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

You thought Big Oil and Big Auto were responsible for turning people into carbrains?
You thought wrong! Walmart is responsible:
I swear, these people get stupider by the day. Walmart was founded in 1962 as an off-shoot of five and dimes, and didn't enter suburbs (or the West Coast) until c. 1990 and most of those were originally non-Supercenter stores anyway, by which time post-WWII suburbs had long grown and matured.
walmart-growth-america.gif
 
I swear, these people get stupider by the day. Walmart was founded in 1962 as an off-shoot of five and dimes, and didn't enter suburbs (or the West Coast) until c. 1990 and most of those were originally non-Supercenter stores anyway, by which time post-WWII suburbs had long grown and matured.
View attachment 5986018
Fucking young ass niggers and shit. I remember the first walmart in our area out west and it was confusing to us why it was built in the ass-end of nowhere, not realizing that the strategy of walmarts in the midwest had ALWAYS been to build in the ass-end of nowhere and provide an amazing shopping experience that nothing around it could compete with.

They'd be better off blaming target, for allowing white women to pretend they're not broke-ass niggers shopping at walmart lol.
 
I went to this place for a week as part of my vacation. I spent the entire weekend blitzed off my ass screwing around doing what I wanted, sparing no expense for every convenience possible. Wowie zowie, this place truly is a paradise on Earth!
Why isn't my neighborhood as walkable and transit friendly as Disneyland. We don't even have a monorail system!

I'm obviously writing facetiously, but they would unironically point to a literal theme park as something they can viably copy into regular infrastructure.
 
I'm obviously writing facetiously, but they would unironically point to a literal theme park as something they can viably copy into regular infrastructure.
They repeatedly use theme parks and colleges as examples of "walkable cities" and it's absolutely batshit because if you had a theme park or a college in the ass-end of nowhere, sure it's walkable inside, but dammit if you have a car you're a god among men.

And if the damn theme park/college is in the city, then it's not walkable on its own and is being supported!
 
Why isn't my neighborhood as walkable and transit friendly as Disneyland. We don't even have a monorail system!

I'm obviously writing facetiously, but they would unironically point to a literal theme park as something they can viably copy into regular infrastructure.
The original theme park has been praised for its infrastructure and layout and has been used as a model for urban development (Havasu, Arazona is a good example. The developer even hired the same guy who helped build Disneyland to build his city.).

Also the original EPCOT concept was built to be highly walkable and uses a more advance version of the themepark's people movers to get people from their homes to any district they want for work, shopping, and school. You would barely see a car living there because all traffic is underground and away from pedestrians and cyclists. And I am sure urbanists would still shit all over it because Walt intended the residential areas to be suburbs instead of commie blocks.
 
Last edited:
They repeatedly use theme parks and colleges as examples of "walkable cities" and it's absolutely batshit because if you had a theme park or a college in the ass-end of nowhere, sure it's walkable inside, but dammit if you have a car you're a god among men.

And if the damn theme park/college is in the city, then it's not walkable on its own and is being supported!
They also overlook the fact that theme parks and colleges only are able to exist because of a roided-up version of the dreaded capitalism. Theme parks you can't walk two steps without spending money on either a ride or merchandise or food, and college prices (at least for the private ones with the walkability they crave) have been notoriously out of control in the states for ages.
 
They also overlook the fact that theme parks and colleges only are able to exist because of a roided-up version of the dreaded capitalism. Theme parks you can't walk two steps without spending money on either a ride or merchandise or food, and college prices (at least for the private ones with the walkability they crave) have been notoriously out of control in the states for ages.
They overlook it because it's not much different from being a consoomer buying up the latest funko pops in the big city going to barcades and spending disposable income on avocado toast.
 
They also overlook the fact that theme parks and colleges only are able to exist because of a roided-up version of the dreaded capitalism. Theme parks you can't walk two steps without spending money on either a ride or merchandise or food, and college prices (at least for the private ones with the walkability they crave) have been notoriously out of control in the states for ages.
Oh it's easy, we just tax the rich! And then we can build this urban utopia.

God, I hate that I can predict their thought patterns to a T. Just say something hyperbolic as a joke and it's something they would literally say.
 
Oh it's easy, we just tax the rich! And then we can build this urban utopia.

God, I hate that I can predict their thought patterns to a T. Just say something hyperbolic as a joke and it's something they would literally say.
The thing that really confuses me is they insist the urban centers are profitable enough to pay for themselves, you presumably shouldn't even need the billionaire tax.

In particular I'm extremely skeptical of the Urban3 charts NJB pushes all the time (bigger line = "more profitable", i.e., "more tax revenue collected") to insist that suburbs (and I guess rural areas) are subsidized by urban centers.

1715651423158.png


Ignoring the fact that there's no actual numerical data provided here I really don't understand how "tax revenue collected" is somehow indicative of overall value. You're telling me the farms that provide all the food necessary for everyone here to live is somehow functionally worthless?

This just doesn't pass the eye test for me.
 
