r/fuckcars / Not Just Bikes / Urbanists / New Urbanism / Car-Free / Anti-Car - People and grifters who hate personal transport, freedom, cars, roads, suburbs, and are obsessed with city planning and urban design

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
I'm alright with transit as it serves its purpose, what I don't like is the glazing of it without speaking of its downsides or using transit as a tool for gay ass political games as it's usually with these types. They don't want to make people who use transit's lives better, they want to make car owners lives worse.
The thing that annoys me the most about transit is simultaneously arguing of its efficiency and its need to be around for the poors and drunks. When they talk about the efficiency of a mass transit system, those numbers always refer to the maximum capacity. Trains don't reach maximum capacity typically except during peak hours (if they can even hit it), every other time they aren't efficient. What's especially annoying in this case is that they'll pretend that they're efficient and then turn right back around and say that they need it at 2 am when the bars close.

You driving a sedan that has three seats empty from point A to point B is a problem but a bus that's 95% empty driving aimlessly around town isn't.
 
The thing that annoys me the most about transit is simultaneously arguing of its efficiency and its need to be around for the poors and drunks. When they talk about the efficiency of a mass transit system, those numbers always refer to the maximum capacity. Trains don't reach maximum capacity typically except during peak hours (if they can even hit it), every other time they aren't efficient. What's especially annoying in this case is that they'll pretend that they're efficient and then turn right back around and say that they need it at 2 am when the bars close.

You driving a sedan that has three seats empty from point A to point B is a problem but a bus that's 95% empty driving aimlessly around town isn't.

What gets my goat is them going to say if you aren't using maximum space in your car it's a waste as if we need to be cramped all the time. Anything else would be absurd like if I said you didn't need a personal television because the theater is more efficient in space and energy. Id be even somewhat fine if they believed that we need to sacrifice a great quality of life for the next generations to live better, but I doubt it. Why do we have to return to an early industrial way of living?
 
What gets my goat is them going to say if you aren't using maximum space in your car it's a waste as if we need to be cramped all the time. Anything else would be absurd like if I said you didn't need a personal television because the theater is more efficient in space and energy. Id be even somewhat fine if they believed that we need to sacrifice a great quality of life for the next generations to live better, but I doubt it. Why do we have to return to an early industrial way of living?
I remember once seeing someone argue with a bugman and saying "well do you want to ban kitchens too? They're unused most of the time and people might be cooking unhealthy food, something might even catch fire, someone might scald themselves with hot water...", and the bugman, without a hint of irony, replied along the lines of "well we'd need experts to discuss that first, but if they agree then I don't see why not". This was IRL, too, not someone trolling on the internet. I firmly believe that these people don't have souls.
 
Id be even somewhat fine if they believed that we need to sacrifice a great quality of life for the next generations to live better,
A lot of them do believe this, but they are advocating for sacrifices they themselves don't have to make. They are fine being a single childless adult biking around the city doing gigs and day drinking, they want you to tear your lifestyle up to stop global warming or whatever.
 
I remember once seeing someone argue with a bugman and saying "well do you want to ban kitchens too? They're unused most of the time and people might be cooking unhealthy food, something might even catch fire, someone might scald themselves with hot water...", and the bugman, without a hint of irony, replied along the lines of "well we'd need experts to discuss that first, but if they agree then I don't see why not". This was IRL, too, not someone trolling on the internet. I firmly believe that these people don't have souls.
That just reminded me... are we still freaking out about natural gas ovens?
 
I remember once seeing someone argue with a bugman and saying "well do you want to ban kitchens too? They're unused most of the time and people might be cooking unhealthy food, something might even catch fire, someone might scald themselves with hot water...", and the bugman, without a hint of irony, replied along the lines of "well we'd need experts to discuss that first, but if they agree then I don't see why not". This was IRL, too, not someone trolling on the internet. I firmly believe that these people don't have souls.

