It’s not just the government that’s banning cars – or making it hard to own a car. Private developers are working toward the same thing – styled the “attrition of the automobile” in urban planning circles.
One of these developers – Culdesac – is erecting a specifically car-attrited stack-a-prole apartment complex in Tempe, AZ. There are no parking spaces or even places nearby to park a car. The whole point of the operation – in the words of Culdesac’s visionaries – is to build “housing” for the “post-car era.”
Which would be fine if it were a natural evolution. Some people either don’t like or don’t feel the need for cars – or for the personal space/independent ownership a single family home provides – and like the idea of being able to walk or bicycle to and fro.
Such people choose to live in cities – and apartments.
What’s not fine is forcing people who don’t want to live in cities – or stack-a-prole apartment complexes – into the “post-car era.” Which is what this is all about.
Culdesac isn’t banning cars, per se.
It hasn’t got the power to do that – or to force anyone to move into one of its 636 stack-a-prole apartments in Tempe. But it is anticipating an artificially created demand for such stack-a-prole housing, as more and more people are forced into cities and stack-a-prole “housing” by government-corporate policies designed to make owning a car (as well as a single family home) onerous – and driving one unpleasant.
Italicized to emphasize that it is intentional. Government/corporate elites (it amounts to the same thing) dislike the autonomy that is a function of personal mobility.
This isn’t an interpretation; it’s a fact. The War on Cars – which is really a War on Personal Mobility – has been under way for at least 50 years now.
The first salvos were fired in the form of exhaust emissions standards, which had the sheen of legitimacy and reasonableness because at that time (the 1960s) the air in some areas was smoggy and motor vehicle exhaust emissions were contributing to it. But that problem was solved 30 years ago – in the 1990s – which left a need for new ammunition to use against the car and the people driving it.
“Fuel economy” was loaded into the breech – justified on the basis of supposedly imminent fuel scarcity and thus a need to “conserve” the dwindling supply. But this wasn’t even a problem – ever. The “scarcity” bogey was never real; it was the result of political machinations by OPEC – the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries – which turned off the spigot to punish Uncle for his policies in the Middle East.
But the lie about scarcity sold for decades – until the accession of the Orange Man, who turned on the domestic spigots. It is now plain to everyone who cares to look into it that there is so much oil – right here – that government fuel-efficiency fatwas premised on scarcity are vaporous.
Which is why vapor – carbon dioxide – has become the latest weapon deployed against the car and personal mobility.
It will also be used against the electric car, by the way. Once the electric car has done away with other cars. It will then be discovered (though it is already known) that electric cars also produce the dreaded vapor – just indirectly – and since the source of the vapor is immaterial, if you accept the assertion that the “climate” is in “crisis” because of it – it will suddenly become necessary to make electric cars more onerous and expensive to own, in order to reduce the number of them owned. As well as driven.
This will be done by imposing heavy taxes on the electricity they burn (which requires the burning of various fossil fuels) or on the cars themselves, as by mileage taxation – or by rescinding the currently incentivizing kickbacks awarded to those who “buy” them.
Psychological war has also been waged upon the car. The first attempts – launched back in the ‘70s and into the ‘80s – failed miserably because the people then driving had grown up loving cars and the personal mobility a car gave them. Thus, the chorus deriding cars as “unsafe” didn’t sell.
Early efforts to make driving un-fun such as the 55 MPH National Maximum Speed Limit, automated seat belts (then air bags) were also met with contempt – as well as passive and active resistance – by most adults in the ‘70s and ‘80s.
Which is why their kids were targeted, beginning in the ’90s.
That generation – now ascending – never knew the freedom of mobility cars gave their parents and older brothers and sisters – because they were never allowed to experience it. They were conditioned almost from conception to dislike even being in a car – via the expedient of laws requiring them to be be caged inside the car from earliest memory to near-adolescence.
Thus, by the time they approached being old enough to drive themselves, they didn’t want to drive. It is not hard to understand why so many of them – about a third of those in the 16-25 age bracket – don’t even have a driver’s license.
Many say that they have no intention of getting one, ever.
They are ready to willingly move into the stack-a-prole “housing” envisioned by developers like Culdesac, which quite openly states its long-term goal: “To remake cities all over the U.S. for people, not cars.”
But it won’t be just cities. It will be everywhere.
Electric cars will make it very difficult to live far from a city – far from work – due not so much to the shorter range of the EV but rather because of the time it takes to recharge an EV and the limitations on mobility and autonomy that imposes.
The prohibitive cost of the EV itself will make outside-the-cul-de-sac living all-but-impossible for most people – once the full (true) cost of the EV is draped around the shoulders of the public.
All of this to further the goal to achieve a “car free” America by 2030. Which will mean a mobility-free America. Or at least, an America in which the mobility of the masses – which is you and I – is defined by how far we can walk – or pedal – in a day.
. . .
Got a question about cars, Libertarian politics – or anything else? Click on the “ask Eric” link and send ’em in!
If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos.
We depend on you to keep the wheels turning!
Our donate button is here.
If you prefer not to use PayPal, our mailing address is:
721 Hummingbird Lane SE
Copper Hill, VA 24079
PS: Get an EPautos magnet (pictured below) in return for a $20 or more one-time donation or a $10 or more monthly recurring donation. (Please be sure to tell us you want a sticker – and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!)
My latest eBook is also available for your favorite price – free! Click here. If that fails, email me and I will send you a copy directly!
Does anyone remember “The Last Chase” with Lee Majors and Chris Makepeace from 1981? That’s when I first saw the prediction of the prole cities. No cars. Just walking, controlled “public” transport and the privileged get bicycles.
I missed that one (and being Gen X, am a fan of Lee Majors and apocalyptic sci fi generally). Gonna check it out ASAP. Thanks for the tip!
I also forgot to mention that in many “stack-a-prole” (LMFAO) apartments/condos, occupants are not even allowed to have washers and/or dryers in the units; meaning one has to lug their mountain of clothes either downstairs or down the street. Most landlords claim that it’s due to their insurance policy, but I say that it’s more of a conspiracy (especially those with paid on-site laundry facilities) for obvious reasons.
Yet another urban “luxury” that you get to enjoy.
The obvious reason being the absence of dryer vents in the units?
Post CarRera & I ain’t even had my 1st one, yet. Damn. Climate is crisis, the reason for the season’s – & seasonings…if you are so acclimatized.
Nobody (but the institutions the rental taxes is handed over to) owns houses…& the land under ‘em…& the sky above ‘em…& vacuuming claims to the vacuum o’ space above that are necrosing, too.
Same for all those ostensibly owned cars out there….
Neither non-ownership’s new.
Even less new’s non-self-ownership…so besides squats & land & sky not being squatter-owned, the squatters ~aka citizens aka tribalthumpers aka uberunters~ don’t own themselves, either.
Posed peacock presentation•preens of ownership via association – “national rifle” or any other “1” aligning with any other “20” are ironicomedic…but before that they are denial of the weeble’d rather switch, or “fight,” reality of the specious species that is humanimal.
“We” are, fight for, “individuals, individualism, individualists,” Guffaw ha-ha.
There is connection between personlessness, placelessness, & thinglessness.
Some call it quantum mechanics at the drill down, but here at the macro its more about wetwork mechanics…& all the mr\ms goodwrenches lookin’ for mr\ms goodbars cuz o’ luvluvluv all that socio’ism, & won’t neverever stop takin’ that deeply socially grooved socio path til they find the perfect gruesome end.
“Working on” the latter two lessness’s is a wet streets cause rain (&reign) strategy…a Les Nessman Herr (o’ narrative) Direktor o’ “news” @ station WKRP, in Cincinatti. Friends, Romans, I’ll take the time machine back to Jan Smithers & anybody that wants empire civic virtue signaling can have it…hell, take Ohio, too.
Not that there’s any work to be done on the first one, either, except, possibly, personally…& then only if a person’s countdown was already set to hit those times & places, unmask those faces.
“Which is why vapor – carbon dioxide – has become the latest weapon deployed against the car and personal mobility”.
Not just the car, but any “excessive” concern for our personal comfort, convenience or pleasure. A new poll suggests people may be getting tired of it.
Note, anyone here who hasn’t visited the Babylon Bee is missing out on a gem. It’s like the Onion, but for hardcore libertarians.
Here’s a couple fore from the Bee. The last sentence in the first story, “The law will not apply to celebrities purchasing jet fuel”, is perfect
I’d say that the Babylon Bee is a lot more realistic than the Sacremento Bee!
That would be expected if the latter can’t spell the name of the city they claim as home:-)
LOL Vonu! Well…maybe they can spell it…but I sure can’t! 😀 (If I lived there, they’d probably deport me to Sandy Eggo…..which would make me mad, ’cause it’d still be in CA.!)
Yeah Jeremy, I find myself passing on at least one article every day. The first time, a guy was sorta weirded about it all and asked if it was the real deal. Everybody assured him it was and after continuing to do so he saw he was being put on. it was pretty funny. I think it just caught him offguard for a while.
I don’t see anything there that everyday socialists across the left-right spectrum would see differently than libertarians would. Lewrockwell.com doesn’t need to write anything original, their aggregations being the best for true free traders.
How did you miss the sarcasm?
I don’t know how that appeared. I wrote:
Everyday socialists and libertarians see “climate change” the same way?
You will find these same concrete condos all over the place in the former Soviet Union, worked out real well for them, didn’t it? People in this country apparently have forgotten that individual personal mobility was an essential ingredient that brought about a healthy & moderately wealthy middle class, not public transportation, housing, or govt. dependency.
Over many decades, I have advocated for the reinstitution of penal colonies. However, I never intended for governments to establish them on US soil to punish the law-abiding by taking away their personal automotive transportation options.
Gitmo is closer to your ideal penal colony?
America has the largest percentage and actual number of citizens in jails of any country on the planet.
I think we should replace the victimless criminals with tyrants.
My point was about losing our cars and becoming prisoners in our own neighborhoods. I won’t waste time here articulating my thoughts on crime and punishment.
How does losing a car equate to becoming a prisoner in your own neighborhood?
Why would anyone want to live in such a neighborhood?
For a good long time, I have also said: There’s a good reason that “Blessed are the clueless” is not one of the Beatitudes.
For an equally long time I’ve held the Beatitudes to be another of the superstitious beliefs of the clueless:-)
I have a family member that lives in Manhattan, NYC.
The individual lives a what I would consider to be a broom closet. Micro apartment. She never intends on owning anything other than personal items, (cloths, computer, etc.). This New Yorker will probably never own a car, and considers this fact to be some form of freedom. The creation of companies like Uber and Amazon are supporting this life style. Think about it; if you can have everything you need delivered to you, why do you need a car. I would never elect to live like this, but there are many young people who do.
I have sympathy for these kids; how else do you live in a city where it costs $2,000 (or more) to rent a crappy apartment? Even in the suburbs, rents are ridiculous. And owning a car has become onerous – money and otherwise.
In high school, I was able to afford a V8 Camaro; an older, well-worn specimen. But nonetheless. On a part-time/after-school McDonalds budget.
That world is fast receding in the rearview…
I have pity for those who can’t figure out how to live comfortably on half of that because they are addicted to consumerism.
Of course, that is all they know because it is all they have been taught, and never bothered with autodidatics.
There have been generations of people in large cities all around the world who have never had drivers licenses, nor needed or wanted one. There are even more who manage to live happy, fulfilling lives without things that Americans couldn’t live without.
If the current crop of American politicians persist in their exceptionality, we may live to live without much of that.
The people in the rental economy think they are free because they don’t have to take care of anything. It’s taken care of for them but they don’t see the mechanisms of that or the power the caretakers end up with. Of course they never see themselves as getting out of line or in disfavor either. They don’t see themselves as being the ones who get turned off.
Like the women who say they can get along just fine without a man, except men built and take care of all the stuff that lets them get along without a man.
I was watching one of those SJW/anti-gun/anti/men rallies.
The reporter asked a women if she could think of anything a man could do a woman couldn’t. She couldn’t think of a thing. Here they are in a square with a huge amount of infrastructure, much of it showing such as high rise buildings, streets and fire hydrants and unseen plumbing and electrical supply underground. Nope, not a thing.
Not too surprising but then this big fat bearded soyboy was asked the same question. Nope, nothing he could think of. Stupid, clueless people.
You need to read and watch up on the late United States Navy rear admiral Grace Brewster Murray Hopper.
That Iron curtain so many people supposedly want. Its to keep the tax slave sheep in the fleecing pen. I travel a lot. The snowbirds with their behemoth motor homes and the other house less nomads presently escape the cold by driving south. Removing cars trucks and other large vehicles will of course have the intended consequence of reducing jobs. Those motels, drive through fast food, roads and whole host of others. It will also have other intended consequences. People control, and population control. Commune ism. They will probably even decide where you will work so you can get your meal ticket punched. 1984 multiplied. Sure am glad I’m a old Baby boomer the death bells of freedom are getting louder everyday. Collapse is visiblely more eminent than we think. Those cafe and emmisions rules don’t apply to military hardware so the cops(heroes) will be everywhere just like the good ole Soviet Union was.