Ignoring the fact that there's no actual numerical data provided here I really don't understand how "tax revenue collected" is somehow indicative of overall value. You're telling me the farms that provide all the food necessary for everyone here to live is somehow functionally worthless?
According to urban3's "data", a city should consistent solely of 100 story office towers as everything else brings in less property tax revenue.

It's incredibly dumb and ignores that people pay taxes, not land. Once again, the response to the work-from-home movement shows that they're completely full of it. Cities, banks, and companies with large real estate holdings are trying to force return-to-office because that fancy office tower is worthless if the suburban commuter stays home in their suburb; they wouldn't be panicking if suburbanites were drains on the budget.

Urbanists are allergic to looking at actual data because their entire economic theory is disproven by looking at any suburban city's budget. They're not running deficits and infrastructure is only a tiny fraction of their spending. Typically, the largest budget category, by far, is education.
 
The thing that really confuses me is they insist the urban centers are profitable enough to pay for themselves, you presumably shouldn't even need the billionaire tax.

In particular I'm extremely skeptical of the Urban3 charts NJB pushes all the time (bigger line = "more profitable", i.e., "more tax revenue collected") to insist that suburbs (and I guess rural areas) are subsidized by urban centers.

View attachment 5987143

Ignoring the fact that there's no actual numerical data provided here I really don't understand how "tax revenue collected" is somehow indicative of overall value. You're telling me the farms that provide all the food necessary for everyone here to live is somehow functionally worthless?

This just doesn't pass the eye test for me.
It’s property values, which probably convert to property taxes.
Property taxes are generally the largest single source of income, but they aren’t the majority of most cities’ tax revenues. (See below)

However, spending is also going to be concentrated in the city center, because it’s not like major cities build massive government offices in stereotypical suburbs.

TLDR: Those city center property taxes go right back into buying heroin for junkies at little benefit to suburbs. Suburbs are basically free tax bases, which is why cities grab them.

(Houston Tax Revenue- Least Urbanist City)
IMG_8066.jpeg

(NYC Revenue - Most Urbanist City)
IMG_8065.jpeg
 
Last edited:
This just doesn't pass the eye test for me.
You also have a square law going on - the total area outside that spire is quite large because it’s just huge in two dimensions- which means it adds up.

I remember during 9/11 working out that the smallish town I was in was worth the same as the trade centers - but it was still worth that amount.
 
They also overlook the fact that theme parks and colleges only are able to exist because of a roided-up version of the dreaded capitalism. Theme parks you can't walk two steps without spending money on either a ride or merchandise or food, and college prices (at least for the private ones with the walkability they crave) have been notoriously out of control in the states for ages.
The same theme parks and colleges arguments (specifically, a lot of missing functions) never get applied to large suburban shopping malls for some reason, even outdoor ones.

20221111_155048.jpg

It’s property values, which probably convert to property taxes.
Property taxes are generally the largest single source of income, but they aren’t the majority of most cities’ tax revenues. (See below)

However, spending is also going to be concentrated in the city center, because it’s not like major cities build massive government offices in stereotypical suburbs.

TLDR: Those city center property taxes go right back into buying heroin for junkies at little benefit to suburbs. Suburbs are basically free tax bases, which is why cities grab them.
Property taxes are a whole can of worms, because they get judged on a variety of factors, most notably "improvements", tax-speak for buildings and anything else that can't be moved. A vacant piece of land in the city has lower taxes than a building, and the value of those buildings can vary wildly depending on a bunch of external factors beyond "let's just build everything everywhere". That's why a lot of abandoned buildings in cities turned back into parking lots, it's not a conspiracy, it's the fact that long-term abandoned buildings don't pay for themselves, but the city still taxes them on it. By tearing stuff down you save money, and because a rotting abandoned building is a nuisance it degrades nearby property values, so it's in the city's best interest to tear them down too.

This is also why you can't build apartments everywhere because if they're not profitable at market rate, they're either going to be torn down or not built anymore. If you get to the point where they become government-owned social housing, that takes it off the tax rolls entirely.

As for Houston's tax revenue, they were smart to grab suburbs and other expanding areas because they actually make money in a way that most cities (eastern seaboard, particularly) couldn't because of their hemmed-in status. I've demonstrated before that Chuck and Jason's allegations that "cities paying for suburban roads" is complete nonsense, and now with St. George, Louisiana we have demonstrable proof that the suburbs are in fact the money-makers because when push comes to shove and the "suburbs" fuck off, the truth comes out and they really do admit that $50M in tax revenue will go away forever.
 
You thought Big Oil and Big Auto were responsible for turning people into carbrains?
You thought wrong! Walmart is responsible:
View attachment 5985868
Source (Archive)
You realize you can walk or bike to Walmart, right? Most of them have bike racks.
They also overlook the fact that theme parks and colleges only are able to exist because of a roided-up version of the dreaded capitalism. Theme parks you can't walk two steps without spending money on either a ride or merchandise or food, and college prices (at least for the private ones with the walkability they crave) have been notoriously out of control in the states for ages.
Colleges and theme parks exist by upcharging you for everything, even for a soda pop. You can't even park with out paying a fee. They aren't communist in their buisness practices whatsoever, they're cyberpunk. It's a wonder that any of these places have guest wifi.
They overlook it because it's not much different from being a consoomer buying up the latest funko pops in the big city going to barcades and spending disposable income on avocado toast.
Knowing that these are the people that make up fuckcars just let's me know they're all hypocrites. Their plastic crap will break and need to be thrown away, forever tainting the environment. A new 2024 Chevy Malibu will last well over 100k miles, and even when headed for the scrap yard, can still be used for parts for the remaining cars on the road.
 