Well the deferrence to Experts is silly because even if they're not exaggerating the details for funding or credibility, they're experts in one hyper specific field and things as complex as transportation and logistics might touch at least a dozen different fields.
 
Well the deferrence to Experts is silly because even if they're not exaggerating the details for funding or credibility, they're experts in one hyper specific field and things as complex as transportation and logistics might touch at least a dozen different fields.
What a load of horseshit. A stove expert is a stove expert. I myself am a stove expert that works with the largest manufacturers of electric stoves in the world. So I have on good authority to say that gas stoves are of the devil! You think they use natural gas? They work by pumping hellfire straight from the tap. Everytime you turn on your stove you are letting a little bit of hell into your home. Do you want your children's food warmed by Lucifer's butthole?! That is why we need to work together to pass legislation to ban these infernal contraptions from our homes!
 
What a load of horseshit. A stove expert is a stove expert. I myself am a stove expert that works with the largest manufacturers of electric stoves in the world. So I have on good authority to say that gas stoves are of the devil! You think they use natural gas? They work by pumping hellfire straight from the tap. Everytime you turn on your stove you are letting a little bit of hell into your home. Do you want your children's food warmed by Lucifer's butthole?! That is why we need to work together to pass legislation to ban these infernal contraptions from our homes!
You convinced me - I ripped out my gas stove and installed an electric stove. There's a weird whooshing noise coming from the pipe in the wall and everything is purple and trippy but I'm sure that'll go away once I turn my electric stove to max power to cook all this spaghetti...
 
Just saw a new one on one of my social media feeds about adding lanes to freeways. Of course it all started with people claiming LA traffic worsend with adding lanes, but other people added context that explains why traffic remained bad.
The main problem is that they don't add isolated express lanes and when they do they are toll only. So you can't filter through and local traffic and it ends up in a giant mashup that confuses the inexperienced. Atlanta is a perfect example in that basically all interstate traffic through Georgia travels through it and you can either detour 100 miles out using back roads or suffer from its complete daytime congestion. It needs another ring road outside of i285 just to handle the traffic that wants to avoid Atlanta in the first place.

The problem with the induced demand theory is that there is a general trend of traffic and volume but then that gets oversimplified into bad takes
The levels of traffic is exponentially more than it was 50 years ago. From shipping consumer goods world wide to constant daily trips to the store, everyone does things much more inefficiently than the past.
 
I remember once seeing someone argue with a bugman and saying "well do you want to ban kitchens too? They're unused most of the time and people might be cooking unhealthy food, something might even catch fire, someone might scald themselves with hot water...", and the bugman, without a hint of irony, replied along the lines of "well we'd need experts to discuss that first, but if they agree then I don't see why not". This was IRL, too, not someone trolling on the internet. I firmly believe that these people don't have souls.
Considering that a lot of these people just do takeout anyway, the kitchen argument is a bad one. Better argument is toilets, because they too take up significant space in a household and are not used most of the time. But then you might have people arguing that "Well when I went to CGNU, my dorm had one toilet between four people".

The main problem is that they don't add isolated express lanes and when they do they are toll only. So you can't filter through and local traffic and it ends up in a giant mashup that confuses the inexperienced. Atlanta is a perfect example in that basically all interstate traffic through Georgia travels through it and you can either detour 100 miles out using back roads or suffer from its complete daytime congestion. It needs another ring road outside of i285 just to handle the traffic that wants to avoid Atlanta in the first place.
Atlanta's traffic is really messed up because I-75 and I-85 merge onto a single freeway, there's one loop despite massive suburban growth, and the surface roads for the most part follow contours, not north-south roads. (Knoxville has similar issues, complete with I-75 sharing with another freeway). They'd never admit it but Houston and Dallas are how to build your city if you're going to sprawl out.