Don’t give up just yet. Because the fight isn’t lost yet. I agree it is probably not possibly to save America at this point. As in the whole country, much of which is now occupied territory. But there are parts of the country which are still sound – and those parts may decide to go their own way. And may succeed in doing so, peacefully. It has happened before – as in the case of the old Soviet Union. So it could happen again.
Several States have already flipped off the US Sociopaths In Charge by legalizing marijuana. Others are going in the opposite direction regarding gun control, protecting the right of any person who can legally purchase a firearm to carry such firearm, AKA Constitutional Carry. The smaller the political subdivision, the more liberty. Numerous Counties are declaring 2A sanctuary. How much better off would we be if ALL law enforcement was subject to the ballot as Sheriffs are? The Sociopaths In Charge are losing. The problem is they are insane, and will no doubt react violently to challenge of their “authority”. In which case we may have to use the 2A for its intended purpose.
In re: “The problem is they are insane, and will no doubt react violently to challenge of their “authority”. In which case we may have to use the 2A for its intended purpose.”
In my state – VA – there is talk about the National Guard being used to Hut! Hut! Hut! the sheriffs who’ve said they will not enforce the pending “reasonable” gun laws that the soon-to-be Democrat-controlled state government is expected to impose.
20 years ago, before Bushco and the never-ending middle east wars, I could have told you which way Texas would go. Now, after Bushco, Obomer and the illegal flood, it’s anyone’s guess what will happen in Texas.
It’s a damn shame too because of all the places I’ve been, Texans are the most courteous people I’ve found. Now, I detest even getting near one of the Big 3, Houson, San Antonio(god help us all) and D-FW. Ft. worth, the good ol cowtown is now seemingly, if you believe the crap in the Ft. Worth Star Telegram, commie as hell. Population is so sparse in west Texas we have no voting power. What we’ve always liked about this part of the state has become our undoing via 20 million illegal aliens and a mass influx of NE and Ca. denizens. It’s depressing as hell.
I never thought I’d be ready to leave life in my old age. Now, the future is so bleak, it’s hard to have any emotion but anger. The stars are still bright but what they light doesn’t look so good.
This won’t cheer you up,
“businesses have been migrating out of the high-tax, high-crime, heavily regulated state”
I think they meant ‘migrating the high-tax, high-crime, heavily regulated behavior’ to Texas.
Bushco is new english yankee.
They weren’t the ones that Californicated Texas, which happened after they’d ruined Colorado. Montana is pushing back, but not as hard as Wyoming.
A friend of mine used to be on a citizen group. One night, a new cop (from California) called in all upset. He had pulled over a traffic offender and saw several guns in the back seat of the car. All the dispatcher had to say was “Welcome to Wyoming.” This won’t happen in Texas unless they stop violating 2A by adopting constitutional carry.
Most snowbirds don’t have anything resembling a behemoth.
“Some people either don’t like or don’t feel the need for cars – or for the personal space/independent ownership a single family home provides – and like the idea of being able to walk or bicycle to and fro.
Such people choose to live in cities – and apartments.
So what’s the complaint? There are millions of people freely and willingly living in Manhattan.
If they wanted to live in a suburban cube they could live in a Levitttown or in New Jersey or even upstate.
You seem to admit that people might actually like living in cities
So why not be like Mick Dundee and just accept it?
That would be the Libertarian way.
The whole point of the article is that the choice is to be denied people. The push is to force people out of personal cars, which is how they’ll be pushed into stack-a-prole apartments.
Is it possible you’re this dense?
I think I mentioned before, Pat seems less dense than some I know. Depressing it is.
The root of the problem is empathy, or lack of it. For me, a vast majority of people simply don’t care or think about other people and their wants or needs. Not actually evil or oppressive, they just don’t give a shit about others. If it something they want, they just don’t care if it rammed down the throats of those who don’t. They simply don’t comprehend that others may have different values. Soft-sociopaths.
Indeed. A good example being that – as I tried to explain to Clover Pat – it’s a matter of indifference to me whether Bruce or anyone else wants to wear a dress and pretend he’s a she. I would never insist he not wear a dress (unless he wanted to work for me, but that’s not forcing him to not wear a dress) and wouldn’t urge or support any laws punishing him for pretending he is a she. I think that makes me a pretty live – and let live – person.
Clover Pat, on the other hand, is a person who would insist I pretend that he is a she. Who would punish me for “misgendering” someone (i.e., refusing to pretend that a he is a she).
Yet Clover Pat probably thinks of himself/herself as the “compassionate” one.
I see your confusion. Few think. Most instinctively react and emote.
I refer to these as ‘dog people’ (not as in owners or preference). They can be interactive and attentive, but deep thoughts? Consideration of others? Exploration of ideas beyond their emotional reaction to a premise? No, No and No.
Most people I know are ‘dog people’. I’ll toss the ball for them and engage in their blather occasionally if I am bored, but I don’t expect them to have meaningful conversations.
Several years ago I tried to explain all this to a dog person I had known for years. He could not grasp it was metaphor or analogy. He was convinced, and to this day confidently tells others that “he called me a dog”.
One cannot converse with those who lack comprehension. Like dogs.
Most dogs comprehend much more than you think they do.
They are very good at turning their owners into slaves providing every canine desire.
Cats make dogs look stupid.
Cats don’t have owners; cats have staff… 🙂
I moved 3 cats out of my chair, turned around and sat down….on one I had just ejected. I have one staring at me from the next room. He’s been in the same spot and drilling holes in me waiting for his special treat.
Another one was waiting for his two pills he gets twice a day and then ran to the bathroom waiting for His special treats.
Yeah, I’ll probably buy special treats before I get myself some Shiner Black.
The cats let us live in Their House, as long as we keep their food and water bowls full and keep the wood stove burning in the winter.
Ditto – same! I maintain the house for the sake of my cats; but I get a fair return on my investment!
Yeah, we get a fur return also. It’s a purrfect arrangement.
I’m familiar with a fur return. I was uncomfortable the other night so I got up and peed and stepped on a cat in front of a spot heater.
I turned on the light and found 9 cats in bed with me and CJ. We were both uncomfortable. Two cats on the bookshelf and two on the dresser and one on the other dresser, 3 under the bed and 3 on the floor/tote. I hadn’t even noticed the one sleeping on the top half of my pillow. 13.3 lbs but at least he’s warm although he’s not the largest by far.
I’m just going to go away and quit posting. We only have five cats and one lives at the barn. 🙂
We have 7 in the barn we claim and one of the neighbors. I wasn’t trying to one-up you. In fact, I wish I couldn’t. But we’re over-run because the wife wouldn’t get the females fixed when I was on the road for years.
You wouldn’t have to evict them during the warm part of the year if they got out the door. I’ve been trying to seduce feral cats into nicer digs for decades, to no avail.
Even cats have standards 🙂
“it’s a matter of indifference to me whether Bruce or anyone else wants to wear a dress and pretend he’s a she”
Yet you go on and on about this topic.
I had no idea you were even talking about Caitlyn Jenner when you made the reference.
I merely dissect your insipid virtue signaling. You referred to Bruce as “she” – and took umbrage when I corrected you, pointing out that it is a he in a dress pretending to be a “she.”
I cannot abide reality inversion and will call it out whenever I encounter it.
But you have known it a while now(and I’m sick of you). So why don’t you just shut the fuck up about it and not keep bringing it up. You’re not going to change anyone’s mind but you’re sure pissing people off. Of course that’s what you intend to do, your raisin deetree you fool. I hope eric blocks your insipid ass.
I have already placed Clover Pat in the moderation queue. The stereotypical shifting-of-the-debate, arguing points not raised, repeating the same arguments over and over after they’ve been answered (over and over) . . . these are some of the attributes which mark out a Clover.
It’s part of what makes dealing with them so aggravating. It’s no disagreement; it’s dishonesty.
“The whole point of the article is that the choice is to be denied people. “
Nobody makes them live there. There are millions of dwelling units in NYC, people
make choices all the time. By the way most of the older buildings that pre-date WW2 don’t have parking.
If parking is that important to the tenants, they will get a place which has it, or they will choose to live over the river.
No oe can be this thick… can they? I’ve replied at least twice now to reiterate the point of the article – which is precisely that people will be (are being) forced into cities and stack-a-prole living by policies that are making driving too onerous/expensive.
If your plan is to wear me down by repetition, it’s not gonna work. I’m as stubborn as a mule – and kick just as hard!
Stop letting this bitch fuck with you.
sieg heil, comrade
” which is precisely that people will be (are being) forced into cities and stack-a-prole living by policies that are making driving too onerous/expensive.”
It seems people can make choices.
The Feds are doing very little to alter social policy of driving, in fact,
Trump has reduced the CAFE requirement, is writing new regs to
eliminate pretty much all the safety regs and is litigating against the California Clean Air Act exemption.
Can you specify what policy being implemented today is making driving too onerous?
“It seems people can make choices.”
People’s choices are being systematically reduced, even eliminated.
“The Feds are doing very little to alter social policy of driving, in fact.”
Oh yes. Very little. Just little things like imposing regulations such as a near-50 MPG CAFE standard that is a de facto electric car mandate and “emissions” regs that de facto require the manufacture of EVs as non-EVs cannot comply with them.
It’s of a piece with your pretending not to understand that a man who feels he is a woman isn’t one by dint of that.
“Pat” here would definitely feel right at home in places like the former Soviet Union or North Korea.
“Oh yes. Very little. Just little things like imposing regulations such as a near-50 MPG CAFE standard that is a de facto electric car mandate and “emissions” regs that de facto require the manufacture of EVs as non-EVs cannot comply with them.”
Drive old cars. The cubans are driving 70 year old chevy’s
This last exchange perfectly reveals your dishonest/evasive tactics. You claim Americans aren’t being pushed out of cars and thereby into cities by the government. I cite two examples of government using regulations to make ordinary cars more scarce and costly while at the same time forcing the manufacture of electric cars most people can’t afford and which are extremely impractical for people who don’t live in cities or close-in suburbs.
“Drive old cars. The cubans are driving 70 year old chevy’s” (sic).
How about you and people like you quit trying to force people out of new cars?
And as far as the old cars: People like you will never permit people to have that option. You can’t abide free choice – which is the whole point of this discussion.
You will advocate for the outright banning of them or the de facto banning via punitive taxes on the very same basis that you and people like you have used to impose crippling/exorbitant costs on non-electric new cars and to impose cripplingly expensive and functionally crippled new cars.
You will say that old cars “pollute” and are “unsafe.”
If you do not say it, you are being inconsistent – and have lost your logical basis for defending the force-feeding of electric cars and the rest. Of course, logical consistency is something Clovers rarely practice. They are ends justify the means (their means) people.
Do you ever reflect for a moment about the casual totalitarianism you so blithely advocate? You may think I am a weirdo and a variety of other things – and I’m the first to concede that I am a weirdo. But at the end of the day, I am not trying to force anything on you, or deny you anything, nor take money out of your pocket to finance what I think is worthy of funding. I pay my own way. I advocate leaving you alone. If you want to drive an EV – or a horse – it’s okay with me. So long as it’s the result of free exchange between buyer and seller, without any coercion applied to unwilling third parties.
You advocate forcing other people to do/not do the things you consider worthwhile; you advocate stealing their money to finance it. You are unwilling to leave other people alone.
But my bet is that like most of your tribe, you wouldn’t have the guts to carry out any of this thuggery yourself, man to man. Instead, you hide behind the legs other men – government men – and have them do your dirty work, out of sight – out of mind.
You are truly an awful person.
sounds like you aren’t able to keep your car running.
“sounds like you aren’t able to keep your car running.”
You’ve proved yourself to incapable of honest debate. I only bother replying to dissect you for the general edification.
My old car runs just fine. The question at hand, Clover, is whether people such as yourself will demand that old cars be formally or effectively forced off the road via onerous “fees” or outright restrictions on where and when they may be used. In order to force them into electric cars. To leave them no choice other than to drive an EV – or not drive at all.
Notice the way you sleazily attempt to shift the debate? You – and it is a characteristic of people like you – change the subject, spout non sequiturs, flippant comments (such as the above) . . . anything rather than honestly deal with the facts.
Much less the moral issues.
Clovers – that’s you – are a loathsome combination of evasive poltroonery and authoritarianism. You lust to control (and mulct) other people, but haven’t got the intellectual honesty to say it directly – much less the balls to attempt to do it directly.
It’s sickening. And pitiful.
Not only can we keep our old cars running just fine, but we don’t have to live with life-long debt due to constantly having to replace them because of the planned obsolescence of newer vehicles mandated by Uncle under the guise of “efficiency”, which adds absurd complexity to modern vehicles so that they get a fraction of a mile per gallon better mileage in exchange for reduced durability, which renders the newer vehicles economically non-viable after just a few years because they are so expensive to repair; require proprietary tools to diagnose and repair, and basically renders them useless once out of warranty.
