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

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
Ah, The pruitt-igoe myth. I saw part of it and despite it's attempts to spin things. The common problem was blacks.. They take care of nothing. and If they cant steal something, they’d destroy it.
over across the pond, we have no shortage of (mostly) white social tenants with mentality of niggers, but in both cases the phenomenon stems for the same root cause: they're part of the second, third, or fourth generation who have the privilege of getting housing without actually having to earn a living, or in many cases, by being such appalling criminal shitheads that nobody else will rent to them

in both cases, if you cram hundreds or thousands of them into the same building, the result is a total disaster area
 
I also get ass-blasted hilarious over the fact that the shit they argue against (mandatory parking minimums, zoning, etc) were all enacted by planners to solve problems. It's all so tiresome, but I wish them one million years of rule in California, just stay the fuck away from normal places.

The issues that I see is that urban planners/urbanists rarely have any "real" problems—every single "issue" is either overstated or made up. A lot of their "reasoning" is "well, the past planners were obviously WRONG so we should undo all that" rather than something more reasonable like "this inner-city highway is no longer necessary because traffic patterns have changed and the downtown isn't the focus of rush hour traffic anymore".

Modern day urban planners either try to create a past that never existed or full "fuck you, your family, and your vehicle".
 
Lefty memes strike again...

1714662711863.png
link

All they had to do was put it once at the top, but no...
 
Lefty memes strike again...

View attachment 5954800
link

All they had to do was put it once at the top, but no...
I love lefty memes that are derivative of right wing memes because you know what gets under their skin. The guy probably gets replied with the "you will own nothing" meme every day and snapped.
 
Lefty memes strike again...

View attachment 5954800
link

All they had to do was put it once at the top, but no...
The thing that gets me is that urbanists are really into this mindset that so called “car dependency” is solely built upon a foundation that the robber barons of the early 1900’s came up with to sell oil and automobiles, in between kicking puppies and bludgeoning orphans to death. The reality is that the reason why infrastructure is so car centric is because cars simply have numerous advantages compared to all other forms of transportation, and as such the people simply like them, but urbanists don’t want to admit this simple fact because it is easier to sell their ideas to the public (and themselves) under the auspices of some grand conspiracy. For how often these types complain about “conspiracy theories”, their ideology (be it urbanism or leftism more broadly) is just as built upon conspiracy theories as whatever some whackjob on /pol/ is ranting about being the fault of da Jooz.
 
The thing that gets me is that urbanists are really into this mindset that so called “car dependency” is solely built upon a foundation that the robber barons of the early 1900’s came up with to sell oil and automobiles, in between kicking puppies and bludgeoning orphans to death. The reality is that the reason why infrastructure is so car centric is because cars simply have numerous advantages compared to all other forms of transportation, and as such the people simply like them, but urbanists don’t want to admit this simple fact because it is easier to sell their ideas to the public (and themselves) under the auspices of some grand conspiracy. For how often these types complain about “conspiracy theories”, their ideology (be it urbanism or leftism more broadly) is just as built upon conspiracy theories as whatever some whackjob on /pol/ is ranting about being the fault of da Jooz.
The fucking gottam "Los Angeles Streetcar" conspiracy that they get from a fucking Roger Rabbit movie being the primary example of this. But they miss that the Pacific Electric railway (Red Car) was a privately owned mass transit system and was obviously in serious decline before it was bought and scrapped.

They also conveniently ignore that LA today has the 3rd largest commuter rail system with 437 unduplicated route miles and 184 million passenger miles per year, and that's in addition to 109 miles of light rail with 61 million riders a year for the subway. Add in the 350 miles of Pacific Surfliner and its 1.5 million riders a year and LA, the poster city for car domination, is quite up there already in transit - and that's not even counting the busses.
 
The thing that gets me is that urbanists are really into this mindset that so called “car dependency” is solely built upon a foundation that the robber barons of the early 1900’s came up with to sell oil and automobiles, in between kicking puppies and bludgeoning orphans to death. The reality is that the reason why infrastructure is so car centric is because cars simply have numerous advantages compared to all other forms of transportation, and as such the people simply like them, but urbanists don’t want to admit this simple fact because it is easier to sell their ideas to the public (and themselves) under the auspices of some grand conspiracy. For how often these types complain about “conspiracy theories”, their ideology (be it urbanism or leftism more broadly) is just as built upon conspiracy theories as whatever some whackjob on /pol/ is ranting about being the fault of da Jooz.
There isn't even a conspiracy theory, most of their history that they claim is simply wrong. Streetcars, growth of suburbia, induced demand, most of that is made of false data or exaggerated.

