individuals have choices. They might choose wrong.

1. I love how you started with "yeah Steve, - great idea - Jarrett Walker kinda solution." And then immediately confronted with Jarrett Walker pointing out exactly why it's a terrible idea you pivot to the complete red herring of "urbanists are statists!!!!" Need I point out that Jarrett Walker is very very much an urbanist?

2. I'm an urbanist because I'm a conservative. Urbanism offers far more freedoms and is a far more efficient way for governments to function as they don't have to subsidize lifestyles of the few and far between. Suburbanism and sprawl is also 100% prescribed and the result of a top down regulatory scheme that assumes that state knows better than 1000's of people making 1000's of independent decisions working out to be an intelligent network (you know, the way we always built cities and towns and all the truly great cities and towns were built this way).

3. But i'm not a complete unthinking libertarian who thinks that massive automobile subsidies are just fine, but TRANSIT is evil. There are a few ways that governments can do great things - and making sure we have a multi-modal system to move goods and peoples arounds so that they can get to the business of making us all profit is one of them.

[gpurcell]

Originally Posted by Komeht

Very simple - it's a false completely illusory independence that actually results in the enslavement of mass numbers of people to auto-depedency and the degradation of our cities to the hideousness of sprawl.

So, freedom is being able to go where and when central planners allow us and "false independence" is being able to go where I want when I want whenever I want.

Got it.

[Komeht]

Originally Posted by gpurcell

So, freedom is being able to go where and when central planners allow us and "false independence" is being able to go where I want when I want whenever I want.

Got it.

Independence is having the choice of how one can get around to meet one's daily needs and wants. Dependency is being restricted to one way of living - must have a car to get anywhere or go anywhere.

If you've ever been to a place with truly good transit you wouldn't think you were restricted - you'd be liberated by the amazing variety of options and choices.

I prefer cities that allow for true independence, not the illusion of it.

[scm53]

Originally Posted by Komeht

... a complete unthinking librarian...

Tell us more about these "unthinking librarians".

OBTW - never said "urbanists are statists!!!!". More of your hallmark manicheanism.

[Komeht]

Originally Posted by scm53

Tell us more about these "unthinking librarians".

OBTW - never said "urbanists are statists!!!!". More of your hallmark manicheanism.

"unthinking libertarian" obviously.

I'm not going to get into a debate with you about what you obviously implied. I mean - the link was to a Free Republic post! OMG - I just realized - you're a Freeper!!!!!!!! LOL

OK ok, ok - whew - that explains ALOT.

Thanks - I'm out.

[gpurcell]

Originally Posted by Komeht

Independence is having the choice of how one can get around to meet one's daily needs and wants. Dependency is being restricted to one way of living - must have a car to get anywhere or go anywhere.

If you've ever been to a place with truly good transit you wouldn't think you were restricted - you'd be liberated by the amazing variety of options and choices.

I prefer cities that allow for true independence, not the illusion of it.

I lived in London.

So, you fail there.

[Komeht]

Originally Posted by gpurcell

I lived in London.

So, you fail there.

And you drove everywhere. . .never used the tube or the amazing bike network or the tremendously walkable streets to get you where you needed to go.

I'd find that hard to believe. Very very hard to believe.