As someone who has been involved in the automotive trades in various capacities for decades, I am disgusted by the fact that the lifespan of automobiles has dwindled so much in recent years, and the economic impact that I witness such having upon the average consumer- as well as the resources being wasted due to the need to constantly replace these 4000 lb. 4-wheeled smartphones- of which very little of them is economically viable to recycle due to the use of more and more plastic and electronics- which ultimately means that there is little metal to reclaim, and that there is little value in used parts, as the electronics and delicate mechanical components have short lives- and even more so in a junkyard environment- not to mention that the parts are now much more sub-model and option-level dependent, even among the same make and model of car; and the fact that other than crash repairs, few people are repairing their newer cars with used parts, due to the complexity and trouble of finding the correct parts (Much less finding them in good condition- and often you won’t know until you’ve installed the part and completed the repair- at which point, if the part is bad, you have to re-do the whole thing; and the part, if electronic, is likely not refundable.)
I’v witnessed over the course of a decade, “junkyard row”- a street on which there used to be more than 20 junkyards all doing thriving business- be reduced to TWO yards. And the bulk of their business is now just crash parts.
The junk business has become highly regulated. as such smaller businesses have been forced out or sold out.
Also land value keeps pushing junk businesses into either depressed areas or on the fringes. A junk yard is a big hunk of land and eventually if not for cashing out there’s a big tax bill as a result that forces a change in use or cashing out.
I’m not sure why you are even interested in new cars?
Seems like the only cars you like would be either late 60’s muscle cars before any EPA rules or even a 1920’s studebaker before there were requirements for brake lights and turn signals.
So you should be driving the car of your choice even if the manufacturers stopped making them 60 years ago
How many times must I repeat it? What I hate are the mandates being imposed by people like you. People like me think everyone should be free to buy and drive whatever type of car meets their needs – and the car industry ought to be free to cater to that natural market demand. If you want an EV with a dozen driver “assist” systems – and so on – by all means. But don’t tell me I (or anyone else) must also buy such a car, if we prefer one without any of that stuff – including seat belts and air bags.
Are you this obtuse? Or simply a sociopath?
Do you think the same way about your women?
There haven been standards for automobiles long before government. The keeper of the standards is SAE. Society of Automotive Engineers. When the government granted us safe cars all it did was copy and paste SAE standards to make FMVSS. Automakers were already following SAE standards. Now government could claim it gives us safe cars that we wouldn’t have without it. Except without government SAE standards would have continued to advance at a faster rate.
Typical Bill. You never know who he’s responding to.
Bill should do stand-up (assuming he has a raised roof van…or is abnormally short)
(We are talking about Vonu Bill, right?)
Yep Nunz, Bill…..in a van…..down by the river……where it’s real snarky…..
“Drive old cars”.
Love to! Problem is, thanks to the people[sic] whom your ilk Pat B. love to elect, old cars are becoming unnaturally scarce and expensive, thanks those whom you elect taking my wealth and using it to artificially distort the market by paying people to destroy often perfectly good old cars- a.k.a. “Cash For Clunkers”.
That is like the schoolyard bully stealing your marbles and then telling you to sit in the corner and play marbles.
“The cubans are driving 70 year old chevy’s”
And there’s the benefit of socialism. You can drive the same car with all sorts of kludge fixes for decades and then pass it down to your children who will do the same.
Of course we all know that control freaks in the USA will never be so kind as to allow us to drive old cars let alone ones that held together with numerous bandaid fixes. The control freaks will demand they be taken off the road and crushed for the environment, for safety, for whatever.
We’ve already seen it. Through the late 1980s in the mid 1990s the old car hobby in the USA fought hard against control freaks who wanted all pre-1980 cars crushed for the environment.
“Just little things like imposing regulations such as a near-50 MPG CAFE standard that is a de facto electric car mandate “
Do you know what CAFE stands for?
Yes, Clover – I know what CAFE stands for.
But you clearly have no idea what is necessary to comply with it. Or rather, with the near-50 MPG CAFE mandate slated to go into effect. I will help you understand – though I know it’s a waste of time, because in reality you do understand; you’re simply being dishonest. Again.
First, Clover, the only way to achieve a fleet average of even 40 MPG is by manufacturing lots of hybrids and electric cars – to improve the overall math. In other words, a de facto EV mandate.
Second, Clover, “fuel economy” standards have been conflated with “emissions” standards – specifically, carbon dioxide “emissions.” Since you can’t eliminate or even appreciably reduce C02 “emissions” from IC cars (without radically downsizing them, at any rate) the only practical way to comply with the regs is to . . . build more EVs. Which are considered “zero emissions” for regulatory purposes.
In other words, another de facto EV mandate.
Keep ’em coming, Clover. I’m having fun!
“the only way to achieve a fleet average of even 40 MPG is by manufacturing lots of hybrids and electric cars – to improve the overall math.”
So, if the big Homers you want are profitable, there will be one for you.
What is it with you? Why can’t you directly answer a question or acknowledge a factual point? I explain why CAFE is a de facto EV mandate – which you denied it was.
You respond with: “So, if the big Homers you want are profitable, there will be one for you.”
Which has nothing to do with the fact that CAFE is a de facto EV mandate.
But it raises another issue, which is that CAFE makes those “homers” as you derisively refer to them more expensive to make, which makes it harder for average people to afford.
In plain English, CAFE punishes people for buying the kinds of vehicles most people want – but which people like you don’t think they should have.
What is wrong with you? Seriously.
****”Why can’t you directly answer a question or acknowledge a factual point? I”***
Because he/she/it is wrong; and instead of merely admitting the reality of the pertinent facts, and then expressing his/her/it’s opinion as to the appropriateness and effects of that reality, they instead, insanely try and deny the reality or use rhetoric to shift the emphasis. Classic troll! Arguing against the facts- as if changing someone’s opinion via rhetoric can alter the reality.
Apparently, such people are oblivious to how ridiculous such makes them look; and that they are essentially admitting that there is no substance to their argument, and or that they do not even comprehend the issues they support.
And imagine if the current fastwas were reversed, so that instead of tyranny being used to push small high-efficiency vehicles, it instead penalized the purchase of such vehicles and instead mandated and subsidized large inefficient vehicles! Pat The B would then be SCREAMING, and suddenly demanding the right to choose, and to not be penalized for buying the type of vehicle that he/she/it wants; and lamenting the fact that there would be scant selection of such vehicles, because the various regulations effectively outlawed their production!
Like all statists, they just want to force what they want and or approve of, on everyone else. When tyranny is used for that purpose, they love it; when it used counter to what they want, then they complain- but Heaven forbid that anyone should be free to make their own choices and not be shackled by outright prohibitions or more subtle interferences, such as the manipulation of what should be a free market.
Pat B, you want specifics??? Fining VW over an infinitesimal emissions infraction, Imprisonment of the Domestic VW CEO, Subsidy of the EV, most notably Tesla, subsidy of corn-fed gasahol, mandates of higher fuel mileage using said gasahol, the nationwide 55 mph speed limit that was established in 1974, the list is ENDLESS! In fact virtually EVERY article Eric has EVER written involves some sort of Federal Government interference with the natural progression of a capitalist economy and society. What fucking planet do you live on, dip-shit? You write the most insipid, brainless twaddle I’ve witnessed anywhere on the internet, YouTube included! Go join your comrades on the Left Coast, if your not already there.
What’s even more absurd about the VW thing, is how Uncle has now made it so that we must have all of these small 4cyl. injuns- even in pick’em-up trucks….and they must be turbo-charged in order to provide enough power for typical driving (Basically requiring the use of the turbo constantly, except when one is driving on level ground at highway cruising speed on the open road).
This makes those little engines appear to get great mileage, when being tested, as they’re not straining at near-full load then, and not being boosted by the turbo- but in real life driving, they spend a significant amount of their life working at full load and under turbo, causing them to get worse mileage than a much larger 6 or 8 cyl. engine (while also greatly reducing their lifespan).
So thus, they do good on the gubmint test…but not in the real world. How is THAT not gaming the system?! Meanwhile, the VW diesels would get over 50MPG in the real world…thus burning a fraction of the fuel that these turbo’d 4-bangers due, and thus putting out far less pollution in the real world.
So, Uncle has indeed created a scenario far worse than that which it punished VW for. They made highly efficient vehicles disappear from the market, over something that was just a technicality but had no negative effect in the real world…while forcing the sale of inefficient non-durable vehicles which actually game the tests much more than any VW ever did, and ultimately burn more gas; spew more pollutants (they should test one under load!) and require the use of more resources and energy to replace them sooner.
The government: Always accomplishing the very opposite of what it’s policies supposedly intend to do; always offering a “solution” to a problem that doesn’t exist, which invariably creates REAL problems.
Nunz, there’s a couple guys who do nothing but test pickups. They load both a half ton Chevy with a 4 and a 6.2 with an identical load and tear off up a many mile grade in Ca. The 4 cylinder didn’t give up too much to the 6.2.
Amazing eh? Reckon how long that turbo 4 is going to last working like that? It was impressive but I didn’t get the the fuel used by both. And I don’t care since I won’t be buying either but the public will eeny meeny moe their way to buying a turbo 4 or turbo 6 by one of the companies. I think they’ll be mighty disappointed right after the warranty is gone.
It hurts to see a boy that age strapped into a car seat like an infant.
When I was that age, we didn’t use seatbelts (which was OK, because even in a fender bender the ’66 caprice and even the VW bug we had could take a hit).
One of my fondest memories of that time was riding in the back of pickup trucks.
Even though I’m only 31, I don’t ever recall being strapped in a car seat. Probably because I was raised by folks who grew up in rural areas in the south who (thankfully) didn’t believe in such “safety” nonsense. Hell, when my brother and I used to live in SC, we also had the luxury of riding in the back of our great-uncle’s pickup. Oh, the memories…
If one were to try that now, both them and the driver would probably be “hut-hut-hutted”, as Eric likes to put it.
Why shouldn’t anything that runs off of electricity from a grid be considered to be just as responsible for the dreaded vapor as electric cars? Since, aside from nuclear, large power plants emit less pollutants than any ICE per kilowatt, moving to electric cars would eliminate more intracity air pollution than any emission control system ever could. That said, I don’t support electric cars as much as I do electric self-driving cars, which would not only reduce air pollution but also traffic accidents and trauma admissions to hospitals. 5G won’t cause surveillance any more than small fast cars caused delivery pizza, nor is it remotely necessary for self-driving cars, which could each have their own database of all of the streets in the service area. The largest resistance to self-driving cars will come from police officers that have DUI arrest mandates to service.
These lib-turds will have to take me out before I even consider giving up my personal mobility!
You are a paraplegic?
Even natural evolution requires an initiating event.
When I was a teenager everyone looked forward to getting that driver’s license. A rite of passage to adulthood. I’m amazed that so many of the younger generation have no plans to get one. Not that I ever want to actually use the thing in connection with driving. If that happens, it means that I have come to the attention of some roadside jackboot wanting to coopt my time and money.
But the license does come in handy when buying a gun. Another freedom the elite really want to eliminate.
Where I live there are a lot of bicycle lanes, which are rarely used. I think it is mostly for show, to grab some federal handout money. The only people I see driving bicycles are middle aged or older homeless men who can’t afford a car. There are charities that refurbish and distribute bikes to the needy, so they are not too difficult to come up with. I don’t see a lot of children riding bikes. I imagine parents perceive it as too dangerous.
Short range electric rental scooters are a big fad right now. I see them piled up around town in various places, blocking the sidewalks. Sometimes in places I would not wish to walk. The franchise can track them by GPS so they can retrieve them where they are dumped.
The Justice Network has a show called “Parking Wars”. Mostly Philadelphia and Detroit. Costly fines for trying to park and do business in either city. Tow lots that can cost vast amounts of time, money and bureaucratic aggravation to get one’s car back. The infamous “boot” to immobilize a car that may be needed for an emergency get away to a hospital or to flee a criminal assault. The attitude of the parking employees is simply infuriating. They delight in the pain they inflict on the working class. I’m amazed they don’t find themselves on the receiving end of a well aimed brick. That particular war against driving and small business has been going on for decades.
Yeah, all this stuff Eric Peters writes is true and well written. I love to read him. But we need to OVORCOME this crap, not just whine about it. One step is get rid of bike helmet laws, which have almost totally killed the bicycle. They aren’t as valuable as they seem because drivers will crowd a helmeted biker more. Another is to restare the education that made a more responsible citizenry:
read www. constitution.org/col/one_room_schoolhouse.htm
But most important is a vision of our own of a more interesting future. With Restorative Agriculture, the world can be more abundant than today, and if we kick over Big Pharma, we can unleash 21st century anti-aging breakthroughs for a huge increase in longevity along with much more vitality in our years. We can make true the Apocalypse vision of our decades as similar to the agony of childbirth–forgotten in the joy of the child that is born.