You realize you can walk or bike to Walmart, right? Most of them have bike racks.
See, you would be right if it wasn't for the completely intransitable parking lot, which is equivalent to an infinitely deep chasm or a moat filled with alligators to them, even though a normal person would consider a store so large that you could live for weeks? Months? Years without purchasing anything from anywhere else (AI rendition below)

1715696336698.png

I wonder if anyone has ever tried - if you live within walking distance from a Walmart, you probably could go for quite a long time, the only major thing I can think of off-hand that a super Walmart doesn't sell is gas, and I think even some of them do (quick search seems so). Someone make some big money by living on walmart only for as long as you can. E.g., walmart literally enables a walkable lifestyle as long as you live within walking distance.

1715696424846.png
I ignored this one at first but then noticed the just fuckoff huge parking lot in the background, that shit is niiiiiiiiiice
 
See, you would be right if it wasn't for the completely intransitable parking lot, which is equivalent to an infinitely deep chasm or a moat filled with alligators to them, even though a normal person would consider a store so large that you could live for weeks? Months? Years without purchasing anything from anywhere else (AI rendition below)

View attachment 5988323

I wonder if anyone has ever tried - if you live within walking distance from a Walmart, you probably could go for quite a long time, the only major thing I can think of off-hand that a super Walmart doesn't sell is gas, and I think even some of them do (quick search seems so). Someone make some big money by living on walmart only for as long as you can. E.g., walmart literally enables a walkable lifestyle as long as you live within walking distance.

View attachment 5988325
I ignored this one at first but then noticed the just fuckoff huge parking lot in the background, that shit is niiiiiiiiiice
Yes some Walmarts sell gas. You can live just off Walmart if you wanted. I think they think Walmart is car hell because it does cater to car people with a pretty good auto section, sometimes even a built in garage. Nope, can't have that. No wins for car brains.
 
I think they think Walmart is car hell because it does cater to car people with a pretty good auto section, sometimes even a built in garage.
They hate walmart because they're niggercattle told to hate walmart even though Targay, Costco, and Traitor Hoe's are basically the same as walmart on slightly different scales and sizes, but those are deemed Reddit™ Approved© Capitalism® for unknown reasons.

I suspect it's literally the parking lot.

Good, light, angels, happiness:
1715697795600.png

Bad, evil, devil, satan:
1715697584716.png

Of course, nobody would ever mention that the bad one is quite walkable for the people who live nearby (and they might even do it, though I notice that half of them are cucked by a RAILROAD TRACK but trains are never bad and the other developments have niggerwalls which means you'd have to walk around, lame. Also it's Arizona which is the asshole of satan.)

And of course all of Reddit loves Costco and they're almost never walkable because they're out in the ass end of suburbs by design.
 
Jason has a sane response to a viewer fact-checking him:
1715699811517.png
YouTube comment screenshot nitpicking an obvious joke in a satirical video

No wonder The Daily Show sucks if its writers think that rear-seat cupholders exist because kids drink beer:
1715699985787.png
How dirty and dumb do you have to be for that to be the first thing to come to mind?

Retard who has never tried to build anything in his entire life:
1715700038312.png

No truck needs a diesel engine and they should have undersized radiators because a properly sized one is "dangerous":
1715700373043.png
Photo of the engine bay of a 2020 Ram 1500 5.7 V8 mild hybrid2022 Ram with a Cummins 6.7 diesel
Source (Archive)

He's also left Japan and is possibly in Taiwan (assuming the airport picture isn't from a layover):
1715700215679.png
Qi wireless charging pad on the Taipei metro from Taoyuan airport.
Source (Archive)
1715700224152.png
Source (Archive)

So the Netherlands doesn't have first-class transit?
 
Trucks should have undersized radiators because a properly sized one is "dangerous":
1715700124949.png
Nigga those cars back then wernt high RPM monsters cranking out the horsepower of a M4 Sherman. They were big, slow rpm monsters that chugged a fuck ton of oil. We also have bigger radiators now because older ones SUCKED. We learned from failure, which with cooling is important because you don't want your engine block going bang. You niggers are retarded.
 
They hate walmart because they're niggercattle told to hate walmart even though Targay, Costco, and Traitor Hoe's are basically the same as walmart on slightly different scales and sizes, but those are deemed Reddit™ Approved© Capitalism® for unknown reasons.
Walmart has issues of its own but I've always found it funny that the people that complain about it don't seem to realize that it's a godsend for the poor and people barely scraping by. It's not like rich people shop at Walmart.
 
Back