Not Just Bikes / r/fuckcars / Urbanists / New Urbanism / Car-Free / Anti-Car - People and grifters who hate personal transport, freedom, cars, roads, suburbs, and are obsessed with city planning and urban design

[Markass the Worst]

I imagined the series to be 2-5 pieces long, but these people are so obnoxiously wrong about everything that I felt I just had to keep going.

This thread is nearing 100 pages and I had a bunch of stuff cut from my original OP back in August. Urbanists make so many claims about basically everything it's almost impossible to stay on top of them.

I can't quote your post for some reason, but I did have to respond to this.

Posts that are too long can't be quoted unless you manually enter the /reply?quote= URL in the address bar yourself or manually create the quote yourself in BB code.

Yes, but they still do proportionally induced demand in favour of whatever public transit fetish they have currently going. Remember, it's very reasonable for a small percentage of latent demand, or even a large percentage of latent demand to be satisfied with a new highway. What's not reasonable is when they look at buses that are already at a dismal 5% average capacity, and then say "but if we make them run 10x more often we'll get 10x more ridership because muh induced demand." You might find you have the exact same number of riders and rider-hours. Or maybe you got 1% more riders, so instead of buses that are 0.5% average capacity, they are 0.505% average capacity because Dave and Chris occasionally ride the bus now. Our 10x increase in buses resulted in 1.01x total ridership compared to the start.

If the buses were at 90% average capacity and you increased the routes by 10x, it would be reasonable to not expect them to be at 9% average capacity, what they would be if no new ridership emerged. Perhaps they'd be at 45% average capacity, since there are undoubtedly many people who want to take the bus but won't because they're full. In this case our 10x increase in buses resulted in 5x total ridership compared to the start.

Good point, I missed that. Their thumbnail says "let's induce some demand!" as if they can literally generate ridership out of thin air just by building infrastructure, when that's not how it works because that's not how it works for driving in the first place, or anything.

View attachment 4295893

But anyway, even Vox made an entire video around the premise that Boston deleted a highway when they literally never did this even a little bit, instead building it underground.

To be fair, Vox is not known for fact checking anything or having any sort of truth in their videos at all. But that just makes it all the more blatant whenever urbanists cite Vox to back up their retarded theories about how traffic works.

 

[WelperHelper99]

To Markass, thanks for the kind words. I imagined the series to be 2-5 pieces long, but these people are so obnoxiously wrong about everything that I felt I just had to keep going. I can't quote your post for some reason, but I did have to respond to this.

"The video isn't that bad but I notice they drop the "people will fill up its capacity" argument entirely and start talking about things in terms of costs and benefits like a mature adult instead of going "JUST ONE MORE LANE BRO" like a spastic. So at the end of the day the "induced demand" argument isn't even a real argument and it just sounds like one so they can dunk on cars because cars bad. If you have to radically change your argument to make it make sense then it's a terrible argument and should never be used."

Yes, but they still do proportionally induced demand in favour of whatever public transit fetish they have currently going. Remember, it's very reasonable for a small percentage of latent demand, or even a large percentage of latent demand to be satisfied with a new highway. What's not reasonable is when they look at buses that are already at a dismal 5% average capacity, and then say "but if we make them run 10x more often we'll get 10x more ridership because muh induced demand." You might find you have the exact same number of riders and rider-hours. Or maybe you got 1% more riders, so instead of buses that are 0.5% average capacity, they are 0.505% average capacity because Dave and Chris occasionally ride the bus now. Our 10x increase in buses resulted in 1.01x total ridership compared to the start.

If the buses were at 90% average capacity and you increased the routes by 10x, it would be reasonable to not expect them to be at 9% average capacity, what they would be if no new ridership emerged. Perhaps they'd be at 45% average capacity, since there are undoubtedly many people who want to take the bus but won't because they're full. In this case our 10x increase in buses resulted in 5x total ridership compared to the start.

It's the assumption of infinite demand that gets me. If everyone could teleport, we would not take infinite trips.

View attachment 4295893

But anyway, even Vox made an entire video around the premise that Boston deleted a highway when they literally never did this even a little bit, instead building it underground.

Wow, building a highway underground to make things more livable and less congested for people on top, impossible, carbrains hat pedestrians!

But being serious, their arguments are cope. My little town is connected to the bus network yeah, but like most places that aren't a hive city, a car, or even just walking and not being a retard will get you around pretty quick; gas station is 20 minutes by foot if you want a snack. And no the cars aren't out to kill you, most roads in my town are 30mph, plenty of time to see you at the crosswalk.

As for safety: 1. I don't live in a shithole with gangs around 20/4/7, cops do their jobs and are nice, B. Carry a pistol, I know I do when I go to the Walmart even though I know nothing is going to happen. The Walmart also has a bike rack tucked away, so if you ride a bike, which is pretty safe, it can be locked up there, and you can walk around the main plaza, secure that no one is messing with your stuff.

 

[Weppers]

It makes me suspicious and angry when a seemingly level-headed channel like Practical Engineering has an ad read for Nebula where they have to present Not Just Bikes as a legitimate documentarian.

