Hacker News Reader

Comment by JumpCrisscross | Hacker News Reader

> it's not like there isn't room to improve

Losing one's license means destitution for many Americans. That places practical limits on enforcement compared with less car-oriented countries.

View on HN

I'm from Belgium, and even with public transportation, there are a large group of people dependent on their driver's license.

But if you ask someone if they'd drive without insurance, or without driver's license they look at you like you've asked them to do the impossible.

Whereas in the US no-one bats an eye when that happens. Half the time the cops just issue a ticket, and don't even tow the car.

And now people who obey the law need to take out extra insurance for under/uninsured motorists.

> if you ask someone if they'd drive without insurance, or without driver's license they look at you like you've asked them to do the impossible

To wit: Europe's 1.8% (and Belgium's 0.7%) uninsured-driver rates are a fraction of America's 15% [1][2].

[1] https://www.mibi.ie/ireland-may-have-highest-level-of-uninsu...

[2] https://www.iii.org/fact-statistic/facts-statistics-uninsure...

In countries like The Netherlands it is impossible to drive around uninsured. So that is probably why the number is so low.

> it is impossible to drive around uninsured

How?

Because fines are automatic. If you register a vehicle to your name and don't insure it within 28 days you get a €500 fine. The government can fine you up to three times a year for a total of €1500. And that is if you actually pay the fines. If you do not pay the fines and let the fees stack up, you are looking at around €4500 per year.

And if you are caught driving uninsured that is a €700 fine on top of all that. With many police cars now having ANPR systems it just isn't possible to drive around uninsured without receiving fines that cost way more than just getting insurance.

> If you register a vehicle to your name and don't insure it within 28 days you get a €500 fine

Oh, this is actually a really good idea. Wild we don't link those systems.

I still see dozens of unplated mopeds in The Netherlands so the system is not perfect but they are trying to fix it.

And quite possibly your vehicle will get impounded and sold at auction.

> there are a large group of people dependent on their driver's license

Are there "no licence cars" in Belgium and the US ? Basically a moped motor and a seat inside a box. 45kmh and no highway, but a bit more confortable and fast than a ebike for rural environment.

Not really, the cross section of people who lose their license/insurance and those that could use something like an ebike reliably for their commute is practically zilch. The US is really big and a lot of people have rural 30+ minute commutes where it snows ~6 months out of the year.

Oh I was’t clear: I’m not talking about an ebike but a very small and underpowered car like this one https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-35210572

There’re somewhat popular here for those that doesn’t have a licence and offer some of the advantage but are less dangerous to others.

> The US is really big and a lot of people have rural 30+ minute commutes

The size of the country in which a commute is contained is immaterial to the length of that commute. What you mean is not "the US is big" but "things are really far apart in the US". Which they are, but precisely because of car-centric (car-only, actually) design.

Things being far apart in the US predates cars. Rail made that possible.

Rails encouraged density around the train stations.

Rail is not responsible for the car sprawling type of communities which are mostly a 20th century phenomenon.

Those do exist in Belgium, but (joke starts here) that's because Belgium is enormous, far too large to get proper public transport going (joke ends). I am seeing more and more cargo e-bikes (e-cargo bikes?), which I find a positive change, though it does differ from place to place (Antwerp's fairly okay for bikes, same for Leuven, Brussels was pretty bad last time I was there).

You are right that this happens frequently in the United States compared to Europe, but you are overstating the degree to which this culturally and legally acceptable. People who are doing this are not typically broadcasting it to others, and I can assure you that when they do, for the most part people will tend to "bat an eye" at the very least.

Note that motor vehicle insurance in most of Europe is more tightly regulated and generally more affordable than in the United States. Also, I suspect the car-dependent individuals in urban areas with robust public transportation in Belgium are generally vastly higher income than the typical uninsured compulsory driver in the United States. Happy to be corrected though

> you are overstating the degree to which this culturally and legally acceptable

In Florida it's a $150 fine [1]. If you do it again within 3 years, they charge you $250. If you do it again within that three-year period, they'll just charge you $500 each time. It's not even a crime [2].

[1] https://www.valuepenguin.com/auto-insurance/florida/penaltie...

[2] https://www.kevinkuliklaw.com/is-it-a-crime-to-drive-without...

What point are you trying to make?

If you can be fined for a behavior, and lose privileges like the ability to operate a motor vehicle, then it is not legally acceptable.

> But if you ask someone if they'd drive without insurance, or without driver's license they look at you like you've asked them to do the impossible.

> Whereas in the US no-one bats an eye when that happens. Half the time the cops just issue a ticket, and don't even tow the car.

A lot of the people driving without insurance or licenses in the US are illegal immigrants, which means enforcement of driving illegally is caught up in the same cultural-war fight over immigration law enforcement that has dominated American news since Trump got re-elected. "And now people who obey the law need to take out extra insurance for under/uninsured motorists" is specifically an anti-illegal-immigrant talking point.

It’s almost like there’s consequences to making it as hard as possible for people to be legalized.

It's equally a consequence of not immediately arresting and deporting illegal immigrants the moment the government learns about their presence on US soil.

The easy way to accomplish that would be to go after the businesses that employ them. At this point, however, I think it's safe to assume it's not the real objective, and the economy would crash into a ditch if policy was anything but theater.

> Losing one's license means destitution for many Americans.

That'd be the same for a Swede who lives in the middle of nowhere too. Although I'm sure both groups, if they'd loose their license, would continue driving anyways.

Clearly, a bit weird to assume that no license would automatically mean that the driver stops driving, that's not true at all.

...But what percentage of Swedes is that? vs the vast majority of working-class Americans.

Remember, outside of its few biggest and wealthiest cities, the US just does not have decent, reliable public transport, and most places don't have any.

And how many Americans live in places without any public transport?

As a European I spend some time in LA and Las Vegas and while not optimal I could get everywhere without a car. I could even do a day-trip to Bakersfield by bus.

Your anecdata to this one time you took a trip to California doesn’t help.

You can just look at % of urban residents that use transit, which is lower in US than any western country. Clearly transit isn’t built or available in a sufficient way to majority of people

Tons of options other than removing the ability to drive. More stringent enforcement, higher fines.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com