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

[Corpun]

What do these people exactly mean by introdrinated by car companies. I get advertising is always meant with sales in mind, but cars aren't something people can easily consoom mindlessly like Funkos, capeshit, and whatever other shit these people mindlessly enjoy.

Cars are all investments of your time and money to maintain them to last as long as you can. Sure, there are people who love buying brand new cars to appear rich and shit, but even then they aren't brainwashed to consoom every new Honda or Ford that is released. It's just not economically viable.

 

[reptile baht spaniard rid]

What do these people exactly mean by introdrinated by car companies. I get advertising is always meant with sales in mind, but cars aren't something people can easily consoom mindlessly like Funkos, capeshit, and whatever other shit these people mindlessly enjoy.

What they mean is they can't argue against cars effectively (because their arguments are stupid) so they fall back to "you'd agree with me if you weren't so INDOCTRINATED by CAR COMPANIES".

Which is so painfully funny because if you stop the average american and ask them "why car" you will get fifty thousand different answers, though you can find some similarities, but when you encounter these freaks online they all parrot the exact same damn talking points like some kinda npc.

 

[Blatant hypocrite]

What do these people exactly mean by introdrinated by car companies. I get advertising is always meant with sales in mind, but cars aren't something people can easily consoom mindlessly like Funkos, capeshit, and whatever other shit these people mindlessly enjoy.

Because they have to explain why people keep choosing cars over le wonderful enlightened public transport options even when they're available.

It's pure cope to avoid engaging with any valid reason why cars are preferred. It can't possibly be the case, they're just brainwashed!

 

[quaawaa]

Because they have to explain why people keep choosing cars over le wonderful enlightened public transport options even when they're available.

That's also why they switch from faux-libertarian arguments like "abolish parking minimums, let property owners decide how many parking spaces they need", "liberalize zoning, property owners should be allowed to build whatever they want on their property", and "people should have the option not to drive" to authoritarian ones like "enact parking maximums", "we need urban growth boundaries to stop houses from being built", and "no one should drive" as soon as it becomes clear that normal people aren't playing along.

If you don't stop driving and living in houses, they will try to make you stop.

 

[Markass the Worst]

That's also why they switch from faux-libertarian arguments like "abolish parking minimums, let property owners decide how many parking spaces they need", "liberalize zoning, property owners should be allowed to build whatever they want on their property", and "people should have the option not to drive" to authoritarian ones like "enact parking maximums", "we need urban growth boundaries to stop houses from being built", and "no one should drive" as soon as they gain power.

They don't have any principles. Or rather, their only principle is that they hate cars and want to do whatever it takes to get rid of them.

 

[Chuck McGill]

@quaawaa Your daily reminder that the "socially liberal, fiscally conservative" get the rope first. It is shocking how many fuckcars members really think that Strong Towns will be compelling to a conservative because Chuck Marohn is also a conservative. Even if it's the most watered down, anal-sex loving form of conservatism. And they think we'll just fucking fall for it because they parroted a corrupt version of our arguments back to us. They're the political equivalent of reddit atheists that think that one "Jesus was a brown liberal that hung out with SEX WORKERS and BEGGARS" is somehow a compelling argument for their communist hellhole.

I hate them so fucking much it's unreal. Whenever you hear someone making these arguments, silence them. Cut out their insolent tongue, sew up their lying lips then smash their fingers so they may never poison someone's minds again. Freedom of speech doesn't apply to flagrant subversion and bad faith arguments, suck my hairy fucking asshole.

 

[quaawaa]

/r/fuckcars discusses how to design a city for disabled people:


First off, cars are bad because they're a leading cause of being disabled:


According to reddit, some guy in a wheelchair isn't really disabled. Real disabilities are mental:



Yes, things like elipsey that make it a bad idea to drive exist. But the a mobility impaired person is usually far better off in the suburban US where they can use machines to get around than they would be in a walkable city. A lot of those European old-towns are horrible for disabled people because they aren't ADA-complaint.