 

[CFC-12]

Good point, I missed that. Their thumbnail says "let's induce some demand!" as if they can literally generate ridership out of thin air just by building infrastructure, when that's not how it works because that's not how it works for driving in the first place, or anything.

That argument is definitely one of the dumber ones they make. Building roads is somehow going to lead to people driving more? Why? I mean for your average schmuck most of the time you're driving out of necessity to work/school or just doing menial tasks like grocery shopping or going to the bank. Having 30% more roads in an area isn't going to mean I'm going to be driving places 30% more. Most of the time I'm still going to be taking the exact same roads as before because those are the ones that lead to the places I go to regularly.

That's another thing I notice about these videos: When you first watch them, everything you hear more or less makes sense on paper. You hear about induced demand and it sounds pretty logical while it's being explained to you. But when you actually start thinking about the implications of what they're saying you realize just how shaky the foundation for their argument actually is. It's like they all rely on you taking the information presented at face value and not questioning anything being relayed to you in the videos.

 

[LaxerBRO]

It's Time To Let Coal Die | Climate Town

A VERY cool way to waste time & money. Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/ClimateTown sUbScRiBe FoR mOrE ViDeOs: https://www.youtube.com/c/climatetown?sub_conf...

www.youtube.com

At one point he actually does mention how solar generation isn't a reliable source of electricity because the sun isn't always shining, but he pretty much just handwaves this issue away with "don't worry, we have battery storage now!" and moves on to the next point without even elaborating. Also he doesn't even mention coal use outside of the US, or even coal usage in the US for things other than electrical generation (cement production, blast furnaces, commercial heating etc.)

I would like a firm yes or no answer from Mr. Climate Town if we should supercede the wishes of indigenous persons and take the lithium on the land they were given.

https://www.npr.org/2023/01/06/1147547868/tribes-are-suing-to-stop-a-proposed-lithium-mine-in-nevada-saying-the-site-is-sa

The fate of a proposed lithium mine in Nevada — one that's important to production of electric cars — is now in the hands of a federal judge as tribes sue to stop it.

If his argument is going abroad for lithium, will he address resource colonialism?

 

[Xarpho's Return]

Yes, but they still do proportionally induced demand in favour of whatever public transit fetish they have currently going. Remember, it's very reasonable for a small percentage of latent demand, or even a large percentage of latent demand to be satisfied with a new highway. What's not reasonable is when they look at buses that are already at a dismal 5% average capacity, and then say "but if we make them run 10x more often we'll get 10x more ridership because muh induced demand." You might find you have the exact same number of riders and rider-hours. Or maybe you got 1% more riders, so instead of buses that are 0.5% average capacity, they are 0.505% average capacity because Dave and Chris occasionally ride the bus now. Our 10x increase in buses resulted in 1.01x total ridership compared to the start.

Like I said before, the reason highways get bigger and congestion doesn't go away is because of increased population growth, so in Houston, a wide freeway doesn't help as much as it should.

A high traffic count is what retailers and restaurants desire, it's in the print of any shopping center lease flier, and no doubt it helps land value and the economy, much more than whatever land was taken off the tax rolls.

If they were right about induced demand (and remember, everything they believe about cities is assumed to be universal), then a city could create freeways, traffic would appear, and an economy is created. This, is of course, just as bullshit as their other incorrect conclusions, but they never seem to consider it...I wonder why........

 

[Meriasek]

Not just bikes (but also nothing else, please).

 

[msd]

I walk everywhere, I do, my town used to be this small hick town with nothing but farm and man made trails from people walking and biking.

Please, I just wanna be left alone, why do retards keep targeting small towns and country towns.

What did we do

 

[Grapefruit Soda]

What did we do

You don't fit into their shallow, autistic worldview, they don't understand how to truly make walkable anything, they just hate cars. These are people so neurodivergent that they feel like anyone living outside of awful urban environments is stealing from them.

 

[Lobster Cult High Priest]

You don't fit into their shallow, autistic worldview, they don't understand how to truly make walkable anything, they just hate cars. These are people so neurodivergent that they feel like anyone living outside of awful urban environments is stealing from them.

Yep they are so autistics they hate driving because they feel over stimulated.

Meanwhile normal people enjoy cruising down the back roads on a Sunday afternoon.

 

[No Batty Boys in Jamaica]

Just dropping in to say that car dependent societies are easier to fragment and thus promote troons. They lead to kids only seeing each other at school and spending the rest of their lives on the internet, where they end up getting exposed to content that can encourage trooning out.

 

[FuckedUpDeer]

Just dropping in to say that car dependent societies are easier to fragment and thus promote troons. They lead to kids only seeing each other at school and spending the rest of their lives on the internet, where they end up getting exposed to content that can encourage trooning out.

I think you'll find that the places hailed as walkable paradises tend to be highly receptive towards the LGBTQIA+ tide. The Netherlands, the place Not Just Bikes lives in, for example, is one of the most tolerant places out there, at least according these UCLA and Pew Research reports.
Also, just because you didn't have friends outside of school doesn't mean everyone else didn't lol.

