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

[quaawaa]

This "natural" disaster is entirely man-made. The regional government has spent the last decade removing flood control dams, to restore the "natural environment", and now everyone is acting surprised that the historic (and not in any way unprecedented, or even unusual for the area) norm of intense rain after a period of drought has caused an enormous flood.

So what you're saying is that the redditors were right and that the flood was caused by voting the wrong way?

 

[Return of the Freaker]

This "natural" disaster is entirely man-made. The regional government has spent the last decade removing flood control dams, to restore the "natural environment", and now everyone is acting surprised that the historic (and not in any way unprecedented, or even unusual for the area) norm of intense rain after a period of drought has caused an enormous flood.

Fucking knew it. What was the justification over there? When I first heard of the dam removal plans on the Klamath and general media buzz about getting rid of dams I immediately thought of manufactured disasters like all the wildfires caused by forestry and infrastructure neglect. It's one thing to get rid of old weirs and industrial dams that are deteriorated and/or no longer serving a purpose. But bigger dams for power and/or FLOOD CONTROL? With the klamath it was fish migration and reparation to muh injuns. Even though iirc at least one removed dam had a fish ladder. And of course there were immediate negative effects from releasing old polluted silt oops haha. But I just know the moment a flood happens that the dams would've prevented it'll be GLOBAL BOILING

 

[teriyakiburns]

What was the justification over there?

https://damremoval.eu/about/

Whatever justification they can think of. Some of it is sensible, like removing old weirs that are threatening to collapse, but they use the sensible to sneak through idiocy about dams causing global warming, to justify removing flood control dams and water supply reservoirs.

 

[Dante Alighieri]

vote harder or you're a chud

 

[Yamamura]

If there are no such examples? I'm genuinely wondering why car-hating retards are so obsessed with this idea that hasn't even been done in reality once. It's an astonishing part of their psychology.

Everything is a hypothetical in their head. Never mind a disaster, they can't even get their ideas to implement properly in normal situations. I'm guessing they just want a train to be the hero of the day in their head so badly to vindicate them. When they only thing they've ever pointed to is Ukraine, but then it's a stretch to call that a "disaster" instead of just people riding a train since it's not like the Russians were bombing the tracks.

You would think he would come up with an argument that couldn't be immediately be used against mass transit. I'm astonished. My expectations were low and I'm still disappointed

Truly is hilarious how unaware they are shooting themselves in the foot. It goes to show as I've said before they're just mad that the one coming up with the idea is Elon himself. If Kamala came up with this robobus idea as a dumb state project they would be all over it. Even though Elon has a better chance of getting it somewhat implemented than the state.

Same with the Cybertruck. There's nothing specific about it that can't be said of another road legal vehicle that exists on the road already. It's really not the threat to society as the "rolling guillotine on wheels" they claim it is. It's funny they really grasp at straws as soon as Elon is involved to find something bad to say about it.

I feel like you could play the same game where you say Hitler did something but then say it was actually a beloved figure who did it. Like for instance: "Hey did you know recently Elon created a program where he will buy your working gas vehicle that gets under a certain fuel mileage and purposely destroy it in order to give you a rebate on a Tesla.

Well I lied it wasn't Elon it was Obama"

 

[VasonJoorhees]

/r/fuckcars doesn't just hate big trucks, they also hate small trucks:
View attachment 6556771
View attachment 6556762

Those wheelchairs must be incredibly wide:
View attachment 6556775

View attachment 6556774
Source (Archive)

Urbancels always fall back onto the size and safety argument in regards to pickup trucks, which makes no sense because they worship public transport like city buses, which are like quadruple the size. Also, how do you get mowed down by a parked vehicle exactly? Genuinely curious.

They also complain about truck size being dangerous for other motorists and pedestrians because trucks have blind spots, while conveniently ignoring the fact that city buses have significantly worse blind spots. How many cases have you seen of buses running over people because they couldn't see them? Too many. Buses also generally cause worse accidents than trucks due to their size AND larger vehicles like buses also take longer to stop and have less maneuverability, meaning it's harder for them to avoid accidents. They also have no seatbelts. These arguments make no fucking sense.

 

[BulkForceFive]

In addition to suggesting induced demand for bicycle lanes (please point to a city where people are cramming up bicycle lanes built in the last 10-15 years), three cherry-picked cities are brought up as brought up as examples.