Oil in particular stems from the demand for indoor lighting, which is what the first big product oil companies came up with. If you look at the history of these things, fossil fuels existed for fuel. In the 18th century, petroleum-based fuels existed but weren't really economical. Unless you had piped-in coal gas, you had to resort to oil lamps, and coal oil was too smoky to use indoors. You know what did burn clean and was relatively cheap? Whale oil.

In the mid-1800s, geologist Abraham Gesner came up with a new process to distill oil shale and coal into a new product called kerosene (initially trademarked) which burned clean. Others came up with similar processes, and in the process had a new industry that was cheaper and less dangerous than whaling, which fell into decline (and saved whales from extinction). There is some controversy that the other leading oil, camphene, was forced off the market by taxes (thanks to a new government agency to help pay for the Civil War, the IRS) but camphene was a product of the logging industry, which wasn't a long-term solution either.

The benefits of a car are pretty obvious compared to horses (no shitting, no full-time groomer required, no "will suddenly freak out if it sees a snake or something that looks like a snake", etc.) and it's not like they believe any other widely-accepted technology (television, radio, Internet, etc.) was a result of some grand conspiracy, so why are cars so hard to understand?
 
so why are cars so hard to understand?
Because it is axiomatic to them that cars are bad, evil, stupid, expensive, and the devil who is Satan.

But if it is all those things, they have to explain away everyone using them, and so the only option is conspiracy. (They sometimes try to use stupidity but that has its own issues.)

Once you realize that conspiracy is often used to explain away failings of someone's desired system, you see it everywhere. Oh, it cannot be that liberal democracy is wrong, it must be the alt-right or the jews or whatnot preventing it from succeeding.
 
I love lefty memes that are derivative of right wing memes because you know what gets under their skin. The guy probably gets replied with the "you will own nothing" meme every day and snapped.
Same story with "why are all the people from the 🏳️‍⚧️ country so ugly" being reappropriated to "why are all the people from the 🏳️‍⚧️ country so pretty".
 
This legitimately is a terrible bike lane:
1714681356683.png

Been wanting to post this bike lane on here for a while.jpeg
1714681364635.png

Some more examples from the comments:
1714681485350.png
Google Maps
1714681492849.png
Google Maps

The hilarious part about /r/fuckcars complaining about them though is that the only reason why those bike lanes exist is because of a federal law (archive) which Ohio implements (archive) mandating that bike lanes be added to all new/resurfaced non-limited access roads:
Bicyclists and pedestrians shall be given due consideration in the comprehensive transportation plans developed by each metropolitan planning organization and State in accordance with sections 134 and 135, respectively. Bicycle transportation facilities and pedestrian walkways shall be considered, where appropriate, in conjunction with all new construction and reconstruction of transportation facilities, except where bicycle and pedestrian use are not permitted.
The picture is the result of broadly mandating something without considering individual cases. An own goal by cycling activists.

Source (Archive)
 
When are they going to make cyclists walk down a trail while a man on a bicycle blitzes past them with an inch to spare at 20 miles an hour while ringing a bell?
 
While its a retarded lane, couldn't you just stop, look to make sure no cars are coming, then safely cross? As long as you dont blow past it without checking you'd be fine
It's also perfectly safe as long as both the cars and bikes follow the rules of the road, so it'd never work in reality.

If the cyclist reaches the off ramp before the car, the car should yield to the cyclist. This is easy because the car is approaching from behind and can slow down until the cyclist exits the off ramp area.

If the car reaches the off ramp before the cyclist, the cyclist should yield to the car (i.e. not keep pedaling into the side of the vehicle). This is difficult because cyclists have a bad habit of refusing to yield. See "right hooks" for an example of a completely made up problem that wouldn't exist if cyclists knew how to coast or use their brakes when approaching another vehicle.
 
Back