Entirely unashamed anti car propaganda, and the more the better.
- Thread starter teuchter
- Start date
beesonthewhatnow
going deaf for a living
This. Some people really don’t have much of an imagination.
T & P
|-o-| (-o-) |-o-|
.
Absolutely 100% guaranteed that person has used or benefited from internal combustion engine vehicles multiple times every single year of their adult life.
Absolutely 100% guaranteed that person has used or benefited from internal combustion engine vehicles multiple times every single year of their adult life.
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
Of course people can imagine a world in which they don’t need a car - one where they live in a flat in London and all their friends and family do likewise, or else live near a station.
beesonthewhatnow
going deaf for a living
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
If you're trying to hint that with a bit more "imagination" then a world where no one needed a car would be readily achievable, or indeed desirable, than I'm guessing you've not left London much
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
Did we?
maomao
普費斯
I'm pretty sure he doesn't live in London.
beesonthewhatnow
going deaf for a living
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
In spirit perhaps, like those FBPE twitter folks who live in the EU but don't.
ah, you’re a Brexiteer! Makes sense now.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
The days where the pro-car defence is mounted by T & P and platinumsage are the best ones. You can just put your feet up and leave them to it.
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
There doesn’t need to be a “pro-car defence” because there’s zero chance that they’ll ever be banned.
I’ve been trying to coax some sort of implementable banning plan out of the abolitionists but they’ve got nothing.
I’ve been trying to coax some sort of implementable banning plan out of the abolitionists but they’ve got nothing.
We’ve agreed on cities so far.
When is a car necessary? Or is it actually just a choice?
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
No, we haven't
How is this relevant? Lots of things are choices and not necessary - internet use, living in a building, using gas and electricity, attending hospitals and schools.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
We all know that it's not an outright ban everywhere that you're scared of in the foreseeable future. Yet all you can muster an argument against is the notion of an outright ban. Meanwhile T & P's killer argument is the same as it always has been: people who argue against car dependency might sometimes have to use a car themselves.
It's quite a pantomime act really. Keep it up.
liquidindian
Hello
Yes - and we ban or at least severally restrict choices that affect others. Welcome to the war on cars!
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
You might want to ban or at least severely restrict all "choices that affect others" but thankfully no one else does.
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
I've mustered an argument against all sorts of delusionary nonsense on this thread, because it's entertaining poking people who are trying to advocate for something that they can't actually present a case for.
We should certain do the ones that seriously affect others as cars do! Just because you’ve built your live around having a car it doesn’t mean we should humour you.
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
The internet accounts for nearly 4% of global CO2 emissions, therefore "seriously affects others" and should be banned. Cherio then.
You’re on a roll with your gotchas! I agree we should look to reduce this harm.
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
"ban or severely restrict" I think you said.
Unless you didn't actually mean that but rather "mitigate the adverse affects as far as is reasonable".
We’ve tried that for cars & it hasn’t worked. Ban
T & P
|-o-| (-o-) |-o-|
To be fair after thousands of posts in here we’re yet to see a single one that remotely qualifies as a valid and thought-out argument against cars, so I guess we’re quits.
Yep - everything’s fine….
www.mylondon.news
First picture of woman killed with three golden retrievers in Chelsea car crash
The woman has been named as 41-year-old Oliva Riley from Suffolk
