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

/r/fuckcars member doesn't like walking in 100°F heat. This is obviously because of cars:
1719842634381.png
1719842655605.png
Just wet your shirt:
1719842698232.png
Source (Archive)
 
TBF this is a bit outside of the scope of urbanism but I don't believe Houston is the same kind of 'cultural centre' that NYC is. You're always going to pay a premium to live in the Big Apple, even while fighting off mutant sewer rats and Diversity.
If you're scraping by and putting in $1,500 a month to live in a shoebox, you probably aren't going out to the symphony every other week.
 
If you're scraping by and putting in $1,500 a month to live in a shoebox, you probably aren't going out to the symphony every other week.

the cost of the Houston Symphony is pretty good with a 18 concert season ticket costing $441 and the New York Philharmonic has no where near comparable deals plus the Houston Symphony doesn't have shit like Afromodernism: Music of the African Diaspora busying up its schedule
 
Last edited:
Personally I'm more in the Dave Ramsey type of thought. To me safety is relative and as long as you're not driving something wildly unsafe like a car from the 50s with no seatbelts and a steering wheel that impales you. A 1998 Accord is not horribly unsafe, or at least not enough to justify buying a more expensive car for safety alone. It doesn't make financial sense to upgrade unless the car only makes up a portion of your net worth and you pay up front.
Yeah. Teenagers do dumb shit and have wrecks. One of my extended family members pulled out of a side road onto a fast-moving rural highway and basically got hit head-on by a vehicle coming from the direction she failed to look. An airbag and seatbelt, something that was not around in her boomer grandfather's time (he was born in the 1950s), saved her life and reduced physical injuries to just bruising.

I'm sure that the sort of thing is very, VERY common.
 
If you're scraping by and putting in $1,500 a month to live in a shoebox, you probably aren't going out to the symphony every other week.
No, but you ARE going out, a lot, unless you enjoy bumping your knee every time you turn around in your tiny coffin apartment. That's the whole point of NYC, to go out and walk around and be where the Beautiful People are and the Movie Sets are, and hope that you'll absorb some of that by osmosis. Admittedly I've never been to NYC and have no desire to, but I did spend 4 years in deep downtown Toronto (the Temu version of New York). Torontonians have so much and still bitch and moan all day every day about how the streetcars are too slow or the ROM hours aren't convenient.
I think that's separate from urbanism because the 'drive' of people that want to live in places like New York, LA, London, San Fran is different from the people that want to live in Amsterdam or Der Bikenlanden, Germany or some Chinese bughive. One is sort of striver-ism, "I want to get a sandwich from [famous delicatessen] and eat it on the steps of [building that appears in tons of movies] and spot [famous actress] walking past, the other is autistic 'I want to play Sim City with everyone's lives'.

Greetings frens. I just bought my first SUV after buying only sedans and sports cars. SUV life is pretty good. The practicality is simply amazing.
Nothing feels better than being able to say 'yes, I WILL plow through that snow drift, eat SHIT mother nature' instead of gripping your tiny cuck car steering wheel and praying to Allah you can make it (speaking from experience)
 
No, but you ARE going out, a lot, unless you enjoy bumping your knee every time you turn around in your tiny coffin apartment. That's the whole point of NYC, to go out and walk around and be where the Beautiful People are and the Movie Sets are, and hope that you'll absorb some of that by osmosis. Admittedly I've never been to NYC and have no desire to, but I did spend 4 years in deep downtown Toronto (the Temu version of New York). Torontonians have so much and still bitch and moan all day every day about how the streetcars are too slow or the ROM hours aren't convenient.

I think that's separate from urbanism because the 'drive' of people that want to live in places like New York, LA, London, San Fran is different from the people that want to live in Amsterdam or Der Bikenlanden, Germany or some Chinese bughive. One is sort of striver-ism, "I want to get a sandwich from [famous delicatessen] and eat it on the steps of [building that appears in tons of movies] and spot [famous actress] walking past, the other is autistic 'I want to play Sim City with everyone's lives'.

There is absolutely a difference between the bored teenagers who think that their lives would be improved to live in a "hip" city where they don't need a car, and "you WILL live in the pod" fascism. But there's a lot of overlap between them. Kowloon Walled City fans are probably drawn more by the idea of practically free (if wildly substandard) housing, not necessarily living in a cramped space with thousands of other people in a building that somehow didn't collapse or burn down in its forty years or so of existence. Wide pictures of parking lots, especially if it's in a downtown area, create a pathos of something lost, even if the truth isn't quite so simple. That's a lot of why there's the "my city is bad because of muh cars" line of thinking (and this isn't a new phenomenon, there's all sorts of things dating back to at least to the 1950s).