This is beautiful–thank you for writing it! Comparing this whole thing to childbirth is something I can understand–lol.
Thank you, Eric, for your vision in writing this essay. Sometimes, I get so caught up in the current policy-du-jour that it becomes difficult for me to see the big picture.
During the last Democratic Debate Warren stated that her plan for Homelessness was to build massive public apartment complexes and that the dream of a single family home was dead. Can you imagine how historically ignorant you would have to be to say this? When have the commies or anyone ever created public housing that wasn’t a complete and total disaster? I couldn’t imagine running for office and promising people that you will be stacking them into public housing projects. If there ever was a way to assure that the future of your nation is a bleak one, that’s it. Seriously who looks at the future of being jammed into public housing projects and thinks it’s delightful? All I picture is broken plumbing and heating, leaking roofs, crime, pissy hallways, etc. That’s apparently the grand future they have in store for all of us and as for cars, forget about it. You are 100% the great future that they envision does not include cars, not for us peons anyway.
Victory Mansions! It’s no longer just fiction….
I see a lot of truly homeless people every day that would probably prefer being stacked “into public housing projects” to sleeping wherever they can. I also know several who would be satisfied to have a place to park their car where they won’t he hassled by a cop.
The homeless will become rich writing and selling books about how to live in the coming stone age. Will there be dinosaurs too? You might want to get the biggest car you can find because once fossil fuels and electricity are banned, you will need something to live in. And heck, no more car payments, car insurance or yearly tabs to renew. What’s not to like?
I don’t know about getting rich by it, but there are plenty of books written by homeless as well as podcasts and websites.
It would be hard to ban fossil fuels since it has already been established that they do not exist.
Nikola Tesla could have told you a lot about how hard it would be to ban electricity.
The Elites didn’t like the way you country proles voted last time in 2016, so time to change the rules. The Elites want you young Soy Boy proles to work in cities for your Masters of the Universe corporations so you’ll be a slave. You’ll need your stack a prole apartment to hot bunk live near your work so you can put in your 12-6’s and share you bunk with the night shift. Work options will evaporate and travel to another job highly unlikely. You’ll need to be paying your student loan, so shut up and do your job without complaining. Oh by the way, the Elites will bring in an new workforce of illegals who will vote (illegally or legally soon) for socialism to take your job at any moment for 25% of what they were paying you.
Enjoy you new life without mobility. Because mobility means freedom. Freedom to choose who and where you work and who not to work for or work for yourself.
We have a stack-a-prole complex going up here in my university town. A few parking slots for those who can afford them. Trouble is we get snow, sleet and freezing rain five months of the year that wipe out the bike paths, and public trans is spotty, often nil. There’s no downtown for old fashioned things like groceries and hardware, just a plethora of eateries. Somebody’s bankrolling this steel and concrete virtue signal. I expect it’s the mountain of debt accruing to the student serfs down the road.
Can’t you just see the old and wheelchair bound going out of these dog boxes to get a week’s worth of groceries and try to carry them home? Or go out and get some meds from the local pharmacy? Or go to visit their friends or family? Some truly mad people around who think these car free areas are wonderful.
I would always prefer a car free area to one glutted by a majority of those driven by people who couldn’t pass a drivers test. I have always considered those who will not signal a lane change into mine to be just as rude as someone who butts into line.
I grew up in a house with a milk door. Why can’t similar things be placed on second floors to receive shipments via drone? My mother bought her groceries at a small store that would deliver for about a nickel more an item.
If you really need to go out and get things, rent a PO box and stop receiving your snail mail at home, if you do. How much fun it must be to sit in ones wheelchair in a line at the post office, only to find out that there is no mail today, for the third or fourth day.
This developer has chosen its name well. A “Culdesac” is exactly where the Sociopaths In Charge have led us. The impending collapse of the worldwide “economy”, AKA “What’s your debt limit?”, is going to create problems for the Sociopaths In Charge slave masters if their property is allowed to roam around freely. Better to get them concentrated into a small area, with little opportunity for escape, where they can be easily monitored and controlled. Or exterminated should the “need’ arise.
My guess is that Culdesac will flop spectacularly. Its existence and subsequent failure may be a GOOD thing, highlighting the fact that Americans are not willing to give up their cars.
The website https://culdesac.com/ is amazingly vague about how someone would get a load of groceries home from the store, just for starters. The entire idea is ridiculous and will be revealed to be so, I predict.
United Nations Agenda 21 is now Agenda 2030.
While waiting in a waiting room today, I read a local magazine. The particular issue was extolling the merits of downtown living.
Some of the articles dealt with downtown developers receiving grants and federal awards of money.
Of course, from front cover to back cover, the U.N. agendas were not mentioned at all.
Where does one apply for a subsidy or grant from the UN, which doesn’t even pay its parking tickets?
Meanwhile, while homelessness and kettleing people into cities is the order of the day, there’s literally millions of acres of public land that could be homesteaded. While it might not be as productive as a midwest wheat farm, it could probably sustain a few families indefinitely. But when Uncle figured out it was more lucrative to keep it off the market and create artificial scarcity it was game over for affordable housing.
You know they tried that once. There was this thing called the Dust Bowl.
Actually the dust bowl came about after fence-row to fence-row planting of marginal lands to meet demands caused by the First World War and the Roaring Debt-Fueled 20s. once a drought set in the highly leveraged farmers couldn’t sustain their business model and doubled down before failing again.
Did you make that up or get if from someone who went on to work for the IPCC?
Marginal lands are marginal because they won’t support intensive agriculture, not because they won’t support the weeds that are cleared for cultivation. Add famine to that and you’ll always get dust bowls.
Those lands weren’t covered in weeds. They were covered in buffalo grass, mesquite grass, side oats grama, red grama, red lovegrass, tumblegrass, gummy lovegrass, Texas grama, sand dropseed, and sandbur and chokeberry, one of the best nutritional foods the indians used.
The plains would have been alright even during the drought had they not been plowed. Even during droughts it rains some and it’s spotty so bison and other ruminants would simply follow areas where it had rained.
Not only have I studied this my whole life but have lived it. I lived during the 50’s that were called “The time it didn’t rain in west Texas”. And while it did rain, it wasn’t often and all that plowed ground made it that much worse.
Growing up we sat in the house in the dark during the day because the sky was full of dirt. Cars got sandblasted…..along with everything. You couldn’t keep the dirt out of the house with the wind blowing so hard. Even back then there weren’t mesquite everywhere like now. Thanks Coronado, you spanish ahole. It’s a damned shame the Comanches didn’t exist in sufficient number to wipe them all out.
Anything that those of us with only one stomach can’t digest is, by default, weeds.
Remember that vegetarian is an old indian word meaning bad hunter.
Just in case I bought some of Linda Runyon’s materials from ofthefield.com
Truth in that. I mow all sorts of “wild crops” I don’t think of as food but are plenty edible. Even an old prickly pear is edible and high in protein.
Resendez (The Other Slavery) pointed out that when the “pedestrian injuns”* took up the “spanish”* horse, became men called horse – “feral ~but “noble”~ brits”*(ya, totally redundant) — got to celebratin’ that locus o’ control feelin’ – nothing more than feelin’s ♪♫♪ – of open road & horsepower “freedom,” it was like spanish fly poured over “their”* slave-tradin’ activities. Dang “comanches”* covered ‘bout half “the country”* with “their”* slave raids. The “yankees”* doubled that…& then continued doubling, redoubling, reredoubling “their” peculiar institution within, then without, “the country.”*
Not to worry, tho. Mean reversion whacks all moles, even the metastasizing melanoma moles. Mmm, mmm, good.
* “” Indicates\ means, whatever the noun, these critters is all the same (even & includin’ they’s all denyin’ the fact they’s all, each & every one, in fact, the much dreaded & denied unique). All are horse shooter-floggers…& flogged-shot horses…that’s a commonality emergent property of denial. Repetiton compulsion life is indeed a bitch…cuz it’s such a botch.
Totally homo, these horsapiens. Takin’ turns as stallions, then mares, as mountebanks, then mounteds.
Hollowed out Trojan gift horses full o’ helter skelter scum & wooden nickels. Son of man, Manson family (danger Will) Robinson(!)…marooned marooners, harpooned harpooners, so why not & what else?…lampooned lampooners.
Wampum for Manhattan Island & Manhattan Projects for to wampum — both them that forcedlabor paid for it, including even paid with their lives for it, & them that receivered that giddyap hitch & got smoked, too.
Ain’t no golden age of people.
Ain’t never a shortage of Goldfingers with the Sadim Touch.
Nor social sociopath 007 doppelgangsters on MidaSadim payrolls…
…& induction rolls…
…that’s just how humanimal rolls…the drunks of all kinds, selves & others, up & down skidrow.
That scene from The Fisher King, but generalized, benign crazy & malignant crazy positions swap-traded back\forth, far & wide.
— link lynx ate it – hafta’ look it up yourself —
Peeps have always been atrocious.
Particularly & especially when clumped in congregations followin’ behind preacher-leaders.
“Mass is energy & energy has mass.” Comes to peeps, tho, mass is entropy, in the worst, Schumpeter-Opposite, heat death, Sense. SOS…mayday…may? March ides march every day…definitely, not maybe.
Cuz “social” (that cogdis denial reframe – we wuz framed! — touted as bein’ such a good thing). Elton’s got a tune that doesn’t erase the word “social” modifies.
— links lynx —
Monkey see, monkey do, seen sees done & raises, done sees seen & raises the raise ∞∞∞….
None of these jailed – “social” — stooges fooks know how to play poker. Poker plays them, to their last chip & borrowed marker – from the hand they was dealt @conception. They’s poker player reenactors, rising again, & again, & again, to be “the south.” Or “the alamo.” Or pick your proud flesh poison.
That scene in Cool Hand Luke, writ large, it is.
But instead of just Luke, Lunk, & his presidential Kennedy adviser, it’s raise around the ouroboros rosie, the whole “table,” mostly. Thar she tableauxs! Ahab(itual offender) crews & white whale nemises in the mirrors.
— links lynx —
20:1, auction (orc•tion?) fever vs 98.6.
Calm cool & collected is cool & collects what can, but when it comes down to Billy Joel versus the Volcano, Joe bills as prevailing only in the movies. Denial, again, on the all that glitters ain’t gold silver screen.
The hell “we” *didn’t* start the fire. “We”’s only attribute is spontaneous combustion contagion, (lotta’)heat(not much light) death.
Weebles wobble for lack o’ balls to fall, guts to get back up. That’s the frequency of the wequency vibratin’ dildo-ring. Es fooked feature, mang, not eavesdroppin’ bugs that can be located & removed.
“People…so goddamn frail they’d rather put a coin in the wishing well than buy dinner.” ~ Rust Cohle
Among all the rustling ‘o bovines wooden nickels, the “voting” version of praying to the Mantis for some prey portion – even just crumbs — is one such wishing well coin(telpro). And all that makes wooden nickel wampum “currency” is use, which is to say capitulation, the most common capitalization, by weebles, i.e. the, or that portion of the, 20:….
A horse is a horse, of course of course, & can’t be learn’t that zero “voter” turnout’d not change a thing the next & subsequent days post “election”…cuz the erection is permanent…as is the Babel tower narrative-babble that extols it, explains it, ex post facto propter smokes & pawns those hocs….
Votin’s just like home ownership, or car ownership – an enabling narrative, a beard for the homo horsapians to hide true natures, true conditions, true motivations, behind & Trojan inside.
Takes Stockholm *&* syndrome to tango. All Patty Hearst shifters are forward geared to reverse…into loving h\arms way.
Still & despite 20 codependents for every independent, the cosplayers are so frail they can’t countenance even that ratio – “they” gotta’ have it all, ever’body under “their” bigtop. This short(wo\man syndrome)change is the simple makin’ change at the register reason why this ain’t no place for a hero — & why “hero’s”\worship’s also just beard & narrative. Even in Latin motto07. Tu ne cede malis, sed contra audentior ito.
Only thing banal’r than evil just might be proceeding “against” it. I like Ike man vs Eichmann is my best man. “Forward” or “backward” the LP emits sounds just the same…is who is that masked man? just the same…The Mask of Zerro…this, that, & the other 20:…& TTT’s utter faith in “pareidolia – the brain’s tendency to recognize patterns in meaningless data – or coincidental phonetic reversal.”
Apophenia, apoptosis, & pop go the weasel-bubbles…& the wheel of fortune players@solvers just keep buyin’ A(pophany)’s from Vanna, ‘steada E(piphany)’s. That all good stoogents want A’s is Autonomic reflex, eh?
btw, thronged & massed the other side of a diarrheal demarcation line – but also color o’ law “fast” : “these colors don’t run” — behind the heroes are the “experts”… division of labor & specialization’s cool, but what we got here is a vivisectioned deference of \ to star chamber “imposed” (the unters love it) labor theory o’ value & speciousization…but not “a failure to communicate” to anyone – that 4 or 5 percent — paying any attention at all….Winner-picking & outer darkness consigning’s been rolled up a long time in the “civilized” parts of the world, & was local-normalized even longer before that just as it still is in the “uncivilized” places – it’s what, how, the tribal20: do, who & what those weebles, first & foremost, are.