The levels of traffic is exponentially more than it was 50 years ago. From shipping consumer goods world wide to constant daily trips to the store, everyone does things much more inefficiently than the past.
Heavy traffic is because a lot of these highways were built back in the 1960s and only have had piecemeal updates (if at all) while population has doubled. It's why the "one more lane" really isn't a panacea, and no one claimed it would be.

But, I have to disagree with "more inefficiently" than the past. For some things, they're more inefficient, if you're sending out Abdul to fetch you a bag of fast food or ordering cheap crap on Amazon Prime, most things have increased in efficiency. I harp on and on about logistics because that's what's been driving change in cities. Small warehouses with garage doors have been closed in favor of massive warehouses that service hundreds of restaurants or stores within a day or two's travel. Trucks can move large volumes of product into stores, and load it directly into stores, no hand truck needed.

Refrigeration and frozen foods have allowed you do to the shopping for the week and not have to take daily trips to the store. That's the great irony of the urbanists. They want to spend time shopping for food every single day, in stores serviced by small box trucks that have to park in the street (or bike lane) and manually unload product in the elements.
 
But, I have to disagree with "more inefficiently" than the past.
Inefficient in terms of "work per trip" is the kind I meant. The most efficient form of transport is the kind that let's you do the most work per trip with the least amount of wasted resources. Its the thing urbanists jerk off over without understanding the conversation. Motorcycles are the most efficient form of transport for most people's daily needs for commuting but neglect every other facet of life. Just like trains/busses are the most efficient form of transportation for moving massive amounts of people in a short period of time. They both neglect huge factors in every other way. There's a reason 90% of the population own a hatchback vehicle that seats about 4 adults, it covers the majority of actual use cases while being cheap in service and gas.

As always they hate cars because they are representative of an alternative lifestyle that specifically excludes them. Not being able to drive is fine when you are a young adult and can mooch rides or pay for Uber, not so much when you have to drag kids around. They are myopic.
 
xaphro's return said:
Better argument is toilets, because they too take up significant space in a household and are not used most of the time. But then you might have people arguing that "Well when I went to CGNU, my dorm had one toilet between four people".

"I share my wife with other men because the days we don't sleep together are underutilized capacity."
1773399400905.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Just saw a new one on one of my social media feeds about adding lanes to freeways. Of course it all started with people claiming LA traffic worsend with adding lanes, but other people added context that explains why traffic remained bad. There was a lot of other things going on at the time, plus maybe an alternate route is better once a number of lanes is reached because merging over becomes too much. There was also talk about some recent widenings somewhere. All had tolls or were restricted lanes so they had very little impact on improving traffic.

These thoughts could not stand so some genius comes up with this: Think of traffic like water. Water takes the shape of any container it fills. So if you widen the container, it will spread out. If you widen the freeways, the traffic will also fill the new lanes.

Do I need to explain to anyone here how double digit retarded that take is? And yes, it had way too many positive reacts for my comfort.
By the way, Los Angeles never fully built out its original highway plan, which was designed for a population far smaller than the current one:

1958 Greater Los Angeles Freeway Plan​

1958 Greater Los Angeles Freeway Plan.jpg

LA's freeway system is famous for better or worse, but there are lots of misconceptions about it:

LA, with the exception of the San Fernando Valley, is not, as is condescendingly claimed, a city "built around the automobile", its suburbs are, but it predominantly grew up in the streetcar era, which you will quickly see if you take a quick drive through the residential areas of Central, with their narrow lots and backyard garages. LA really straddles an uncomfortable line between dense older cities like Chicago and sprawling newer ones like Houston. In fact, when the Regional Planning Commission issued its seminal report in 1943, they mourned LA's underdeveloped road network compared to Chicago and New York.

LA's freeway network isn't as massive as you think. The metro area is near the bottom for freeway miles per capita, behind Boston and Washington DC.

But there was a time when the city was planning for much much more. In 1958, there were plans for 1500 miles for Los Angeles, Ventura, and Orange Counties. No part of LA County would've been more than 4 miles from a freeway. In the end, only 60% of it got built, and if all of it did, LA would still not be in the top 10 for freeway miles per capita.