It's a lot easier to drive one of these:

Than it is to ride a bike or walk/roll to/from bus stops and businesses.

Good luck riding a bike or walking any significant distance with a broken ankle:

Meanwhile, in car hell:

Also, you can drive with a broken ankle. You only need one foot to drive unless you're on the track or your car has a manual transmission.

Some of them have talked to actual disabled people, but unfortunately, they were all afflicted with carbrain:



Source (Archive)

 

[Markass the Worst]

Some of them have talked to actual disabled people, but unfortunately, they were all afflicted with carbrain:
View attachment 5138358
View attachment 5138359

One of the biggest problems with urbanists is that they never actually talk to people to see what people actually want. Nowhere is this more prevalent than when they talk to disabled people, and then dismiss what disabled people have to say as being "car-brained" as shown here.

I've brought up before in this thread how a wheelchair user reviewed the Holy Land Of Fuckcars ie Amsterdam, and it wasn't very positive. Jason Slaughter responded but he completely misunderstood her argument and didn't offer anything even close to a substantial defense. To this day, I still have not seen any refutation of this wheelchair person's twitter thread.

Speaking of criticism, Jason Slaughter's holy shrine was criticized by none other than a disabled person in a wheelchair. Urbanists always like to counter the objection that disabled people need to get around with cars with "um, ackshually, cars bad for disabled people, walking and cycling better" but there's a whole ass thread by an actual disabled person complaining about Amsterdam.

 

[quaawaa]

This Strong Towns tweet is incredibly misleading:


Source (Archive)

The best part about the after picture is that they cropped out the MARTA station and the Greyhound bus station:

Google Maps (The three buildings from 1919 are highlighted in blue)
Guess that didn't support the narrative.

Also, who wants to live a few block away from the city jail?

That photo is of one of only a handful of undeveloped areas in downtown Atlanta.
Here's a map of the entire downtown area with OP area highlighted:


Also, I wonder why Strong Towns doesn't mention the real reason why people knocked down perfectly good buildings in downtown Atlanta...

 

[Corpun]

Also, who wants to live a few block away from the city jail?

Why wouldn't you want to live right next to the prison when you suck off public transport. You'll find the same people who end up in prison on a subway or bus looking for their next victim.

 

[Xarpho's Return]

@quaawaa Your daily reminder that the "socially liberal, fiscally conservative" get the rope first. It is shocking how many fuckcars members really think that Strong Towns will be compelling to a conservative because Chuck Marohn is also a conservative. Even if it's the most watered down, anal-sex loving form of conservatism. And they think we'll just fucking fall for it because they parroted a corrupt version of our arguments back to us.

I had someone tell me that Strong Towns was "conservative" and I went through like 8 pages of articles. Not one of them was anything other than the typical same lefty arguments. It was the same "pedestrian infrastructure is bad because it improves the roads", and I gave up after some article like "5 impediments to a walkable city" didn't mention homeless people.

/r/fuckcars showing once again why you should never use cars deaths as an argument against gun control:

The cars/guns argument doesn't work because it ends up strengthening the pro-gun argument.

Besides, if you wanted to have "unflattering statistics about death and costs" = "must be highly regulated/banned", wait until they hear about black people.

 

[Yamamura]

I was just sitting around and randomly I started thinking about that buzzword they use, "walkable". Maybe someone can explain this to me but where exactly can't you walk to? Which specific place inaccessible by walking exactly except the McDonald's drive thru? There's an unbroken sidewalk wherever there's a road leading to every place. The only benefit from turning roads into one giant sidewalk might be that you don't have to look both ways when crossing the street, but that takes what like 30 seconds? There are some country roads without sidewalks, but usually those are long stretches that go for several miles without any buildings that you probably don't want to walk down in the first place. But still if you have everyone riding bikes people walking will have to yield to bikes before crossing the street.

I've brought up before in this thread how a wheelchair user reviewed the Holy Land Of Fuckcars ie Amsterdam, and it wasn't very positive. Jason Slaughter responded but he completely misunderstood her argument and didn't offer anything even close to a substantial defense. To this day, I still have not seen any refutation of this wheelchair person's twitter thread.