So, what’s it all about, Alfie? Just this: If you’d rather join (even if by non compos mentis default) & be enjoined than come to inner sweetness•light & indict•dynamite the condition “our” condition’s in – as Bard’s observation that world’s a stage peopled choc-a-bloc full of actors & extras (Hollywood stereotypes, ya’ll) is an indictment — you’re a weeble. And like Rust Cohle put it, weebles is feebles head over heels enthralled to fee simpleton arrangements with each “other” & especially with “their” betters”leaders.”
So it’s funny that human property prerogatives of the one – each & every one – the individual, goes by the word all•odial…& not surprising that “we are the one state” reserves that allodial ownership to “itself” – same as other corporate entities are said-lied to be “selves.”
Plainer, just in case: Many of the “1”’s is so only in their own minds. Any 1 that coalesces, even if small scale – like “the libertarian party” – is an emulating reenactor off the ol’ “20” block.
“Me too” moo•vement ain’t no new thing.
This is sooo much better than Kenny Rogers’ cover
— links lynx —
— links lynx —
— links lynx —
— links lynx —
— links lynx —
The Heavy stock version of this tune starts out like a funeral dirge…appropriately…”And doin’ things just to please your crowd” a’pall(ing)bearers…those parts of the world that’re all spelled “stage” are not spelled “bier” cuz denyin’ the fear’s the whole cosplay point….:
— links lynx —
God made that land fer buffalo. Serves pretty well for cattle. But it hates the plow!
I can’t imagine any self-respecting carnivore plowing any land where animals could graze.
We’d be much better off if we grew all of our vegetables and fruit in 4 season hydroponic walapinis.
They want to set up their own little Soviet city. Guess they know sooner or later someone like Bernie is going to get elected and just getting ahead of things. Can’t wait for the gov to assign me an apartment and a job. We’ll all be equal and poor, It’s going to be fun. Only our glorious leaders will need cars.
Every now and then, I consider just saying to Hell with it and filing for “disability” (my left shoulder is a mess) and staying in bed until it’s time to get up and get sushi and a ribeye using my EBT card.
But I’m not yet that depraved.
I’m in agreement with Walter Block on the issue of libertarians taking money from the government: one cannot possibly live like a libertarian in a statist society.
I’ll do you one better. I’m in total agreement with everything that Dr. Block wrote in Defending the Undefendable in 1976.
It might can be done but you need luck on your side. People used to go across this country and not use public roads but you are at the whim of a landowner if caught. It might turn out fine or it might not.
I had an old classmate(real a hole)and another guy the same age I knew(another bad a hole)come across some guys just traveling across the country on one of their’s land. They decided they’d beat shit out of those long haired hippies. Once they regained consciousness, the interlopers were long gone. I laughed and laughed and laughed…
Eric’s ad “Do Blue Lives Matter” reminded me of the recent White guy questioned by the fbi and kicked out of university for saying “White Lives Matter” Definitely the age of Aquarius.
Of course, peak oil is a complete falsehood because they are now turning plastic back into oil in Australia. Also, for well over 10 years, the Europeans have been turning trash plastic in to diesel fuel.
How much energy had to be used to turn the plastic into diesel versus how much energy the diesel contained?
Not a great deal of diesel produced is used to heat the plastic. I’ve seen several examples and was going to try it on a larger scale similar to a refinery but when I did research, I found out it was already being done on a large scale in this country.
Of course the best bang for the buck is where there is a large enough population to supply plastic for recycling without the need to haul it to site.
Why would anyone burn diesel to drive a refinery?
Refineries don’t even recover the gases given to flaring.
Why would you be melting and refining plastic and not use the product being produced on site? They are making diesel, it’s the cheapest form of energy for them to use. Do some research on making diesel from plastic and you’ll know as much as anyone.
The elite have never liked cars for regular folks. Keeping regular people contained in the 19th century and early 20th was seen as a normal thing for them to be doing. An example of that is Pullman in Chicago. The company town. They were all rentals, no booze, strict rules and if you quit working you had to move out. And Pullman was probably one of the “nicest” ones there were. Most of you know what happened with that though, a gilded cage is still a cage.
But that’s what they want back badly. The 21st century company town. The government replacing the company for the most part. But it won’t work because many people would be idle. You can never “plan out” human behavior. Idle people cause major problems.
But back to cars. They worked very hard (and thankfully were defeated then) to kill the early affordable cars. They put up as many roadblocks as they could. Ford had to fight off a patent holder to even make cars. Many communities tried to ban outright or over-regulate cars to defacto ban them (basically what they do today too). Road construction was blocked when they could get away with it. Thankfully the fast development of the auto overcame all their roadblocks. Even big money couldn’t stop them, since so much new money was being made. We don’t have that going for us this time around though as the economy hasn’t really been well since the 1960’s in many ways.
I know the Chicago elite would love to get regular people off the roads to Michigan and Wisconsin on the weekends in the summer. They are just greedy bastards that don’t want to wait in traffic with the great unwashed to get to their second homes out there. And that’s what its all about. Keeping the best to themselves.
If people had to have paid for a car to drive it, the roads would would be much less crowded.
Instead, most people never pay for their cars. They just trade them in before they could.
One of the best parts about being a vandweller (since 1984) is never having to drive to get home.
TIME Magazine has named climate clueless Greata Thunberg as “Person of the Year.”
Might be appropriate. Hitler was once too. Same mentality.
Their choices have always been poor. That isn’t new.
I forgot about those clowns until I saw it on the news feed.
Little Autismo better enjoy the fame, she’ll be cast aside and forgotten like the 20 something yo Crisis actor who pretended he was a HS student in Florida
Imagine Little Autismo in about ten years… when she is running for office.
She would actually make AOC look like a libertarian. lol
Doubt it. She will be dead or institutionalized in less than 10.
Either she will get so unhinged that they lock her up or she will come to realize how she has been abused and terrorized by her handlers. She did not go completely whackadoodle without help. If she does come out of it, she will need supervision to prevent self harm. The way outside odds are she goes postal. Tough to predict what crazy people will do, but it usually comes down to only a few unpleasant outcomes.
But then again, we live in crazy world now, so we will see.
If she returns to Sweden, she will be recognized by a wandering band of horny immigrants who will gang rape and murder her.
Delusional beliefs, if advantageous to the PTB, are handsomely rewarded, never recognized as “crazy” and lauded as brave. Consider Paul Ehrlich, a man who rivals only Bill Kristol for the lifetime “Teflon” academic award, given to the academic who is fantastically and consistently wrong about everything, yet remains respected and richly compensated.
Greta will never be recognized as crazy, the awful people exploiting her for their own ends will never be called out for their abuse. She will likely settle into a comfortable life, forgiving her childhood manipulators, maybe as a politician or a professional activist. She will likely overcome her naive, utopian disdain for air travel and other conveniences made possible by carbon “pollution”. Perhaps her next world tour will be aboard Leonardo DiCaprios’s oh so green yacht. Perhaps she will purchase carbon “indulgences” from climate hucksters like Al Gore to distract from the hypocrisy of it all. Being a carbon sinner is forgivable if indulgences are acquired from the “correct” sources.
Consider the source. Time is in bed with the socialist crowd. This is as silly as the Obama peace award. A decade later there is less peace.
According to Wikipedia, “Person of the Year … is an annual issue of the United States news magazine Time that features and profiles a person, a group, an idea, or an object that ‘for better or for worse… has done the most to influence the events of the year'”
How does one influence events as opposed to influencing people?
She should consider herself to be one of the few Swedish females not having been raped, yet.
Is the misspelling of her name a covert pejorative comment?
Idc what I have to do, where I have to move, only way Uncle is getting rid of my cars is when he sends an AGW hit squad to take me out!
Good thing about being single with no kids, you don’t need much space for things, so little house with room for a garage or just to park cars, and I’ll be set
Well said Zane I’m the same way and not only do I refuse to buy a new computer wheels “car” I’ll always keep my current car, older 90s truck, and motorcycles.
Never sold a car before, but hit the limit of my current A4 essentially (Just big turbo)
I’m stuck between Fox Bodies and 90s RHD JDM’s essentially, possibly an E36 as well. Trust me, I haven’t built “That Car” yet, haven’t come close to it and I’ll be damned if some nameless, faceless pencil pushers who don’t care to drive think I should give up my keys so they can have more power over me
There is a lot of anti religious folks here, but this is my favorite prayer…
Lord, make me fast and accurate.
Let my aim be true and my hand faster
than those who wish to harm me and mine.
Let not my last thought be “If only I had my gun”.
and Lord, if today is truly the day you are to call me home,
Let me die in a pile of brass.
Mark Twain’s “The War Prayer” is my favorite.
It has its own URL at warprayer.org
What will TPTB say when renewable electricity becomes cheap, reliable, and widely available? They won’t have the ‘carbon’ canard to fall back on then…
I don’t think that is a major concern for TPTB. It just won’t be allowed.
Besides, energy is heat. Heat is bad. Therefore energy is bad. TAX IT! (or so I expect the propaganda to resemble)
“Renewable” energy could not exist without Bad Bad oil which is the original green fuel as it comes from the earth.
I prefer “super-renewable” energy. This is a form of energy that becomes renewable forever once you burn it, and this awesome power source also INCREASES THE CARRYING CAPACITY OF THE EARTH FOR LIFE. Also affordable. Really, truly. It is called “fossil fuels” and it gets all this magic precisely because these fuels release carbon dioxide. CO2 + H2O + sunshine in a green plant –> sugar and all life. Photosynthesis. So you get ethanol and wood to re-burn forever AND more abundant life.
The craziest conspiracy theory I have run into yet says the elites are deliberately destroying the Earth humans and life in order to make room for some space alien life. I figure those would have done it long since if they were so inclined–but it fits the facts better than almost anything else. Maybe biological life is being destroyed for AI.
Conspiracy theory? That’s the plot to “They Live”.
What the ruling class is trying to do is cull the herd and engineer human society as they see fit. Their idea is more along the lines that the planet belongs to them and they don’t want so many people consuming resources.
There is also a great short SF calle Occam’s Scalpel along similar lines.
The next bible will probably tell us that we are not to suffer a useless eater to live.
And another thing…. these people will tell you that wide streets, a wide public way did not exist before the automobile. That is absolutely false. 18th and 19th century cities had very wide streets for travel and commerce. This is a propagandist trick to say they didn’t. One of the things that got me banned from a new urbanist website was that every time they deployed this lie I would dig up photographs of ideally the same street or ones nearby from before the automobile age showing them as wide as they are today.
My favorite was on a fake automobile enthusiast website (I say fake, because its run by people who promote the anti-car nonsense) where I found a 19th century photograph of exactly the same street corner in Paris taken from almost the same location as the one used in the article. The street lamps were different, most of the buildings were in both photographs, the sidewalk was slightly narrower in the modern photograph. That was about it other than traffic signals being added. Very little had changed and what changed amounted to tiny details.
So to design a city from the ground up to be without automobiles means also to be without trucks, wagons, anything required for any remotely modern (as in the last 200 years) level of transportation and commerce. The automobile was built to fit the 19th century road structure, which is why we still largely have 19th century road designs in cities. Nobody wanted to start over.
Supposedly General Palmer designed the original main streets in Colorado Springs to be wide enough for a team and wagon to turn around (U-turn). At least that is the story.
But I think some drunken Indian came along and designed the rest of the streets in the city LOL
Salt Lake City in Utah was designed expressly for teams and wagons to be able to turn around.
I’ve spent a LOT of time there but never outside the airport!
Another thing that people forget (probably no longer taught) is that city streets used to be badly fouled by horse excrement and urine. The automobile was hailed as the cleaner mode of transport.
Of course they have. Early articles on the automobile praised how much cleaner it would make cities and it did. And it was this improvement that probably in a small part led to not doing anything about actual pollution from automobiles until the 60s and 70s.
Yep. We just traded medieval diseases for asthma. Maybe the problem isn’t horses or cars, but that dense urban agglomeration itself is unhealthy and unnatural.
That’s probably why these bastards want to force us to live in these overcrowded urban centers. It may very well be one of their solutions for “overpopulation”.
How can one cure overpopulation by causing it?
There is a plan to move the majority of people into a dozen or so regions within North America. I saw the beginning setups for this while I was doing driveaway in the mid 2000s. I began seeing quantities of jersey barriers being staged at the intersection of interstate highways and loops around cities. This was done to make it easy to close the highways into the cities so that it can be segregated on the loops.