The one valuable metric (bikes per hour past a certain point) is never the one used, because it would turn out that the 50 percent increase would be two bikes per hour to three.

These arguments make no fucking sense.

They make perfect sense when you take race and politics into account, both of the truck owner and the urbanist.

 

[Yamamura]

They make perfect sense when you take race and politics into account, both of the truck owner and the urbanist.

It's funny when they try to say "I don't get why urbanism is a partisan topic" when they use it as a vehicle to push leftist talking points constantly. They have no consistency with their arguments except the fact they hate anything that makes people not dependent on the state. Remember that time they were trying to shill Chinese electric cars hard despite supposedly being anti car. I bet if Elon didn't step on the trannies feet and toed the party line he would still be in their good graces and you see them shilling why the Cybertruck is better than the F-150. It doesn't matter what you say, it just matters who you are in these circles.

 

[Return of the Freaker]

Has Strong Towns always had a youtube channel? I'm noticing them suddenly showing up in youtube shorts.

 

[Xarpho's Return]

It's funny when they try to say they "I don't get why urbanism is a partisan topic" when they use it as a vehicle to push leftist talking points constantly.

The funny thing is that people in blue cities are getting sick of their shit and rather than picking up on this, they blame it "muh boomers" or "muh conservatives". The only non-partisan part of urbanism is how much they're disliked.

 

[Apple Porcupine]

Has Strong Towns always had a youtube channel? I'm noticing them suddenly showing up in youtube shorts.

Far longer than all the others actually, their oldest videos look like this:

As far as the recent shorts go these numbers are absolutely pathetic, YouTube loves pushing these and you can get hundreds of thousands of views with the right thumbnail and no effort.

Notice also that Chuck really doesn't like being the face of the channel. His response to this would be that it's because he doesn't want to be the leader of Strong Towns forever, and doesn't want to be the "face" of urbanism, which I'm noticing is a theme that Jason shares (even though his ego demands the glory). Unfortunately (or fortunately for the rest of us) movements that try to explicitly forego a defined leader are historically doomed to fail.

 

[Xarpho's Return]

which I'm noticing is a theme that Jason shares (even though his ego demands the glory). Unfortunately (or fortunately for the rest of us) movements that try to explicitly forego a defined leader are historically doomed to fail.

If Jason had that chance he would take it. I think deep down there's a little self-awareness that his antics turn people off ("I like to get angry about this", etc.) and knows he's not cut out for it. Leadership is a quality that not everyone possesses and elections are won and loss who the better personality is.

 

[Meriasek]

A German politician just demanded that parallel parking and any reverse exiting out of parking spots should be illegal because that's where accidents happen and that wouldn't work with Vision Zero.
Anyone with even a quarter brain knows that such a ban would be impossible, but then again, German female Greens aren't exactly known for their intellect.

 

[i440BX]

Found another Urbanist planner, this time praising Franch Mayor anti car measures.

https://x.com/BrentToderian/status/1850351219216351554

This "natural" disaster is entirely man-made. The regional government has spent the last decade removing flood control dams, to restore the "natural environment", and now everyone is acting surprised that the historic (and not in any way unprecedented, or even unusual for the area) norm of intense rain after a period of drought has caused an enormous flood.

I was surprised to see there is an aggressive movement for removing dams, because of Muh Environment, when ironically floods can also cause degradation of environment. I understand making dams better for fish by putting ladders, but REMOVING them despite being put there for a good reason?

https://theconversation.com/when-dams-cause-more-problems-than-they-solve-removing-them-can-pay-off-for-people-and-nature-137346

https://archive.is/710TU

https://www.weforum.org/stories/2023/08/removing-dams-europe-river-restoration/

https://archive.is/u62WN

 

[quaawaa]

Found another Urbanist planner, this time praising Franch Mayor anti car measures.

https://x.com/BrentToderian/status/1850351219216351554

View attachment 6587244View attachment 6587243

Spoiler: Archive

---

Assholes like him are the reason why Vancouver has incredibly expensive housing.

---

There's also less than two dozen cyclists along the entire street.

The road probably carried more people when it was open to cars, as shown by this 1970s photo in the replies:

Source (Archive)

Google Street View concurs. Before:

After:


Way more people used the road when it was open to cars.

