Comic misses a parked car
this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2025
1141 points (97.2% liked)
Fuck Cars
12717 readers
524 users here now
A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!
Rules
1. Be Civil
You may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.
2. No hate speech
Don't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.
3. Don't harass people
Don't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.
4. Stay on topic
This community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.
5. No reposts
Do not repost content that has already been posted in this community.
Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.
Posting Guidelines
In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:
- [meta] for discussions/suggestions about this community itself
- [article] for news articles
- [blog] for any blog-style content
- [video] for video resources
- [academic] for academic studies and sources
- [discussion] for text post questions, rants, and/or discussions
- [meme] for memes
- [image] for any non-meme images
- [misc] for anything that doesn’t fall cleanly into any of the other categories
Recommended communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Yeah, that matches my experience on public transport alright.
Crammed in so tight you can't even bend a knee, and god help you if you're travelling with luggage or groceries...
That's not really a car issue, that's a "no-one invests in public transport" issue.
That’s not really a car issue, that’s a “no-one invests in public transport” issue.
...which is absolutely a car issue. It's not happening for no reason!
People don't invest in public transit because they have cars. Imagine if cars were banned. People would be falling over themselves to improve the systems they need to use every day.
No they wouldn't.... They'd be trying to find new jobs, because they would no longer be able to manage their commutes.
99% of folks driving during rush hour do not want to be driving - they're given the option of a 1 hour commute or a 2 hour cycle. You'd need a societal shift away from working to manage this.
That's more complicated, similar to 99% of americans want free healthcare, but then if you frame it as "the government will run it" or " might benefit" or "the government wants to take away your health insurance", then the numbers start to dwindle and a vocal minority get extremely worked up.
It is in the interest of 99% of Americans, but you still have to lead them there.
Por que no los dos?
Are you sure? I've heard that many drivers that support public transit, support it for everyone else. They'll still want to drive but the roads will be clear because everyone else will be on public transit!
Uhh, re-read my post. The reply here does not follow.
99% of folks driving during rush hour do not want to be driving
Your comment I was replying to.
load more comments
(1 replies)
The only thing cars are better at than public transit and/or riding a bike (or similar), is traveling long distances. I'm not talking about your commute to the office; I'm taking about driving a percentage of the way across the country.
In that context and that context only, vehicles move more quickly, more consistently, and without needing as many breaks. With the obvious caveat of: traffic.
Other than that, for any notable Metro area, public transit should be the default, not your backup plan when your vehicle won't start.
Cars are actually sub-par for long distance travel. They have to stop to refuel every few hundred miles, require horrifyingly expensive highway infrastructure to travel at speed, have to manually negotiate all intersections / exchanges, and their individualized form factor multiplies the maintenance upkeep required for that sort of mileage. Trains and planes both kick their ass at distance travel in different ways.
What cars are actually superior at is medium to short distance adhoc hauling trips at medium speeds on the edges of a transportation system. Rural work and visits, last mile drop-offs, back country mobility.
What cars are actually superior at is medium to short distance adhoc hauling trips at medium speeds on the edges of a transportation system
Motorcycles/scooters. You can get way more out of limited road infrastructure and are much more flexible when it comes to obstacles such as traffic.
Ah, but in a world where the optimal vehicle is utilized for each trip, there isn't much traffic :P Also they can't haul much. Honestly I do feel like I want to embrace motos but in a system where the best vehicle for a given trip is always available I suspect they would be largely displaced by bicycles and ebikes.
they can’t haul much
Idk, I've seen a family of 5 with a dog, construction workers hauling 30 foot rebar, and dudes with like 200 lbs of plywood, in like an aframe around the bike. A hero of a construction worker with a 20 year old Ship of Thesisus'd Honda Winner probably hauls more stuff per year than your average GMC Canyon.
Lol... OK maybe replace "can" with "should".
load more comments
(5 replies)
Airplanes, long distance busses, or trains?
Cars a good for long distance travel to the middle of nowhere. Which I personally rarely do, if I need to, I carpool or rent a car.
I live in the middle of nowhere, I am basically obligated to own a car.
Circumstances have always demanded that I have one. Whether work demands, or simply being able to travel away from my house at all.
