NoXion
Craicy the Squirrel
No, you don't like the proposal because it doesn't involve the spiteful exercise of state force against a group you consider to be wrong 'uns.
Entirely unashamed anti car propaganda, and the more the better.
- Thread starter teuchter
- Start date
No, you don't like the proposal because it doesn't involve the spiteful exercise of state force against a group you consider to be wrong 'uns.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
Read the thread.
NoXion
Craicy the Squirrel
It's not my job to support your arguments, that's on you.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
I bet you oppose the idea of rent controls too. The spiteful state trying to constrain the god given freedoms of private property owners.
Teuchter is without doubt the greatest troll I have ever had the joy of witnessing. Proper, old-school trolling where you inspire 100 pages of arguments with one well-placed sentence. Where you manage to create rage and ranting without employing a single insult. It’s wonderful to watch.
Last edited:
maomao
普費斯
Dwyer vs Teuchter is like Hendry vs O'Sullivan.
NoXion
Craicy the Squirrel
Nah, it's shit and always has been, and I would argue it breaks the "don't be a dick" rule.
sim667
All aboard the 303 bus.
It seems by looking through this thread lots of people seem to think there is no justification for owning a car at all? At what point do people think its ok to own a car?
Also yes, for full disclosure, I do have a SUV, bumping over fields in my old 2 door hatchback with a bunch of PA equipment in was just knackering the suspension/bumper constantly.
Also yes, for full disclosure, I do have a SUV, bumping over fields in my old 2 door hatchback with a bunch of PA equipment in was just knackering the suspension/bumper constantly.
beesonthewhatnow
going deaf for a living
Owning a car is fine. But, much like a shotgun, it's where and what that you do with it that matters.
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
So you’re in favour of mass production of motor cars so that rich toffs can accumulate them in vast garages and blat them around racetracks at their leisure. Meanwhile a nurse trying to get to hospital in a basic family car after dropping her kids at school ought to be hauled out of the driver‘s seat and plonked on an e-bike?
platinumsage - the gift that keeps on giving 
beesonthewhatnow
going deaf for a living
By christ you're shit at this. No, yes.
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
Make your mind up.
beesonthewhatnow
going deaf for a living
Cars shouldn't exist purely for racetracks. School runs and urban commutes should be done on (e)bikes. Fuck me, this isn't rocket science.Make your mind up.
T & P
|-o-| (-o-) |-o-|
Well, that’s a very good question to ask to the ‘lots of people’ in this thread who have displayed anti car sentiments, seeing as nobody in that camp seems to agree or even be very clear themselves on whether they want a total ban on cars, or only privately owned ones.
One moment it’s ‘all cars are ‘death machines‘ that must be completely eradicated from the face of the Earth’ (or at least all towns and cities, the jury is still out on that), and the next it’s only privately owned vehicles that appear to pose an unacceptable degree of mortal danger to pedestrians and cyclists, with hire and car club vehicles, taxis, or those useful delivery vans that deliver one’s online purchases to one’s doorstep suddenly and magically not being an issue, depending on the narrative or discussion taking place at the time. It’s all rather confusing.
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
So according to you “owning a car is fine” but must not be used for getting to school or hospital, yet cars can be bought and accumulated by rich toffs for use on racetracks.
That’s exactly what I thought you position was. Thanks for confirming you’re basically Norman Tebbit, as you tell working class people they ought to use bicycles.
beesonthewhatnow
going deaf for a living
I’m starting to think you can’t read.
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
Go on then, who should own cars and who shouldn't? When should they be used and when shouldn't they? Because so far you've said they shouldn't exist "purely for racetracks" but that "school runs and urban commutes should be done on (e)bikes". Literally things you actually said.
beesonthewhatnow
going deaf for a living
Which you extrapolated to something about “toffs”.
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
It's clearly a example of the kind of private car ownership you appear to find acceptable - a garage full of cars on the country estate which are used occasionally on racetracks.
Meanwhile a working class person driving through a city to work, school or a hospital is the enemy in your eyes.
I bet you have voted LibDem
beesonthewhatnow
going deaf for a living
As ever, wrong on all counts
maomao
普費斯
Pretty sure he said the exact opposite.
I wouldn't ban the manufacture or purchase of cars, I'd just ban driving them anywhere. I'd leave race tracks open but I'd combine them with shooting ranges (well, artillery really) so they were more fun.
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
As ever, wrong on all counts
If you'd answered this you could have clarified your position:
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
How would people take their cars to the racetrack? By cargo bike or would you allow vans to be driven anywhere?
maomao
普費斯
As it's just a random fantasy I don't need to account for practicalities like that.
beesonthewhatnow
going deaf for a living
Who should own a car? Anyone that wants one really.
But. Many buts.
They shouldn’t be the default. We shouldn’t design our cities around them. They should be the last resort. We should have infrastructure that makes them the most difficult, expensive and sometimes downright stupid option. The bar for operating one should be much higher. The penalties for abusing them much harsher.
People need to travel. The problem is not that people need a car to do so, it’s that they don’t have viable alternatives. That is changing - rapidly in some places around the world - and will continue to do so.
The car was (is) an amazing invention. But so was the typewriter. The world moves onwards to better ways of achieving the same result.
But. Many buts.
They shouldn’t be the default. We shouldn’t design our cities around them. They should be the last resort. We should have infrastructure that makes them the most difficult, expensive and sometimes downright stupid option. The bar for operating one should be much higher. The penalties for abusing them much harsher.
People need to travel. The problem is not that people need a car to do so, it’s that they don’t have viable alternatives. That is changing - rapidly in some places around the world - and will continue to do so.
The car was (is) an amazing invention. But so was the typewriter. The world moves onwards to better ways of achieving the same result.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
The car actually destroyed previously viable methods of transport, due to a lack of foresight about what its widespread use would lead to, meaning that lots of useful infrastructure was torn up much too hastily. Now its as much about restoring better ways to move around, as it is about moving onwards to "new" ways.
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
Nonsense
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
OK, good to know you don’t subscribe to teuchter’s North Korea vision of banning them.
All of which favours the wealthy, for whom taxes, penalties etc present far less of a challenge.
I have yet see a proposal for a viable set of alternatives which would make much of a difference to anyone not living in a large city.
Poor analogy, electronic word processing is obviously superior to mechanical typewriters in every way. I can’t see how any kind of transport solution which isn’t motorised and self-directed can ever be superior in lots of key ways to one that is.
