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

Rishi, a man who commited to banning gas cars for "muh climate", is apparently a "climate change denier":
1690848869128.png
This poster makes a good point (in a sea of lunacy) that "muh climate change" fags are always the ones taking private jets everywhere and flying more than the average person does. But then I'm willing to bet this person would never bring up how much holy high priest Jason Slaughter flies.
 
Also, despite them claiming that they save $20k per unit in construction costs by not building parking, they aren't passing those savings on to their residents. Their rent is quite high at >$1400 for a one bedroom which is more than many nearby apartments with parking. The neighboring buildings have rents in the $1100-$1300 range, with a lot around $1250.

These two quotes from the article sums up the whole development:
Maybe those parking minimums exist for a reason and weren't created out of thin air? Great job externalizing your parking costs to your neighbors.
I do credit Culdesac for revealing exactly why developments like these aren't the answer.

1. The urbanists act like parking costs are driving up apartment prices, but any "cost savings" will go straight to developers. You're literally lowering your standards of living so your (((landlords))) will get a bigger paycheck.
2. You can't just put an upscale building in a shitty neighborhood and expect instant gentrification. This is most pronounced in SF, but it's nice to have a non-SF example. The reason why this is bad is you're expecting to have bicycles to be a main source of transportation, but bicycles are easy pickings for thieves, far more than cars are. Getting a locked car up and running without detection or causing damage (like smashing windows) requires a fair bit of technical know-how, while a good pair of bolt cutters can defeat most bicycle locks.
3. A market of true-believer car-free yuppies simply doesn't exist, much less support the nearby retail without outside traffic. Sorry--that pricey Mexican restaurant is already done for!
 
I do credit Culdesac for revealing exactly why developments like these aren't the answer.
I also give them credit for actually building their dream community instead of running away and bitching (e.g. Jason) or trying to change other people's nice communities into their personal utopias without the consent of the people who live there (e.g. LTNs).
Sorry--that pricey Mexican restaurant is already done for!
Nah, if the food and service are good it'll do fine.
Because it has a parking lot.
 
I also give them credit for actually building their dream community instead of running away and bitching (e.g. Jason) or trying to change other people's nice communities into their personal utopias without the consent of the people who live there (e.g. LTNs).
I wish apartment communities could build to who they want to build. Until the laws changed in 1988, you could have adults-only apartment complexes (though 55+ communities can still be built).

On that subject, it boggles my mind how urbanists can lap up every boring five-over-one while decrying suburban houses as being too generic and soul-crushing.
 
Commieblocks coming to Phoenix.

View attachment 5243271

The only question is how long until the first resident collapses due to heat while waiting for the bus.

I do credit Culdesac for revealing exactly why developments like these aren't the answer.

1. The urbanists act like parking costs are driving up apartment prices, but any "cost savings" will go straight to developers. You're literally lowering your standards of living so your (((landlords))) will get a bigger paycheck.
2. You can't just put an upscale building in a shitty neighborhood and expect instant gentrification. This is most pronounced in SF, but it's nice to have a non-SF example. The reason why this is bad is you're expecting to have bicycles to be a main source of transportation, but bicycles are easy pickings for thieves, far more than cars are. Getting a locked car up and running without detection or causing damage (like smashing windows) requires a fair bit of technical know-how, while a good pair of bolt cutters can defeat most bicycle locks.
3. A market of true-believer car-free yuppies simply doesn't exist, much less support the nearby retail without outside traffic. Sorry--that pricey Mexican restaurant is already done for!
I bolded the important part. Not only is Phoenix hot, but like every major city, it has crime. The locks on my car with AIR CONDITIONING aren't fool proof, but they'll buy me time to walk out of the apartment with my revolver and load him up with 120 or 158 grains of 38 special hollow point.

With a bike, good luck getting the revolver loaded before he's gone. I work with angle grinders. Slap on a diamond wheel, and I don't care how tough that lock is or what it's made of, that bike is fucked and gone.
 
You have to have bike lockers if you're in shittown, and if you're not in shittown, you're in a goddamn suburb anyway, and already worshiping carmoloch.

And built-in bike lockers really only work on shorter buildings, or you need fuckoff huge elevators, or you have bike locker hell.

They're fucked because they can't admit the problem is niggers.
 
Cul de sac in Phoenix is the epitome of gentrification.

Funny how when it's something they enjoy the claims of gentrification are mostly absent.
Much as they try, they can't balance all the woke priorities of intersectionalism, class warfare sensitivity, or hell sometimes even climate sperging. Their top priority is hating on cars first and foremost.
 
Much as they try, they can't balance all the woke priorities of intersectionalism, class warfare sensitivity, or hell sometimes even climate sperging. Their top priority is hating on cars first and foremost.
What's that people say about a forum of people ironically being something? That eventually the only people in that forum are actually that thing?

I think fuckcars and bikefiends started out as "this will lead us to glorious communism" + "I like tight shorts, fast bikes, and hate cars" and now it is actually full of people who hate cars first and foremost.

Which is a bit ironic because they follow the prophets of the first wave and haven't yet developed their own prophets, because if you really, REALLY hate fucking cars the best place to be is a small rural town - since it's only two miles wide by definition it's entirely walkable, and since it's small you could walk in the middle of the road and the worst that'd happen is you might get honked at.
 
if you really, REALLY hate fucking cars the best place to be is a small rural town - since it's only two miles wide by definition it's entirely walkable, and since it's small you could walk in the middle of the road and the worst that'd happen is you might get honked at.
Small towns are boring have no nightlife and only a few restaurants, so they're unacceptable to bugmen. It doesn't matter how many outdoor activities or other things are available, if they can't get their "authentic" ethnic foods (even though they're all cooked by Hispanic immigrants with ingredients from Sysco) and go clubbing, they'll say the town is boring.
 