If I lived and worked in a city, at a job that didn't demand a vehicle, I wouldn't have one.
what if your local community and the trek into town was bikeable and/or had a bus route to a robust rail network
I would be utterly amazed that they decided to send a whole assed bus through my <10k population town, when even the taxis and Uber drivers won't bother, and our police presence is one officer in a vehicle that drives through town twice a day.
Which isn't to mention that pretty much every home here has 3+ cars in the driveway.... Aka, zero demand (or close enough to not make it viable even stopping in the town). The nearest "city" with more than 10k population is at least a 15 minute drive down country roads with little if any shoulder; so overhauling the routes to make them bike friendly for the handful of people that actually own a bike who live out here, and not only can ride that far, but are able to go that distance in a reasonable timeframe.....
To be blunt, I'd wonder what the local government is smoking, because there's so few people who would either want, or benefit from, such an infrastructure project that would likely go into the tens of millions in costs, if not more.
I get what you're saying, but my town could triple in population and I still don't think transit would make sense economically.
Forget buses, there are smaller towns that have 15 minute train service, for an average ridership of <1/day on their unmanned platform. Here's a random line: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyohashi_Railroad_Atsumi_Line
On trains in the US-
I have to be across the country soon, and looked into the best ways to get there. I axed airplanes due to a fear of flying at this time.
A car would've gotten me there in 50 hours, the train takes 75. I went with the train bc I would be exhausted driving for 50 hours. In the US, trains are much less time efficient for cross country travel 9 times out of 10.
(Amtrak is a private company and not owned by the government. i wonder why this is.... /s)
The public transit vehicles that go short distance are optimized for short distances. The ones that go long distance are designed differently. This is feasible, because there is no need for a single vehicle to work both short range and long range routes.
Take busses for example:
- The plastic seats in urban busses are less comfortable than the cushioned ones in long range busses - but this design makes them easier to get into and out of, which you will be doing a lot more when the rides are short.
- Urban busses have less seats and more area for standing and walking. This area allows you to get off the bus more quickly (because there is more room to walk) - compared to long distance busses where once the bus stops at the station everyone who want to get off need to form a line (there is not enough room to not form a line). Short distance busses need this to shorten the time the bus stops at each station - a properly that's less needed for long distance routes, making long distance busses opt for more seats so people will not have to stand.
- This standing area also means you can stand up and move toward the doors when the bus approaches your station - which streamlines the process. Long range busses are less comfortable to stand at, so you are expected to seat until the bus stops.
- Long range busses have storage compartments, so that your luggage won't bother the other passengers. Short range busses don't have it, because it'll make the stops take more time, so all that standing area is also useful because people will have their luggage with them (and it'll also be smaller luggage because most passengers aren't going on long trips)
The standard for passenger rail over long distances is 200kmh, which is about 124mph. Can your Toyota pickup do that?
No. I also don't own a Toyota, or a pickup. But I need to go to my city in "middle of nowhere". Your high speed train, local transit buses, and even taxis, don't go where I live.
There's lots of cases where vehicle ownership is not a requirement. There's also plenty of examples where if you don't have a vehicle, you're just not going anywhere.
My car could probably hold 200kph somewhat indefinitely but there are laws preventing that. And my bank account after that when I run out of my not cheap fuel.
Yes, most vehicles today can do that.
Yeah that sounds about right.
Countries with super good train infrastructure can get around that pretty well but countries without that would rely on cars.
I'm in Canada, the only thing we have in ample supply is land.... If you're not in a city, you're either driving through farmland, or a forest.
Google shinkansen
The shinkansen is expensive, I vastly prefered China and even Koreas HSR. Public transit isnt supposed to make a profit.
@MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca didn't mention price, they only mentioned long distance speed and convenience. Shinkansen is king at long distance convenience and second at long distance speed. It's the most comfortable and easy way to go a long way.
That is true for convenince, especially given the chinese require security screening.
The chinese HSR might win in comfort though, they have dining cars. Then again the shinkansen often have heated toilet seats and/or bidets. The toilet situation in China is... not great.
Nahh
load more comments
(1 replies)
Even then I would much rather be in a TGV going 300 kph than driving a car myself for hours on end..
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›