Even /r/urbanism admits this:


Source (Archive)

A once busy street

Also, I thought urbanists wanted road space to be allocated based off the number of people using each mode of transport. That means that for Rue de Rivoli, the bike lane should be reduced and the car lanes and sidewalks should be expanded.

---

The French comments on the original source of the video aren't positive:

Spoiler: Original Source

Source (Archive)

And suddenly, a man Obliged to Leave French Territory (economic migrant) appears with his knife

"Bobo" means "bourgeoise-bohemian" or in English, rich urban bugmen.




The only positive replies are in English:

 

[Markass the Worst]

The French comments on the original source of the video aren't positive:

The only positive replies are in English:

I'm noticing a theme here along with car haters praising theme parks and cruise ships. Urbanists are NOT beating the tourist allegations. They really are just tourists who think what's good for tourists must be good for locals too.

 

[Sunflower Samurai]

I'm noticing a theme here along with car haters praising theme parks and cruise ships. Urbanists are NOT beating the tourist allegations. They really are just tourists who think what's good for tourists must be good for locals too.

They are so desparate for a gotcha that suburbanites enjoying "walkable" areas in purpose built places like cruises or amusement areas is a serious 200 IQ hypocrisy

Of course, not notcing the average theme park and cruise is purpose built for a relatively small area and you dont have to have either transport, long term housing. complex infrastructure or schedules

 

[jray4559]

It's funny when they try to say "I don't get why urbanism is a partisan topic" when they use it as a vehicle to push leftist talking points constantly. They have no consistency with their arguments except the fact they hate anything that makes people not dependent on the state. Remember that time they were trying to shill Chinese electric cars hard despite supposedly being anti car. I bet if Elon didn't step on the trannies feet and toed the party line he would still be in their good graces and you see them shilling why the Cybertruck is better than the F-150. It doesn't matter what you say, it just matters who you are in these circles.

Of course it is partisan, it's always partisan. These people are always, always the left-leaning WFH bubble that never ever go outside of their suburb or downtown. They don't think about people who don't live the same way they do.

If they did, they'd realize that there is no way that they can get their support to push in biking/public transit without getting them to give up their car willingly, which, surprise to no one, they aren't willing to do because it is simply too convenient.

So they push laws like minimum parking removals, lowering lanes via changing them to bike/bus only, pedestrian streets, etc etc to force every car owner to be inconvenienced. Getting their alternative transit utopia by artifically capping the usefulness of cars. There is no agreement or compromise with these types, the only way to stop them is to make sure they never get power. Luckily in the US at least, that can be accomplished by not voting Democrat. Unluckily, every major city is run by that party, and you can guess what that leads to...

 

[Yamamura]

Of course, not notcing the average theme park and cruise is purpose built for a relatively small area and you dont have to have either transport, long term housing. complex infrastructure or schedules

Or that keeping a cruse ship running requires you to have an army of Filipino indentured servants to maintain the facilities that make it nice to live in the first place. I've been on a cruise before, the funny thing is the PRIMARY downside I felt while living on the ship was how our neighbors were loud drunks and you could hear them thumping and banging through the walls while you were trying to sleep.

The only complaint I had was that what little elements of the urbanism they describe cruise ships have were the drawback. Also I got sick a lot because it's such a dense claustrophobic environment.

 

[maxell4hd]

Urbanists are NOT beating the tourist allegations. They really are just tourists who think what's good for tourists must be good for locals too.

And not surprisingly, the City of Paris continues to experience population decline in large part due to these policies that have made life expensive and miserable for long-term residents.

According to Insee: "In Paris, the population continues to decline, and has done so for the past nine years."

The reason for this tendency is clear: "Departures from the capital are motivated in particular by the high cost of housing, the reduced supply of large homes for families and the search for another way of life," the institute says.

...

However, with 48,520 residents, the upmarket 7th arrondissement has seen nearly 7,000 former residents pack up and leave – the most marked decline in the Paris region, down by 12.6 percent.

District mayor Rachida Dati has underlined that her arrondissement is plagued by traffic problems and building work that slows down the bus routes – "Paris is always dirtier, more insecure.

"For years, I have been asking Paris City Hall to create intermediate housing to enable families to stay in the 7th arrondissement. Finally, I fear that the increase in property tax decided by the city will also accelerate the departure of those who used to own their properties," Dati added.

https://www.rfi.fr/en/france/20221231-paris-population-drops-as-thousands-quit-capital-city-every-year