I can't go through all the unbuilt freeways, but there are some notable ones:

1958 Greater Los Angeles Freeway Plan (1).jpg

The Beverly Hills freeway would've gone along Santa Monica Boulevard, for this reason, earlier planning documents confusingly call it the Santa Monica Freeway while I-10 was called the Olympic Freeway after Olympic Avenue. It was cancelled because rich people get what they want, which was bad news for Century City commuters, as the development was planned with freeway access in mind. Oddly enough, Governor Ronald Reagan, who you'd assume would be sympathetic to the plight of the rich, kept it alive as long as he could, all the better to repay the campaign donations of Century City's developers, vetoing 3 bills that would've killed it. Not until Jerry Brown came along was a fork finally stuck in it.

The Laurel Canyon freeway would've gone along Laurel Canyon and then La Cienga Boulevard. It was cancelled for the same reason, except for a small section that travels through the Inglewood Oilfields, causing the world famous traffic jams on the 405.

The Slauson Freeway became the Richard Nixon Freeway then, after Watergate, the Marina Freeway. It would've gone along Slauson Avenue. Only a short spur near Marina Del Ray and another one near Yorba Linda (Nixon's birthplace) was built. The problem with this route was cost, according to the New York Times.

Cost was also the likely reason for the scrapping of the Whitnall Freeway, which would've been a North-South route parallel to the Laurel Canyon Freeway before turning to an East-West route in the San Fernando Valley. It was named after LA planner Gordon Whitnall and construction had started in 1927 before suddenly being cancelled due to the depression and then later revived in the 50s. The right of way had already been cleared when the plug was pulled in 1975.

The 103, or Industrial Freeway, would've spanned all the way through downtown and Chinatown before terminating at the 110.

1958 Greater Los Angeles Freeway Plan (2).jpg

The Pacific Coast Highway would've become the Pacific Coast Freeway with part of it going on an offshore causeway by Santa Monica. There were one or two problems with this: it would've required 97 million cubic yards of the Santa Monica mountains be carved out for the landfill (although that would've made more space for housing), tidal forces would've required constant dredging to prevent silting, and obviously, residents were not pleased with the potential loss of their oceanfront views. Governor Pat Brown vetoed a bill funding the causeway in 1965, killing it. The rest of the route didn't fare much better. Long Beach residents were furious about the impact it would have on their city's downtown and the mayors of Costa Mesa and Newport Beach got into a fistfight. It was officially removed from the plan in 1967.

The Century Freeway, the last new freeway in Los Angeles, and probably the last freeway of its type in the country, was planned to go all the way to San Bernadino. From a social justice perspective, the Century would wind up being arguably the least problematic freeway ever to be forced through a densely populated urban area. That's because Judge Harry Pregerson, in a consent decree, forced Caltrans to go to some impressive lengths to compensate for the disruption it caused. So it had noise barriers, carpool lanes, light rail running through the median, and he forced them to build new housing for those displaced and to hire workers from the neighborhoods it was to tear through. For that, the interchange with I-110 was named in his honor.

Route 23 was going to be turned into the Decker Freeway. The difficulty of the terrain doomed it, and probably the Topanga, Malibu, and Reseda Freeways.

1958 Greater Los Angeles Freeway Plan (3).jpg

Mulholland Drive was going to become the Mulholland Scenic Parkway, with 6 lanes of traffic.
Source (Archive)
 
I remember once seeing someone argue with a bugman and saying "well do you want to ban kitchens too? They're unused most of the time and people might be cooking unhealthy food, something might even catch fire, someone might scald themselves with hot water...", and the bugman, without a hint of irony, replied along the lines of "well we'd need experts to discuss that first, but if they agree then I don't see why not". This was IRL, too, not someone trolling on the internet. I firmly believe that these people don't have souls.
About that:
1773416524935.png
1773416595199.png
Source (Archive)
 
The thing that annoys me the most about transit is simultaneously arguing of its efficiency and its need to be around for the poors and drunks. When they talk about the efficiency of a mass transit system, those numbers always refer to the maximum capacity. Trains don't reach maximum capacity typically except during peak hours (if they can even hit it), every other time they aren't efficient. What's especially annoying in this case is that they'll pretend that they're efficient and then turn right back around and say that they need it at 2 am when the bars close.