 

[talk talk talk]

Just dropping in to say that car dependent societies are easier to fragment and thus promote troons. They lead to kids only seeing each other at school and spending the rest of their lives on the internet, where they end up getting exposed to content that can encourage trooning out.

I'm open to exploring the idea that American suburban safety-above-all norms are linked with American troonism. I'm not sure about the direction of causation, though; or if there is even a causative link.

 

[Bonesjones]

If induced demand worked Detroit would be a paradise. So just bring that up any time they want to argue.

 

[Overpriced Gaming Chair]

I don't use bus too often but being in a bus alone or just one or two people is common when I do. There also seems to be rush hours during which bus is filled to the point some people need to stand.

I'm assuming there is a decent argument that those buses driving around with maybe 5% capacity filled is worth it, because if buses only ran during rush hour, it would create a massive incentive to own a car so you can move around during non-rush hour time, and end up simply using it during rush hour as well. With buses going regularly, you can depend on them to get around no matter what time it is. The question is, will there be enough rush-hour traffic to "subsidize" all the 5% capacity buses.

The argument that you can't have infinite amount of induced demand is perfectly valid, eventually there will be a true "one last lane" and highway now has sufficient capacity that during peaks, no significant traffic jam works. However by that point you've created a 20-30 lane monstrosity that, outside peak hours, barely reaches half the capacity, wasting prime real estate. And of course if you build 20 lane highway in the middle of nowhere it will not magically fill up with cars, induced demand is meant to be applied to large US cities with extensive suburbs.

 

[Grapefruit Soda]

The argument that you can't have infinite amount of induced demand is perfectly valid, eventually there will be a true "one last lane" and highway now has sufficient capacity that during peaks, no significant traffic jam works. However by that point you've created a 20-30 lane monstrosity that, outside peak hours, barely reaches half the capacity, wasting prime real estate. And of course if you build 20 lane highway in the middle of nowhere it will not magically fill up with cars, induced demand is meant to be applied to large US cities with extensive suburbs.

Induced demand isn't an argument, it's not real, it's made up, nothing about induced demand makes any sense with any level of thought beyond the surface. If induced demand made sense, then that mega city in myanmar would be full of hustle and bustle, instead of being a barren city, or detroit would be vibrant and thriving, since it has car infrastructure and nearby suburbs.

Adding extra lanes to a ring road and highways is a great way to deal with congestion, the traffic was already using the road, the road didn't summon people just by it's existence.

 

[Chuck McGill]

Just dropping in to say that car dependent societies are easier to fragment and thus promote troons. They lead to kids only seeing each other at school and spending the rest of their lives on the internet, where they end up getting exposed to content that can encourage trooning out.

While that may be true, the fact that troons have total institutional capture makes this irrelevant. We're well beyond the point where Discord groomers are the biggest threat to your kids. The teachers in your schools openly promote critical race theory and gender theory, and the only practical defense you have against it is to opt out of public schooling entirely.

I think the Fentanyl Floyd protests made them realize that people in suburbs and rural areas are much harder to fuck with than people in urban cores. It's little coincidence that the hatred against suburbs just so happened to ramp up after BLM protestors were told to kick rocks by suburbs. They want to set it up so you have no means of recourse against them. You will sit in traffic for 2 hours, you will take a knee for Black Lives, and you will send your children to public school to be groomed by public school psychopaths. Encouraging strong communities may be a solution to combat this on paper, but it's a non-starter as long as there are lefties around every corner waiting to subvert you.

 

[WhiskeyJack]

Just dropping in to say that car dependent societies are easier to fragment and thus promote troons. They lead to kids only seeing each other at school and spending the rest of their lives on the internet, where they end up getting exposed to content that can encourage trooning out.

Nah, cars are where most teens lose their virginity and are sized to move families around. Cars lead to hetero-monogamous relationships and nuclear families, both a social good.

Teens who lose their virginity on the bus become degenerates. Public transportation leads to polygamous relationships, abortions, and coomer voyeurism. Haven't met a troon yet who didn't have a degenerate mother into polygamy and exhibitionism.

 

[quaawaa]

Unsurprisingly Jason and fellow cow Technology Connections support banning gas stoves:

Spoiler: Image in Tweet

Source (Archive)

Spoiler: Follow up tweets from Technology Connections

Source (Archive)

Spoiler: Images in Tweet

Source (Archive)

These people really are useful idiots for the elites who want to ban everything fun.

 

[Return of the Freaker]

Unsurprisingly Jason and fellow cow Technology Connections support banning gas stoves:
View attachment 4316556

Spoiler: Image in Tweet

View attachment 4316569

Source (Archive)

These people really are useful idiots for the elites who want to ban everything fun.

Oh yes, I'm sure there's enough CO2 there for it to effect people. A few years ago on the Science Channel I was watching one of those abandoned places shows where they talk about the history of the place. Show was originally made in Europe and last segment was a big coal power plant in Belgium iirc. When they mention the plant closing they said, I shit you not, "the plant released high levels of deadly CO2"