Hacker News Reader

Comment by olivermarks | Hacker News Reader

Penalizes families - say you have 3 kids, a dog and grand parents to move around you will need a larger vehicle. So many of these schemes to punish car ownership and use are invented by cyclists and people who don't need a car and don't think anyone else should have one either.

Also penalizes tradesmen who have trucks and vans.

View on HN

As long as cyclists are forced to share the road with cars they should get a say when it comes to car safety, especially when it comes to properties of cars that make them more dangerous to cyclists and others on the road.

Also worth pointing out that most cyclists are also car drivers.

The fact is that cars have been getting way bigger and heavier and don’t actually need to. And speaking of families, as someone with young kids, pickup trucks these days are especially scary.

Well, maybe the people with the huge family should pay more because there are more people?

In a world that is being brought closer and closer each day to climate disaster by the exponentially increasing exploitation of resources to satisfy the exponentially increasing needs of an exponentially increasing population… maybe we should be ever so slightly discouraging large family sizes instead of the current policy of subsidizing them?

Meh. You could offset this. Tradesmen could get a tax credit and families as well.

But why should we do something to fix the problem of increasing vehicle sizes at all when we could just do nothing and resign ourselves to the objectively awful status quo instead? After all if you change something, someone somewhere is going to be negatively impacted. Can’t have that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com