The other problem that they seem to forget is that wealth is still the driving force. Life sucks, and if you have more money things will suck less (generally; it won't buy happiness but can solve most of the pressing problems). If your logic for big cities is to "not being 'forced' to buy a car" (that is, it's expensive enough that it is a major financial concern) your life will still suck because you'll be paying much more in every other way, and your poor financial situation will lock you out of good neighborhoods, material wealth, fun experiences, and so forth.

If you can plunk down $2k on a good bicycle, for instance, the argument about being "forced" to buy a car is irrelevant.
 
I was driving within broadcast range of a major city the other day, there was a radio segment about some local bill about buses, and it legitimately sounded like I was watching a Not Just Bikes video but it was on legacy fucking media. I know NPR is prone to spout this kind of bullshit as well.

The thing that pisses me off the most about their Bolshevik tier propaganda is the downright Orwellian claim that pedestrians are the working class and that drivers are the elite. People only commute because they can't afford the city, it's that fucking simple.
 
The thing that pisses me off the most about their Bolshevik tier propaganda is the downright Orwellian claim that pedestrians are the working class and that drivers are the elite. People only commute because they can't afford the city, it's that fucking simple.
To the Elite they see the Working class (who drive cars) the same as their slave caste (the brown migrants who take public transportation to work in the trendy shops and bistros they love)

They want everyone not in their inner circle to be part of the slave caste.
 
/r/fuckcars member doesn't like walking in 100°F heat. This is obviously because of cars:
1719842634381.png
I feel like when starting a social movement there should be a little more self sacrifice involved you know. Like for example people who go vegan in order to protest conditions animals are kept in. But with these guys it feels more like a hail Mary in penance for using a car like "oh urbanist God forgive for I have sinned and used a car". There's a point where they're just using cars but just feel guilty. Shouldn't they set a better example for people if they want to prove a point even if it's difficult.

How could you take a social movement seriously if a vegan eats meat because "it's not convenient". As annoying as vegans are at least they don't cave to eating meat because there's no vegan infrastructure.
 
I feel like when starting a social movement there should be a little more self sacrifice involved you know. Like for example people who go vegan in order to protest conditions animals are kept in. But with these guys it feels more like a hail Mary in penance for using a car like "oh urbanist God forgive for I have sinned and used a car". There's a point where they're just using cars but just feel guilty. Shouldn't they set a better example for people if they want to prove a point even if it's difficult.

How could you take a social movement seriously if a vegan eats meat because "it's not convenient". As annoying as vegans are at least they don't cave to eating meat because there's no vegan infrastructure.

There is kind of "no vegan infrastructure", you don't get the protein you need from just vegetables. Occasionally, some vegan influencer is caught in public eating meat.

You did remind me of something, though. In my post about "not needing a car" it's true that 75% of Manhattan doesn't have a car (a number that's dropping), they use taxis and Ubers to get around, they don't use public transit. This is in stark contrast to the /r/fuckcars urban fantasizers who think that even if you use Ubers in a "big city" it's a failure on someone's part.

I shop in Aldi like any other poorfag and I never really noticed any meat substitutes, they're obviously there somewhere but I don't think they sell that well among the typical clientele. Jason confirmed for shopping at middle-class supermarkets like a twat.

Jason isn't poor, nor has he claimed to be. In fact, it was demonstrated that he lives in Amsterdam-Zuid, which is the wealthiest area of the city (not Amsterdam-Centrum, which is also very wealthy but extremely tourist-oriented). It is telling that he seems to shop at "normal" supermarkets, though. Could it be that for all his "yeah, REAL cities have small groceries you can walk to" bullshit he just drives to Albert Heijn (or whatever) like a normal person? 🤔

(As for Aldi, I don't think I've seen the fake meat there but my opinion is pretty worthless since I've never visited a non-American Aldi, and I don't buy meat at Aldi anyway).
 
Why does this have so many upvotes? This dipshit is wrong. Global warming is actually caused more-so by 3rd world countries currently in an industrial boom such as China and India. It's also caused by cruise ships, and by rich people using their private jets:
1719894100555.png

Rich people output more CO2 annually than the common man will in their entire lifetime.

The "global warming caused by cars" argument is just globohomo bullshit peddled to pit the peasants (us) against eachother. The rich and powerful denounce the use of cars and call for new policies such as paper straws, recycling plastic (proven to be ineffective), and countless other shit policies all whilst they're the ones actually burning the planet up. This guy and everyone else on that sub are the textbook definition of sheeple. Also the irony in his username lol, bet 10 dollars this guy is a bug man too
 
I had an old CRV as my first car and I love it. Being a light SUV ment I had storage in the back for all sorts of stuff like friends, my bike, Warhammer 40k stuff, lots of groceries, and my personal favorite... old furniture people toss out that I take home and refurbish for my bedroom. As a bonus because my ride was both a SUV and a beater I never had issues with car accidents, I've had slight love taps from other cars and because my car was already rough I just let it slide because I needed to get to my Uni classes.
 
Back