What's that people say about a forum of people ironically being something? That eventually the only people in that forum are actually that thing?
I might be way off the mark, but maybe what you're describing is like a version of Poe's law? It's kind of like atheists who worship satan ironically as a way to be edgy but later find themselves in the company of other people who unironically believe in occultism and the supernatural.
 
I might be way off the mark, but maybe what you're describing is like a version of Poe's law? It's kind of like atheists who worship satan ironically as a way to be edgy but later find themselves in the company of other people who unironically believe in occultism and the supernatural.
it's usually waved around against people who say they're only "ironically racist" or some shit, but there's some truth to it
Small towns are boring have no nightlife and only a few restaurants, so they're unacceptable to bugmen. It doesn't matter how many outdoor activities or other things are available, if they can't get their "authentic" ethnic foods (even though they're all cooked by Hispanic immigrants with ingredients from Sysco) and go clubbing, they'll say the town is boring.
they're missing out, you get plastered drunk in the big city and you might end up dead or worse, but in a small town with one bar you can have all SORTS of batshit drunk experiences without hardly dying at all
 
I now live in a so called "walkable" neighbourhood.

Everything here is expensive and the residents have far higher income than the national average. The streets are clean and cars are unnecessary.

This is only possible because the residents are wealthy. It wouldn't work in lesser than average areas because your bike is just going to get stolen. If I must visit one of these places, I will never ride there.

These urbanist spergs always seem to miss the mark because they are seeing everything through their own set of elitist lenses. The average Joe doesn't care about climate change when they're worrying about putting food on the table. It's really similar to idiots on the other side of the coin who say "I enjoy driving" because they don't have to deal with being stuck in traffic for half an hour and the high costs associated with car ownership (ie they are rich neets working from home).

The loudest climate change idiots I've met owned at least 2 cars, their homes in some gated gentrified foreign landscape outfitted with IOT and flies everywhere. They'd rather spend $300 for a 20-minute flight than being stuck in a coach for $25 with us peasants. They should just shut the fuck up, really.
 
Everything here is expensive and the residents have far higher income than the national average. The streets are clean and cars are unnecessary.

This is only possible because the residents are wealthy. It wouldn't work in lesser than average areas because your bike is just going to get stolen. If I must visit one of these places, I will never ride there.
When an urbanist complains about housing in walkable areas being expensive as proof that there aren't enough of them, they're only ever thinking about a handful of rich places like the Chicago Loop, San Francisco, and Manhattan. It's the equivalent of claiming that houses in single family neighborhoods all cost millions of dollars and citing Beverly Hills, Jupiter Island, and the Hamptons as examples.

There are loads of affordable walkable areas in the US. Urbanists pretend they don't exist because there aren't any trendy businesses there (e.g. small towns) or because they don't like the residents (e.g. the poorer neighborhoods in big cities).
 
There are loads of affordable walkable areas in the US. Urbanists pretend they don't exist because there aren't any trendy businesses there (e.g. small towns) or because they don't like the residents (e.g. the poorer neighborhoods in big cities).
They don't seem to realise it's always a balance between convenience (plentiful amenities), cost and transport. I have yet to visit somewhere with all three. More than half a dozen coffee shops, good transport options making car ownership redundant, walkable and also safe and cheap?

Go build that in Minecraft, lol.
Oh wait, Minecraft has no bikes. Common urbansperg L.
 
Oh wait, Minecraft has no bikes. Common urbansperg L.
Notch lives in the car-dependent hellhole called Los Angeles and is therefore a cart-brain:
1691035712566.png
I know it's a train, but minecarts in Minecraft are personal, not public, transport.
1691035831586.png
 
They don't seem to realise it's always a balance between convenience (plentiful amenities), cost and transport. I have yet to visit somewhere with all three. More than half a dozen coffee shops, good transport options making car ownership redundant, walkable and also safe and cheap?
Japan, Ok, maybe not cheap. But you know what they don't have... neighbors.
 
Go build that in Minecraft, lol.
Oh wait, Minecraft has no bikes. Common urbansperg L.
Minecraft worlds are an elytra-centric hellscape. Think of how expensive it is to even get an elytra in the first place. They're not even renewable! Then you have to constantly repair your elytra. Then you constantly have to use up firework rockets to even fly them. Both of those things require a lot of resources or grinding, which only rich players can afford, making the elytra inaccessible to poor working-class players. Then they're pretty dangerous to fly! One wrong move and you might end up hitting a wall, or worse, falling in lava. That's why every elytra-brain has to wear max-enchanted Netherite armor. Elytra-dependent infrastructure has been the largest social engineering disaster of the 1.9 update. Many players feel like they have to get an elytra to get around everywhere, when the truth is that anti-minecart policies and excuses like "I'm lazy" result in the unwalkable sprawl that plague many worlds today. We need to build things closer together and make things walkable again. Some worlds like 2b2t are too far gone, but join my server today and we can kickstart the urbanist revolution in Minecraft!

Sorry not sorry for sperging
 
Japan, Ok, maybe not cheap. But you know what they don't have... neighbors.
Japan has the advantage of being on a island and hating the idea of immigration. Things just work there. In a way it reminds me of Utah; a shared common culture, terrain that limits how many people that can move in, etc. It's easier to keep the peace when everyone agrees niggery equals a jail cell.
 
Back