You driving a sedan that has three seats empty from point A to point B is a problem but a bus that's 95% empty driving aimlessly around town isn't.
My favorite part of this argument is no transit authority wants busses or trains running that late cause paying people to work late has a big premium, and the ridership is terrible at super late hours, maybe the fat urbanists will finally get some exercise walking an hour to the only bus stop with a running bus (they're just gonna call an uber).
 
I'm a little lost on this map. What is that space by the kitchen where everyone is clumped up around the circle? Is that another dining area? Also having a family room and living room be separate spaces is also an odd choice as they usually blend together. Then you have the bathroom connected to a room with a sink which seems redundant. Also is it a front porch or back porch? Back porches get a lot of milage during summer BBQs.

I also don't understand what the person is complaining about. A room is a room, if you don't want or need a dedicated dining room you could just use the space for something else.
 
I'm a little lost on this map. What is that space by the kitchen where everyone is clumped up around the circle? Is that another dining area? Also having a family room and living room be separate spaces is also an odd choice as they usually blend together. Then you have the bathroom connected to a room with a sink which seems redundant. Also is it a front porch or back porch? Back porches get a lot of milage during summer BBQs.

I also don't understand what the person is complaining about. A room is a room, if you don't want or need a dedicated dining room you could just use the space for something else.
Yeah for a lot of people the living room and family room are basically interchangeable (relatively few people have both unless you have a large house) and whatever you call it, it's typically a large room in the house where the television is.

Likewise, the image seems to have two dining rooms. The smaller one gets used often, but the bigger one, which I assume is for larger gatherings, rarely does.

I assume that this household has two dining rooms because they wanted to, and the Dunning-Kreuger midwit didn't notice the second dining room. The porch non-use was admitted that it was only two weekends, and it might've been too cold or too hot to use.

The idea of hanging out at someone's house just seems unfathomable to these people. The fact is bars and restaurants are kind of shit to hang out at with a large group. Restaurants typically don't like moving tables together, you're obliged to spend money there, and they kick you out after closing. When you visit someone's house, you can stay as late as the host allows you. If you're a real party animal, where do you go after the bars close? Unless you're extremely well-connected, someone's house.
 
This video has been floating around on my homepage for a few days
https://youtube.com/watch?v=p_0ox4BDDGk(local archive)
Introducing Reg! - Foxfield Railway Official (720p, h264).mp4
If you thought trains couldn't get any gayer, you were woefully incorrect.

They even had the audacity to name their goon puppet after the lead designer of the Supermarine spitfire:
View attachment 8634169

Of course, there are plenty of animal fuckers in the comments:

View attachment 8634008

View attachment 8634013
(hope this guy likes getting gang raped by muslims)


View attachment 8634018


View attachment 8634024

View attachment 8634028

View attachment 8634045

As well as some AI sperging:
View attachment 8634035

View attachment 8634040

And finally, the artist that designed the character, Fattydragonite, has a Furaffinity page where he draws furry fat fetish "art": https://www.furaffinity.net/gallery/fattydragonite/(archive)(you have been warned)
Iirc there has been a meltdown due to him now leaving twitter entirely because people "kept giving him shit". All this started months before when infamous fat fetishist Pyrocynical replied to some fat animation he did and people kept using it as a reaction gif, so when this came around everyone went "oh it's HIM???!?!?!?!1/1/1/?" before he just decided to up and leave.
 
Back
Top Bottom