This has already been accomplished for tractor-trailers, which are banned from several city centers without permits, which are mostly issued for moving vans. When I was doing longhaul in the early 1990s, I’d drive through Atlanta occasionally. That is not allowed today unless one is delivering or picking up.
‘First they came for the tractor-trailers…’
Where did your idea that asthma is a modern disease come from?
I recently drove down a side street in the city where I’d learned to drive and found it uncomfortably narrow, even though I hadn’t decades ago. I attributed the new narrowness to the far higher number of pickup and large SUVs than had been parked on the same street in the late 1960s. Most full size cars got parked in garages that were not rebuilt during “modernization.”
Yes, the SUVs and crossovers make things feel closed in.
I also find that using the commons for regular car storage to be a rather silly practice that should have never been allowed. It creates all sorts of needless conflicts. And because it is ‘free’ it gets abused. If it were up to me I would find some way to make street parking something only for visitors, temporary loading/unloading, that sort of thing. Regular storage of vehicles should be on private property. Maybe older homes could have parking spots on the street directly in front of them assigned. They do that in chicago for the handicapped. There has to be a solution to this tragedy of the commons.
The first step would be for all the bereaved to learn why it is not a tragedy of the commons.
If you want all parking to be on private property, you should become a besieged parking lot magnate.
Parking on the public way led to the development of new multi-unit residential buildings so more people lived in the same ground area without parking well into the era of everyone having cars. With all the additional housing units vertically there were no additional parking spaces on the public way. That’s the very definition of it.
The result was government creating parking minimums. But the root cause is that the public way was being used for the regular storage of private property.
Did I write “all parking”? Nope. Street parking would be required for short term use obviously. Visitors, loading, unloading, tradesmen, etc. But the idea that street parking be regular storage always seemed absurd to me. Even when I lived in the city I paid for parking on private property and only used street parking for short term loading and unloading.
So you defend bicycling on every non-freeway in existence, up to and including the Nurburgring because it’s technically allowed, along with some freeways if they’re the only way (or only convenient way) to reach a given destination, and think anyone who is against it is a selfish reckless idiot who wants to go 80 in a school zone. But on-street parking in cities, where it’s expected and frequently the only option due to lack of space, and where average speeds (possible and actual) are much lower, is “the tragedy of the commons”, “should never have been allowed”, “creates all sorts of needless conflicts”, and “gets abused” “because it is ‘free'”.
Does it ever occur to you, and this is a 100% serious question, that this is precisely how other people feel about bicycles on the road?
Chuck, go troll someone else. I’ve been over this multiple times with you. If you fail to understand that bicyclists are traffic like anything else that’s your problem.
As to parking, it’s quite simple. If you can store your vehicle on the public way why can’t your neighbor store one of those big freezers there? Maybe a stove or shack? Why are you permitted the regular storage of your private property on the public way? I could use more room for my crap. Why I can’t I just put a locked shed the size of a pickup truck on the street in front of my house? Same difference as parking an actual pickup truck there.
Bicycling on the public way is not ‘free’. It is more than covered by taxes bicyclists pay provided they like many motorists are not on the government dole. You simply do not recognize the taxes paid as such because you want bicycling eliminated.
“As to parking, it’s quite simple. If you can store your vehicle on the public way why can’t your neighbor store one of those big freezers there? Maybe a stove or shack? Why are you permitted the regular storage of your private property on the public way? I could use more room for my crap. Why I can’t I just put a locked shed the size of a pickup truck on the street in front of my house? Same difference as parking an actual pickup truck there.”
You’re right that there’s no difference, and you’re right that it would be stupid. But I never said on-street parking was ideal, only expected. It exists because some areas were built before motor vehicles were popular or before they existed at all, or were built along similar lines due to lack of space. In a perfect world, everyone would have a parking space on private property, but in the world we live in, the only way to ensure this would be to either tear down and rebuild large areas (by force!) or to just make people who live in those buildings rent offsite garage space if they want to keep their cars. I’m sure to you that sounds like a perfectly acceptable solution; to me it absolutely doesn’t. And if you let visitors, delivery drivers, etc. continue to park at the curb, well guess what… you’ll still have people parking “on the public way” and they’re still going to be annoying.
“Bicycling on the public way is not ‘free’. It is more than covered by taxes bicyclists pay provided they like many motorists are not on the government dole.”
Don’t the people who live on those streets pay taxes too? It’s “free” in the same way that on-street residential parking is “free”.
“You simply do not recognize the taxes paid as such because you want bicycling eliminated.”
Oh, I recognize the taxes paid. You’re the one who does not recognize the difference between what you “have a right” to do and what you should do. Do you have a right to ride a bicycle on the road? Yes. Is it just as annoying to other road users as on-street parking is to you? Absolutely yes! Is it destructive to car culture? 100% beyond a shadow of a doubt yes, and no amount of whataboutism or “but you’re outdriving your sightlines!” will change this. Is there any way to cycle on the road without being both a nail in the coffin of car culture and a freakishly annoying artificial hazard for the normal drivers? No. No there isn’t. And there never will be.
And frankly, based on some of the things that you’ve said before, none of this is even relevant. Remember when I brought up the Nurburgring? As a literal straw man of obnoxious cycling? As an example of a road that would be so suicidally inconsiderate and flat-out silly to cycle on that no one in their right mind would even dream of doing so? Your response was to link to multiple companies that specialize in helping people do just that, and then say you’d happily do it yourself if the tolls were lower. This is despite the fact that, as far as I know, the Nurburgring is funded by user fees and is thus under no particular obligation to allow non-drivers. What this tells me is that even if all roads were entirely funded by fuel taxes or user fees and non-drivers thus had zero right to road space… you pretty much wouldn’t care, and would find some other loophole or excuse to keep non-drivers on the road.
My point is, you’re all hot about the public way when someone doesn’t like how you use it, but as soon as someone else tries to use it in a way that you don’t like so much, it’s “a rather silly practice” that “should never have been allowed”. Somehow I don’t think I’m the one here who thinks the public way should revolve around me.
Horses, carriages, and wagons all had to be parked and they were not kept on the public way. There were these businesses called stables where they were kept unless one had enough money to have his own stable on his own property.
So the model required for the automobile already existed but since storing vehicles on the public way was allowed of course there was little need to have private garages except where demand vastly exceeded the available public way parking.
Government created a commons for automobile storage that didn’t exist for previous vehicles.
If you don’t understand the difference between short term parking for practicality and regular storage then I can’t help you. Let’s say you have to unload a bunch of stuff but because the street parking is used for regular storage you end up only finding a space three blocks away. If it’s not used for regular storage you’ll have a spot close by.
I didn’t claim street parking was “free”. Of course there are taxes going to it. But it’s the public way, not a place to store personal property.
Yes, I get that you don’t like certain vehicles on the public way. Tough shit. Grow up. We’ve been over this at length and I have already dealt with your nonsensical “arguments” about how you have more right to the public way because you can go faster.
“If you don’t understand the difference between short term parking for practicality and regular storage then I can’t help you.”
Kind of like you don’t understand the difference between occasional short-distance walking or cycling by someone who has no other choice, and a deliberate choice by someone who has multiple functioning automobiles but wants to ride anyway?
I never said on-street parking was ideal. It’s absolutely not. But neither is on-road cycling. My point is, the only time you really care about “the public way” is when someone calls you out on using it in an obnoxious and obstructive manner.
It is the bicycle mentality to consider yourself less selfish than 90% of people despite asking for more accommodation – and more onerous accommodation – than that same 90%. It takes some spectacular cognitive dissonance to demand that every other road user design their entire driving style around the mere possibility of your presence, and then call other people selfish for pointing out that that’s not even realistic, let alone reasonable.
It’s been a long time since I wanted to ban bicycles, and I know popularity doesn’t determine rights, but there does come a point where, in a PRACTICAL sense, you go from being “normal” to being an annoying mobile hazard. Cycling passed that point decades ago. So if you want to be the lone, eternal pain in the butt who requires approximately the same considerations as ONCOMING traffic (but comes from the other side and usually has no specifically marked space), reduces everyone’s margin for error, cuts maximum ethical road width use by 30-35% and maximum ethical speed by some unknown but presumably similar percentage, and multiplies the danger presented by other hazards as there is no longer a “safe side” to ditch towards, then I guess I can’t stop you, but don’t expect anyone else to like it or act like there’s anything righteous about it.
Bicyclists are TRAFFIC. They are MOVING. Motor vehicles stored on the public way are not traffic. They are personal property regularly stored on the street.
Since this difference between moving and stationary would even be obvious to a cat it is clear you are either trolling or simply have such an ingrained irrational hate that you can’t help yourself.
You might notice, that except for those stupid government subsidized bicycle share things, bicycles are not stored on the public way.
It’s because it’s not just on-street parking. Remember the last time I brought up bike paths? You said they didn’t exist because they were really for pedestrians, but also ranted about how the pedestrians get in the way and take up too much space and they’re all stroller pushers or dog walkers?
You general attitude toward “the public way” seems to be:
“Someone doesn’t like the way I use publicly funded infrastructure? They’re selfish! Someone is using publicly funded infrastructure in a way I don’t like? They’re selfish too!”
I’ve tried to ignore your increasingly unhinged obsession with cyclists, but I’m going to succumb and respond because YOU keep bringing it up, using any opportunity, no matter how tangential or unrelated, to take jabs at us. You find any recreational use of any road by a cyclist to be unacceptable and call us selfish for disagreeing.
“Kind of like you don’t understand the difference between occasional short-distance walking or cycling by someone who has no other choice, and a deliberate choice by someone who has multiple functioning automobiles but wants to ride anyway”. 12/20/2019
“Is there any way to cycle on the road without being both a nail in the coffin of car culture and a freakishly annoying artificial hazard for the normal drivers? No. No there isn’t. And there never will be”. 12/17/2019
You once admitted that your preferred driving style is unsafe if ANYONE else is on the road. Now you pretend otherwise and have convinced yourself that you’ve figured out how to drive that way safely around “normal traffic”, if only we selfish cyclists would voluntarily ban ourselves from the road.
“Honestly, I think part of it is knowing it’s not justifiable. I know that my preferred style of driving is illegal and dangerous, and so basically depends on the good graces or simple absence of other people.” 1/02/2019
“It’s not ‘anyone else’, not at all. Well before this all started, I spent significant time figuring out how to work around normal traffic. 7/18/2019
You have described your preferred driving style, which you once recognized as dangerous, but now seem to think would be reasonable, and not selfish, if only “we” weren’t on the road.
“For deciding on my own use of roads, I would not consider any road suitable for non-motorized use unless a racer could come through any corner or over any crest at limit-of-adhesion speeds, with two tires over the shoulder line and the other two right up against it,…” 3/15/2019
“Mountain backroads, two lanes or even no center line, likely to be no shoulder as well. These are like a magnet to recreational walkers/riders, which gives me no end of rage as these are exactly where I’d like to push my car and abuse the gutter/road edge as a cornering aid”. 12/24/2018
As I’ve said before, I understand why you want to drive this way and don’t object to it per se. What I object to is your pathological belief that were it not for non-motorists, especially cyclists, you could drive this way safely with “normal traffic” on the road. This insane belief leads to the other thing I object to, your complete unwillingness to make any effort or take any risk in order to drive this way without harming others. You have scoffed at every suggestion that you find private roads/courses, or travel to an established race, like Pikes Peak. You are unwilling to take the risk of setting up an illegal, blockable course, like the Japanese racers you admire, and you ignored my suggestion that you do so.
You once asked, “Who’s the selfish one…”
To which I replied,
“Well, let’s see. you object to the mere possibility of any cyclist being on any road that you like, period. You have graciously rescinded the call for an outright government ban on us and replaced it with a call that we all choose to ban ourselves from these roads. All so you can indulge your fantasy that, were it not for cyclists, you could safely drive dangerously. What do I want? I wish to be able to use the public roads on my bicycle while being aware of and considerate to others”.
First, I’m more than a little creeped out by the fact that you’ve been copy-pasting and dating everything I say. Are you sure I’m the unhinged one here?
But you say,
“What do I want? I wish to be able to use the public roads on my bicycle while being aware of and considerate to others”.
The whole point is, using the road on a bicycle is, by default, neither aware of nor considerate to others. Certainly not your fellow car enthusiasts, but not really to normal drivers either, who now have an additional artificial hazard to watch out for.
As for what I’d said previously about my preferred driving style and the dangerousness of it and whatnot, what I was getting at there (but articulated very poorly at the time, mainly because I’d made the mistake of letting you/Brent/etc. get inside my head) is that the best we as car enthusiasts can ever hope to get from the authorities is benign neglect, never actual support – so maybe we shouldn’t ruin that benign neglect (or make its presence or absence completely academic) by our own actions.
