Hacker News Reader

Comment by anlsh | Hacker News Reader

Hah! Cars have been around for just a hundred years or so, and yet serious efforts to reduce our dependency on them are "near impossible." Talk about recency bias.

View on HN

Would you say something similar about computers?

No. But we're talking about cars, not computers, and their novelty is just one among many strong pieces of evidence that a much less car-dependent society is possible, even desirable. Perhaps you can refute the existence billions of people on the planet who live without commuting via car, or the dense networks of public transit which they often rely on?

> Perhaps you can refute the existence billions of people on the planet who live without commuting via car, or the dense networks of public transit which they often rely on?

You have to remember that the infrastructure they depend on to have drinkable water, stores with food on shelves, power and other media, itself is built around cars and trucks, and depends on them being available and able to drive everywhere. Cars are intertwined with everything else in modern civilization - you can't just rip them out. Even if everyone other than critical infrastructure operators suddenly got rid of their cars, this still wouldn't let you eliminate roads from the city, as the trucks and construction equipment and ambulances etc. need to be able to go everywhere.

It’s funny because you’re actually arguing against yourself. Those of us who want to reduce car dependency think exactly that: the use of cars, trucks and roads should be reserved for the less able, the elderly, delivery and emergency vehicles etc. Everyone else who don’t need to be there shouldn’t be. Imagine how much easier and safer everyone’s life would be if roads weren’t gridlocked by the countless million people making unnecessary trips in single occupant automobiles who don’t need to.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com