this post was submitted on 06 Feb 2024
106 points (91.4% liked)

Fuck Cars

9789 readers
3 users here now

This community exists as a sister community/copycat community to the r/fuckcars subreddit.

This community exists for the following reasons:

You can find the Matrix chat room for this community here.

Rules

  1. Be nice to each other. Being aggressive or inflammatory towards other users will get you banned. Name calling or obvious trolling falls under that. Hate cars, hate the system, but not people. While some drivers definitely deserve some hate, most of them didn't choose car-centric life out of free will.

  2. No bigotry or hate. Racism, transphobia, misogyny, ableism, homophobia, chauvinism, fat-shaming, body-shaming, stigmatization of people experiencing homeless or substance users, etc. are not tolerated. Don't use slurs. You can laugh at someone's fragile masculinity without associating it with their body. The correlation between car-culture and body weight is not an excuse for fat-shaming.

  3. Stay on-topic. Submissions should be on-topic to the externalities of car culture in urban development and communities globally. Posting about alternatives to cars and car culture is fine. Don't post literal car fucking.

  4. No traffic violence. Do not post depictions of traffic violence. NSFW or NSFL posts are not allowed. Gawking at crashes is not allowed. Be respectful to people who are a victim of traffic violence or otherwise traumatized by it. News articles about crashes and statistics about traffic violence are allowed. Glorifying traffic violence will get you banned.

  5. No reposts. Before sharing, check if your post isn't a repost. Reposts that add something new are fine. Reposts that are sharing content from somewhere else are fine too.

  6. No misinformation. Masks and vaccines save lives during a pandemic, climate change is real and anthropogenic - and denial of these and other established facts will get you banned. False or highly speculative titles will get your post deleted.

  7. No harassment. Posts that (may) cause harassment, dogpiling or brigading, intentionally or not, will be removed. Please do not post screenshots containing uncensored usernames. Actual harassment, dogpiling or brigading is a bannable offence.

Please report posts and comments that violate our rules.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] tophneal@sh.itjust.works 11 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Can't tell if /s or not... Infrastructure isn't housing, it's roads, bridges, etc

[–] CableMonster@lemmy.ml -3 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Great, but the question stands, why should I be penelized for needing a vehicle that fixes and builds your housing?

[–] drkt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I don't know what they do where you live, but here we have license plates for work vehicles and personal vehicles. Work vehicles are subject to different tax and rules. This tax would apply to personal vehicles, ideally, as those are the problem.

[–] CableMonster@lemmy.ml -5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Why should work vehicles be harder to use and get higher taxes?

[–] drkt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Why should my tax dollars go to maintaining your highways when I don't own a car?

[–] CableMonster@lemmy.ml -3 points 9 months ago (1 children)
[–] drkt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

No, it doesn't. Gas tax goes into the tax pool which is used to pay for most things that taxes pay for. We all pay for roads just as we all pay for hospitals, regardless of if we personally use them.

[–] CableMonster@lemmy.ml 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The taxes for larger vehicles is already done, it goes into the same pool that pays for maintenance. If you think the government is not fixing the roads as it should, that is a sepperate issue.

[–] drkt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 9 months ago

You have a 1 ton truck. The article refers to a 3.5 ton vehicle, presumably a personal car. Why are you fighting as if this is directed at you?

I've read the rest of your comments and must simply conclude that you are either here to troll or have literally no insight into how countries are run. The rest of your profile (because I did look, I'm a loser) gives off an 'arguing for the sake of arguing' / Devils Advocate vibe. If you are actually here in good faith, I recommend you look up what roads cost and hopefully realize that roads and subsidized and a net loss. If your "gas tax" actually did pay for your road usage, you would not be able to afford gas, and the 3.5 ton vehicles roaming around out there certainly do not pay their fair share in terms of damage to the roads. Road damage is exponential to vehicle weight.

[–] simpleTailor@startrek.website 9 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Great question.

The better pitch is to consider the "tax" like an additional permit with increased costs, including mandatory more expensive insurance. It's the cost of doing business, wrapped into your overhead. The disparity between the large pickups and the smaller sedans of yesteryear are staggering; imagine if you could buy and operate a semi truck with the same costs and licensing as a sedan. Trailers parked in front of your house completely obscuring the street, or taking up extra spots at the grocery store. People who don't know the size of their vehicle knocking over signs and mailboxes. More roadkill, dead pets, and pedestrian fatalities because there are so many blind spots for such a big truck.

Obviously, pickups and semis are still quite different in size, but the point is that pickups and large SUVs are now so much bigger than sedans--bigger than what we built our streets and bridges for--that they present additional danger.

  • Larger vehicles cause more wear and tear on the road just by driving on them
  • collisions and accidents are more destructive and fatal due to the more deadly shape and weight
  • blind spots are bigger, making the vehicle more dangerous for anyone outside of it
  • effects of distracted driving are compounded
  • irresponsible drivers get to drive these larger vehicles without any additional barrier to entry

In short: these machines can be used to perform specific tasks, but they are not the same size, shape, or weight of our lived environment. Additional regulation is needed to offset the real effects on people and infrastructure (e.g., more difficult licensing, higher registration fees, higher tolls, etc.).

[–] CableMonster@lemmy.ml -3 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Everything you mention should be accounted for by higher insurance and the gas tax.

I think what we are running into is the conflict between freedom vs safety. I think it will get more apparent as people are not able to afford things that we have reached the point where we have too much regulation and things will get too expensive for people to afford.

[–] Landsharkgun@midwest.social 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Nah. People can't drive a bus or a semi without a CDL. It's not hard to get, sure, but you still have to go through at least some training and weeding out process, because those vehicles are more dangerous than a car. Bigger SUVs are now reaching that point, particularly if standard safety infrastructure is not designed for them. Once you hit that point, any person's freedom to drive it is outweighed by the freedom of everyone else to not be threatened by it. We can either redo every damn road in America, while also accepting much higher death rates, or we can limit these larger vehicles. Pretty obvious what the better option is.

[–] simpleTailor@startrek.website 1 points 9 months ago

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "regulation". Increasing the cost, such as by mandating higher and more comprehensive insurance, or instituting a gas tax are both regulatory measures.

[–] DriftinGrifter@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Why should you AS a member of society contribute to its betterment? You must know that driving over potholes with a pickup truck full of Materials and equipment tends to have negative consequences

[–] CableMonster@lemmy.ml 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The gas tax should about pay for the potholes. But do you really think the cost of filling potholes is that much relative to the size of the government?