Good luck riding a bike or walking any significant distance with a broken ankle:

It's sort of funny to me despite all their leftist, "equality for all" sort of stances they never really acknowledged how disabled people aren't able to ride a bike. This woman has no arms but she can drive:

This man has no arms and he drives:

Shit you can find hundreds of videos covering this topic if you want. Also if you have fucking epilepsy do you think you're safer while on a bike?

/r/fuckcars triggered by a crypto investing meme:

This is funny to me because isn't one of their talking points about how cars are too expensive for "low-income" individuals? What happened to all that? They actually could have used it as a counter argument and said how "public transit will always be there for you even when you're financially struggling". But no, they don't want to be associated with those icky poor people.

 

[Xarpho's Return]

This is funny to me because isn't one of their talking points about how cars are too expensive for "low-income" individuals? What happened to all that? They actually could have used it as a counter argument and said how "public transit will always be there for you even when you're financially struggling". But no, they don't want to be associated with those icky poor people.

The cope is "truly rich countries is not where the poor drive but the rich use transit", which is of course bullshit, even in Europe and Japan. Sure, there are probably more people in suits using transit in those places, but those aren't rich person, they're wagies barely keeping their head above water and probably would drive if they could drive.

 

[quaawaa]

The cope is "truly rich countries is not where the poor drive but the rich use transit", which is of course bullshit, even in Europe and Japan. Sure, there are probably more people in suits using transit in those places, but those aren't rich person, they're wagies barely keeping their head above water and probably would drive if they could drive.

The public transit of rich Europeans:

The public transit of rich Japanese:

 

[reptile baht spaniard rid]

That's also why they switch from faux-libertarian arguments like "abolish parking minimums, let property owners decide how many parking spaces they need", "liberalize zoning, property owners should be allowed to build whatever they want on their property", and "people should have the option not to drive" to authoritarian ones like "enact parking maximums", "we need urban growth boundaries to stop houses from being built", and "no one should drive" as soon as it becomes clear that normal people aren't playing along.

If you don't stop driving and living in houses, they will try to make you stop.

they're literally autists

you know how if you ask someone to do something, and they don't want to, they don't tell you the real reason like "I hate your ass" and instead make up excuses like "I need to wash my hair" or "I am required by law to build this parking". most people can recognize the "polite response" even if they can't pin down the actual reason, they realize that the "reason why not" is just a polite fiction.

autists can't get that shit and actually believe it and then when they "fix the problem" they get fucking buck broken and can't understand why it didn't change your answer

 

[indomitable snowman]

/r/ThatHappened:

That's one way to get shot I guess. I hope he does it again and gets arrested for an attempted carjacking or at the very least gets a bucket of paint or something fall on him.

Also, I wonder why Strong Towns doesn't mention the real reason why people knocked down perfectly good buildings in downtown Atlanta...

I don't know about you but old building are usually kinda crappy. People were smaller back then and they didn't have HVAC so the buildings are cramped and stuffy. In Atlanta AC is a must.

 

[Xarpho's Return]

I don't know about you but old building are usually kinda crappy. People were smaller back then and they didn't have HVAC so the buildings are cramped and stuffy. In Atlanta AC is a must.

Old buildings have all sorts of issues that either need to be upgraded or grandfathered in--insulation, fire code, ADA requirements, wiring & plumbing, etc. that make them less desirable. In most modern cities, bringing them up to code is often just as expensive as knocking them down and rebuilding them entirely.

 

[LaxerBRO]

/r/ThatHappened

Car doors normally lock when the vehicle is put into drive.

 

[Markass the Worst]

Car doors normally lock when the vehicle is put into drive.

Not on all models, especially older ones, and on most models it can be configured.

 

[Aegir]

Car doors normally lock when the vehicle is put into drive.

Also manual transmission cars almost always will never lock unless the user wants them to. My mid-2010s Honda has an option for "lock vehicle until ignition off after going above 10mph" but that is turned off by default.