The other thing is, no matter how crazy I drive, the one thing I’m not asking anyone to do is accept legal or moral responsibility for my dumb decision. If I have to crash horribly to avoid hitting someone, they’re not under any obligation to feel guilty for that, or to pay any sort of debt to society. That, on the other hand, is exactly what backroad cyclists do. “I’m going to go riding down a narrow, poorly-sighted road on a ‘vehicle’ in the technical sense only, which is literally physically incapable of keeping up with traffic (especially uphill), and if someone hits me or even comes to close to me then they’re the jerk for not treating the rightmost quarter of the lane as though it were made of lava! Yeah, I could be normal and drive a car like everyone else, but I’d rather be an extra mobile hazard that everyone else on the road has to watch out for!” You are forcing other road users to accept the moral and legal responsibility for the potential consequences of your risky decision.
“What I object to is your pathological belief that were it not for non-motorists, especially cyclists, you could drive this way safely with ‘normal traffic’ on the road.”
Of course there are other limiting factors, but none of the restrict in the same way as or to the same degree as a cyclist or pedestrian. A slow driver is still moving faster than a cyclist, and is probably visible from further away as well. Animals don’t comprehend roads at all, so using the shoulder to corner won’t make them significantly less difficult to avoid (plus, since they have no rights, there are other ways to deal with them, such as fencing in the road so they can’t get to it or luring them away with bait stations). The wide trucks that 8SM likes to cite as an example would require using more of the shoulder to avoid them, not less. The police only matter if there’s actually an officer around, and a radar detector (or a radio scanner, if your jurisdiction hasn’t started using those BS encrypted radios yet) may be able to sniff them out. And so on.
“This insane belief leads to the other thing I object to, your complete unwillingness to make any effort or take any risk in order to drive this way without harming others. You have scoffed at every suggestion that you find private roads/courses, or travel to an established race, like Pikes Peak.”
First of all, if you really think the joy of driving should be locked to a very small number of expensive track days and sanctioned events a year just so That One Guy can ride his bike wherever he wants, that is LITERALLY the exact line of thinking that is killing car culture. Just replace the love of cycling with climate panic or safety advocacy and you’ll have every other modern enthusiast’s excuse for aligning against the car hobby too.
Second, I could probably write an entire rant on why sanctioned racing is something entirely different and is not what I’m looking for, but to put it short, because sanctioned racing is legal and socially acceptable, it attracts “super tryhards” – i.e. people who care nothing for the joy of the drive and are only there to win at any cost, frequently aligned with factory teams or big-dollar privateer shops. There is no real freedom of tuning (except in the occasional “unlimited” class which you can bet will never be used as a dumping ground for daily drivers that don’t fit anywhere else); either you build your car to exploit every last column-inch of the rulebook, or you are food for those who have done so. The only ways to solve this while remaining sanctioned are A. ridiculous micromanagery as in the top levels of FIA racing, or B. an outright spec series as in much of oval racing. The courses have also evolved in tandem with this state of affairs, to the point that a decent racetrack is significantly less challenging than even a mediocre mountain pass. They are optimized for free-for-alls of 20-30 similar cars, not for head-to-head duels between wildly different cars.
To put it simply, no known form of sanctioned racing has the ability to offer near-complete freedom in terms of which make/model to use and how to upgrade it, and yet still prevent Billy Big Bucks from just out-horsepowering everyone and killing the whole scene the way Porsche killed Can-Am.
“You are unwilling to take the risk of setting up an illegal, blockable course, like the Japanese racers you admire, and you ignored my suggestion that you do so.”
There’s one BIG problem here: finding people who would be willing to help with that (and for some roads it would take a lot of them) would pretty much require getting an “in” with people who are already racing on unblocked roads, which may require racing against them or at least supporting their racing in some way, but if it was possible to “ethically” do so, then the whole operation of blocking the road would be pointless in the first place!
Besides, blocking roads is what you do when you want to use both lanes. It shouldn’t be necessary just for one side of the road.
On top of which, the reason Japanese racers got away with that is because Japan does weird things in weird ways. It’s like they have two systems, one hyper-authoritarian collectivist and one surprisingly libertarian, running parallel to each other. The “police culture” of the US just plain isn’t set up for it.
But then end, it’s not all about racing. That may be a part of it, but what I really want is this: to be able to drive in peace, at whatever speed, not necessarily even 10/10ths, maybe only 5 or 6, without constantly having to worry about whether I’ve crossed some invisible, ever-shifting line of “too close” to the edge of the road. To me, that really doesn’t seem like asking for a lot.
And that, right there, is the crux of my beef with “car-guy bicyclists” as a group. The “bicyclist” part always seems to come first somehow. In theory, you may love cars and think speed enforcement is immoral, but whenever there’s an adverse condition, such as darkness, bad sightlines, narrow/no shoulders, or whatever else, you still think the drivers – never the cyclists – should be the first and only group to sacrifice.
And that’s the other thing. Despite what I said before, I’ve never actually pushed a car to 10/10ths on the street, and I have (very grudgingly) started taking all the ridiculous non-driver-compliant Good Little Boy cornering lines as of several months ago. But because I don’t enjoy doing things this way, don’t think it should be necessary, and have the temerity to say so out loud, I’d still “selfish” and “reckless” and need to be told so. At this point I would again like to state for the record that while I may unfortunately have to watch out for you on all the corners you’re not currently riding through, I am under no obligation to like this or to agree that non-motorized road use is a positive thing.
I’m curious: What makes you think that you have a superior claim to the public way, which gives you the right to use it as you choose, while disregarding the rights of other users?
I have no problem with you driving 140MPH where conditions allow for it; where you have the space, visibility, etc.
But to think it is your right to do so any time you desire without regard to other users of the road, is to arrogate to yourself a superior right, just as an inconsiderate cyclist does when he unnecessarily impedes faster traffic by hanging out in the middle of the road when there is a shoulder or other usable space for him to be.
We ALL have an equal right to use the roads- be we fast or slow, big or small, etc. We thus must all cooperate with and accommodate other users where and when necessary. When we assert that our right is greater than that of others, and that we should be given preference, we are then infringing on the rights of others.
I sympathize with Chuck’s point-of-view, as a “car guy” who likes to drive fast and who mourns the death of car culture. But I agree with you (and Brent and Jeremy) that roads are the public right-of-way and cyclists have as much right to use it as car drivers, truck drivers, RV drivers and so on.
I personally would not ride on most roads – but that’s an “executive decision” I make on my own behalf, not on account of any assertion that such roads “belong” to cars but because I personally don’t feel comfortable riding on those roads. I make no executive decisions for others.
I think the nut of it is that so long as we are talking about public rights of way (paid for by general taxes) then it’s hard to make a case for excluding bikes, legally.
It seems to me this is another problem arising from government involvement. All of us are effectively force to use the same roads – and to pay for them. If government hadn’t co-opted everything, there would probably be roads designed solely for high-speed traffic and others for mixed use – the “terms and conditions” arrived at by the mutual consent of the users and providers.
I ride in a way that some people would deem “aggressive”. However, I am aware of and considerate to others. I never block people from passing me, swerve without looking, force them to avoid me or have to slow down to deal with me. Some drivers do so anyway, but I can’t control their irrational reaction to my mere presence. I certainly do not obey all traffic laws, as doing so is often dangerous and actually annoying. Many drivers get annoyed if I pass them while they’re stopped while waiting at a light. But, these very same drivers would be furious if I took the whole lane (in many cases my legal right) and slowed them down. So, they want me to use the rightmost portion of the lane when they’re moving, so they can pass me, but they don’t want me to pass them when they’re stopped. Can’t have it both ways, I choose to be courteous when they’re moving and efficient when they’re stopped. Seems reasonable to me.
I drive the same way, I never block side streets while approaching, or waiting at, a light. I let people in; I don’t hog the left lane; on back roads, with a good shoulder, I’ll pull over and let faster traffic pass me (Texas friendly); on curvy roads with no, or an insufficient, shoulder, I’ll pull into the first available “wide spot” and let those who wish to drive faster pass me. But, I do speed, and I don’t always obey traffic laws.
Hi Ya, Eric!
I agree completely! I like to drive fast too. Not many cyclists here- except for me- but instead, Amish buggies, farm equipment, livestock, etc. Same deal though- you don’t go charging over the blind crest of a hill at 70MPH, ’cause ya don’t know what may be in the road over that crest.
Or even with other car drivers- as in an example I used recently in another thread, where this idiot that mu sister used to know got into an accident because he was flying down a road at a speed too great to allow cars entering that road from side streets to ever see him coming in time- and the idiot couldn’t understand how come he was charged as being at fault, when “the other guy pulled out in front of me”.
And yes, whether it’s communal schools that we are all forced to pay for…or communal roads, whatever…it all amounts to the same thing: Everyone ends up paying, but no one can truly get what they want.
And I too refrain from cycling on a lot of roads. In fact, with the ever increasing numbers of drivers distracted by phones and gadgets and touchscreens and cars that beep and chime 100 times a minute, I’ve pretty much been refraining from cycling in general these days. Hell, people plow into the back of other cars because they are now so distracted…what chance do we stand on a mere bicycle?!
Good job. & damn, son, you might oughta’ change that to “sniper chuck.”
The racing bits are tight; “super tryhards,” indeed. 20:1, again, at the least…including spectators & couch potatoes, too.
But at the little kid end, in mx, it’s the parents, dads mostly, doing the ST thing (same as in any number of other sports…not to mention “adults” in the rest of life, too).
The kids just want fun, excitement. If the kid progresses, so does the ST tend to spread.
Semi-pro & pro’s – bills to pay & it can become something it didn’t start out as: a job.
Again tho, punching a clock to play is just TGIF; common across the board.
But some of those pro’s transcend, too; what they do represents jobs to other people, but it’s not a job to themselves. A click-tight fit into calling, more like.
But all that 20 shite matters only to the 20. Doesn’t matter to the ones at all. If the checkered flag is anything, let alone everything, you’ve already lost, never got into that highest & last gear, no matter where you place, or at what level.
If Sunday drivers drove only Sundays, it’d be better.
Peddlers – slightly more mobile pedestrians — ain’t drivers, but they court becomin’ colorful sundaes (as do pedestrians a lot more than before the mobile phone craze…& pedestrianized, or even more pedestrianized, phone crazed car “drivers” – whole lotta’ mo’ pedestrian pastrami than usta’ be).
And let ‘em be free to “choose” it (choice being a beyond ideal figment of\for fevered imaginations).
And own the just dessert whatever comes.
Same as\for the somewhat less empty calorie motorized two-wheelers – where I’ve been & done & maybe came close to being done in by an automatonobile “driver” – who was drunk past his limitations.
Drunks or no, it happened to most I rode with, or knew, too; some of them died.
And, of course, same for car & truck drivers, too.
Like the stand up said, the road’s (& the rest too) just a ride. Where he screwed the truth was in maintaining passengers – which is every one – could change the ride.
Flyweights don’t ring with heavyweights. Cuz its “sport,” rather than suicide, & rules & refs keep the kamikazecrazies out of the wrong rings.
Flies suspended where angels fear to float, & when windshields smack, splat, & deflect, ain’t sport nor suicide. It’s just bugs in the wrong airspace at the wrong time. From the bugs perspective. If bugs have perspective. Which I’m sure they do. It’s just reaaaalllly narrow.
Gaylon Mosier was one I liked. He pedal-shared the road with relative freight trains to crosstrain. You pours your liquidity & you takes your chances.
That truly wild & crazy zenner free solo’er Alex Honnold ain’t even a mite weight to the granite massifs he scales. Let him, too.
Knife edge’s got appeal. But it also peels. And there ain’t no appeals.
So&yeah: f*** ‘em if they can’t take a spoke. Thru an eye. & out the back of their skulls.
Go Honnold, or go home…cuz if you’re on asphalt peddling with cars, you are Honnold, even if you’re just pretending (even if you think the pretense of color of law rights or right of way means anything post tense of being in the wrong airspace at the wrong time). (Cue that Jackson Browne tune.)
There ain’t no safe spaces. But some are way more dangerous than others.
I haven’t been copy/pasting everything you’ve written. I just did a search on the site, quite simple if you have access to the main comments page. I did so because you now say things that contradict what you’ve said before. Bottom line, you are under no obligation to like that I use the roads on my bicycle, nor to believe that it is a positive thing. I don’t give a shit. You do have an obligation to understand traffic, which has included bicycles for a very long time, and to drive accordingly. This doesn’t mean you have to drive slowly, observe the speed limit, etc…. You once understood that your preferred driving style requires the absence of other people, you now pretend otherwise.
Bicyclists have been subject to the traffic laws for as long as I’ve had a license (1970) but I have never seen one of them pulled over by a cop for running a red light or failing to make a right turn from a right turn only lane. I frequently see they do things that put them in danger while acting like their right to ride wherever the hell they want is violated.
I also routinely see them eschew bike lanes that we all paid for their exclusive use of. The most annoying thing that bicyclists do is weave around, making it chancy to drive past them, which forces everyone in the adjacent lane to pass them, however they can. Some of those passing them cause accidents in the process, but the bicyclists who caused the accident never fail to leave the scene of the accident, for which they should lose their drivers license in similar fashion to riding drunk.
One has to wonder why, if bicyclists are so offended by being disrespected, they don’t respect those who aren’t riding a bicycle. In fact, one has to wonder why they don’t create municipalities that cannot be reached by motor vehicles. This might be a good way to repurpose a closed shopping mall, since those are starting to stack up. Woe be to a pedestrian in such a place.
Bill, I saw one get a ticket in NYC for not stopping at a light recently although the video showed the rider did stop. Go figure. A-hole cop
Vonu, where there are lots of cyclists and lots of cops- as in cities, like NYC, bikes are ticketed all of the time. Usually not the worst offenders/dangerous ones, like the kamikaze bike messengers who mow down pedestrians and cause accidents….but rather the hipster who rolls a stop sign, or rides halfd a block the wrong way down a one-way street when no one’s around at 1 AM on his home to his loft from the gastropub[whatever that is].
They even nail cyclists fior DWI and speeding now (Now that the speed limits have been lowered in many places to 15-25MPH…cyclists can often break them).
Check out some of the cycling forums., It’s disgusting. I remember one guy in NY even having the porker who pulled him over point a gun at him when he reached into his backpack to get his ID which he was commanded to produce.
Big Brother knows no bounds these days- 10 year-olds are even hut-hut-hutted for having “unlicensed” lemonade stands in their driveways.
PEDESTRIANS are even ticketed!
Yes, some cyclists are reckless, inconsiderate, clueless assholes, I have never defended them. Many drivers are reckless, inconsiderate, clueless assholes as well. Obviously the number of such vastly exceeds that of cyclists, but there may be a higher percentage of such people among cyclists than drivers. I suspect not because my experience suggests otherwise. Still, I never do “group rides”, almost always ride alone, occasionally with one or two friends, so my perception may be skewed. We, myself and the few friends I ride with, are aware of and considerate to others, and have never caused an accident or any harm (except to myself in a few spectacular MTB wrecks). I have also never forced a driver to slow down or swerve out of my way, though many drivers have forced me to do so. Of course, I have annoyed some drivers, but they are annoyed by my mere presence on the road and convince themselves that I did something that justifies their wrath, I did not. I will never accept the pathologically selfish assertion that my mere presence, or the possibility thereof, on the road is an unacceptable, artificial hazard.
Yes, cyclists disobey traffic laws, as do all drivers. Doing so is sometimes dangerous, sometimes not. I do not care about disobeying a traffic law, by a driver or a cyclist, if doing so is neither dangerous nor inconsiderate. People who do are usually hypocritical control freaks.
I am not offended by being disrespected, I disagree with those that insist that I shouldn’t be on the road at all and that choosing to do so makes me an asshole. I choose to use my town bike for 90% of my errands, I enjoy it, it’s faster and more convenient, and I don’t impose a burden on drivers by doing so. The fact that I have a functional car does not make my choice immoral or selfish.
Finally, I use bike lanes where they are available and safe (many end abruptly or direct you to cross a lane of traffic which annoys the clueless driver behind you who may just hit you). Also, I routinely see drivers using the supposedly dedicated bike lane, I’ve never seen one ticketed for it. Bike paths are a different thing, most are impractical as a way to get from here to there and are definitely not restricted to cyclists. I’m not calling for them to be so restricted, just pointing out that they are neither practical nor a place where cyclists can recreate away from others. Denver police are now wasting resources enforcing absurdly low speed limits on bike paths. So much for “us” being immune from police harassment.
There has always been a solution, driveways and garages. At least a driveway. I detest driving old, narrow streets jammed with cars on both sides and that has nothing to do with cycling. The only place safe to cycle there is on sidewalks. I couldn’t tell you how many streets are one way in countless towns due to parking at the curb.
If I’m unlucky enough to have to get a big rig down one, there is no “being a good guy” since I can’t back up block after blocks. 4 wheelers are going to have to yield ROW as is so often with just 4 wheelers meeting on those streets.
And I”n not speaking of places that were made before cars were a requirement for every household. I’m talking about places where developers screwed the pooch and weren’t held to a wide enough street.
I worked with a guy who got to be friends with this idiot who finally got hired by the poleez dept. He spoke one day of riding those streets with his idiot buddy doing 85 where there’s barely room for one car and kids and pets are commonly in the streets even in the dark. Car 54 dumbass, where are you? Killing kids on tiny streets? Good enough, just get an accurate count.
If you had been a student in the truck driving school that I graduated from (and taught at after 50 months of intensive 13000 mile a month longhaulling), you wouldn’t have graduated. After passing the skills tests in the yard (straight backing for 200 feet, buttonhooking, blind-side backing, and serpentine), your instructor would take a truck with 2 or 3 students out to “Tower Road” where you would stay until you had backed the truck for several blocks without a pull up.
There are several municipalities where one cannot park anywhere else but the garage. There are several where pickups, RVs, motorhomes, and truck tractors can’t be parked at all. If I were a cop, I’d ticket those who park across a sidewalk, along with those who don’t signal, or don’t yield right of way.
“This will be done by imposing heavy taxes on the electricity they burn”
This. Because some virtue signalling jerk off wants/lets TPTB force them, your domestic electricity costs are going double or triple, even if you don’t have an EV. Supply and demand.
You can be sure TPTB will not simply tax the EVs. Way more money in raising everyone’s electricity rates and thus the huge increase in tax income. Count on it.
BTW, my electrical bill total is already more that 1/3 taxes, riders, contingency fund allotment, service fee….. Not much more than half the cost is actual energy usage.
Hey Anon,,, You forget solar panels, wind turbines and dilithium crystals will someday soon replace hydro / Fuel fired generating plants. Power will be freeeeeee! 🙂
In 2015 we will have Mr. Fusion that runs on kitchen garbage – oops!
Yep, anything but fission. Because it actually exists and works!
And they’ll put troublemakers like you into jail cells made of transparent aluminum.
Then something like this gives us some hope.
We fed all our kitchen waste to the chickens when we still had them. You should have seen how excited they got when we headed out with the container. Now it just goes into a “compost” pile under the pine trees.
And the City is removing it’s parking requirements from the building code. Amazing what brain dead political correctness can achieve.
Bicycling will be outlawed, tracked, taxed, etc too. They simply need to wait until motoring is no longer something ordinary people can afford. The idea is to re-establish the three mile radius that most people lived their entire lives in. When I am in good bicycling shape I can be 50 miles away in about two and half hours. These control freaks could not tolerate that sort of uncontrolled free travel. Even right now, in winter, I can in an hour or so be 15 miles away from home with a bicycle. The bicycle will be going away, probably via safety moms and claiming people need to get their exercise in ‘safer’ ways. Never mind that bicycling is very safe as it is. They’ll just do the usual emotional nonsense and claim it is impacting the costs of government funded “health care”. That will be the end of that. You can have a stationary bicycle to work out but not one that actually takes you somewhere.
As to no-car developments, this is the new urbanists at work. They hate parking. All parking. These control freaks will complain about even private developments that have parking structures. They will politically fight every driveway or ‘curb cut’.
The problem is that street parking was allowed in cities for the regular storage of automobiles. This gives the new urbanists their wedge. Because street parking was allowed for more than temporary visitors cities created parking minimums for new businesses and developments so as not to overcrowd the street parking. Now the new urbanists use the political power over parking for their goals.
Because of the CO2 scare (a big lie) , bycycling will be limited. Peddling causes rapid breathing thus leading to increased CO2 . You just know that some up and coming commissar in DC would love to slap some type of breathing device over our face to regulate and limit the air we breath. You can call me sarcastic or crazy, but I put nothing past these elites.
I propose that all these Greenies who are proposing the C02 Crap just kill themselves for the sake of the planet, that’s the end goal anyway, why not skip to the end?
Also surprised the Globalist don’t insist we all drive this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXEddCLW3SM
I have grown so tired of the sanctimonious and selfish hypocrites.
Almost invariably the ‘green’ assholes have 3 or more children stuffed into an SUV. 3 MORE CONSUMERS you fucking morons.
I think any of these hypocrites who says anything about forcing others to ‘save the environment’ but are still fertile or have multiple children, should be executed on the spot. To save the planet….. from their stupidity.
Next time some ‘green’ parent spouts some eco-bullshit, point out that their having kids added to the problem. Go on, try it. See the rationalizations spew like Old Faithful.
Nuke the whole fucking lot from orbit. There is no intelligent life here.
I for one fully agree with that sentiment
Also forced sterilization for the Watermelons
You make sense, friend. I have had the same thoughts – in re my not having had kids and thus, being much “greener” than the people urging my mulcting, who’ve have had several. I drive an old regular cab truck – because I have no kids and so don’t have to buy a new truck with a quad or crew cab to accommodate sssssssssssssaaaaaaaaaaaafety seats. Speaking of which. How much plastic is put into the several seats one kid needs from birth to say eight years old? What is the “carbon footprint” of that?
Argh. And they ask me why I drink…
They might need several seat due to their growing and the fact that they expire, the seats not the kids.
Why do you continue to live where there is no intelligent life?
Because I am the nasty kind that will sit and watch a kid stick a fork in a wall plug, and not prevent it. Watching the results of bad choices take their inevitable toll on the stupid is entertaining. Especially if I have explained the likely outcome before.
I used to try to educate people. But you can’t teach (by force) anybody anything, they have to care to learn. Many can’t be bothered to learn from others, so they have to stick the fork in the plug to ‘get educated’. Some several times.
I’m just an observer now.
I knew a guy in college who used a fork in a receptacle to wake himself. He must have had one hell of a resistance to shock. Cold water worked fine for me.
I can remember well my first encounter with AC.
I was old enough to crawl around but not walk. My parents were socializing with the grandparents in the kitchen, leaving me to my own devices on the living room floor. I pulled the floor lamp’s cord out from under the chair to find it plugged into an extension cord. I pulled the lamp plug out far enough to get a finger in, and experienced my first electric shock. I don’t think any of the adults took any notice and I don’t remember being very shocked or even crying.
This is one of the reasons why I’m not surprised when told that we are born knowing everything and forget it before we can talk, just as most of us forget vivid dreams after waking, if we don’t write them down immediately.
Cycling is self limiting. Not too many people are capable of more than 5 miles of riding anyway. My longest bicycle ride was 95 miles in a day back in 2008. Since I really don’t enjoy riding that much, I never have broken that record
All the easier to clamp down on it then.
This is the other thing. Take away motoring, you’ve pretty much already reestablished the three mile radius. I know a lot of internet car enthusiasts are hardcore cyclists, but most people see cycling as a slow, difficult inconvenience and aren’t going to bother riding more than a few miles if that. I know a lot of modern car enthusiasts will probably find it hard to swallow, but at this point it’s more important to save driving than cycling.
Electric cars are the cat out of the bag. Even before we get to bicycles, EVs will drastically limit how far and how often millions of Americans will be able to drive. If you live an hour away from your job or wherever you routinely need to go, the EV will make getting there – and back – onerous and expensive. It will nudge you to live closer to the city. But rents closer to the city are much higher, so many will not be able to afford the electric car. This will nudge them into ride-sharing/government transport… ta da.
What will it take for office managers to give up their need to have all of their employees physically in the office? The technology already exists to telecommute and network virtually. Maybe they’ll put a tax on companies that refuse to allow those who could telecommute to do so. If they did so, it would open up vast amounts of office space to be converted into small and more efficient small spaces that would be more affordable. This is happening in Hong Kong and Tokyo by necessity.
Then who will the office managers bully?
If the Productive People are all working somewhere else, then there is no need for an office manager 😉
There will always be a need for a manager as long as there are managees. It would take a pretty stupid manager to bully someone online because the bullied would be able to record the bullying and post it where everyone could see it. Muting and ignoring the boss would become much easier online than in person.
That’s probably why my SIL’s job that involved working from home for a decade was satisfying to her. The only time she’d see any of her coworkers was at a company side meeting that happened maybe twice a year. She had a sweet job(I might be wrong, but she liked it)setting up the meetings at certain places with certain personnel. I think everyone working for the company was pretty satisfied and they could get their work done on their own timetable in a given day. Of course everyone has deadlines but their’s were much more flexible
I worked from home most of that last 15 years, but sometimes I had to go somewhere for a few weeks at a time. It worked really well and I found that I got a lot more done at home than with the constant interruptions at an office. And I could talk on the phone with somebody from England or Japan or India just as easy from Montana as I could from Arizona 🙂
Well, it’s pretty stupid to bully your productive people in the office too, because then they leave and don’t come back. Certain corps have an international policy of not letting any work off of their premises, to their loss. They begged and begged me to come back because I “was the best […] they had ever had” but nope, I’m not going back to that environment.
That isn’t a problem after you put a booster motor on the bicycle, which turns them into motor vehicles without licenses.
There is one guy here with a powered skateboard that can break the speed limit on the road he rides it on.