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

What's with the 1000/month car payment these dingdongs always bring up? Yeah some people are getting absolutely bent over on a used BMW from a buy-here pay-here lot, but it's not the standard. Most people either pay off their car loans or lease and get a new car every four years. On the other hand, that 1400 USD rent on the tiny bugman apartment off an alley in NYC is FOREVER, even as it falls down around you.
They think everybody else makes irresponsible financial decisions like they do. It's another case of bugman projection.
 
The rules of stop signs are: whoever gets there first has right-of-way, but if multiple people arrive at the same time, everyone yields to the person on their right.
That's a nice rule but in reality 99% of people on the roads, cyclists and motorists alike, do not know this and the reality is whoever has the guts to go first takes it.
 
It isn't just parks, but public parks are a good barometer for the area around it. Despite what every city builder will tell you, you can't plop one in the middle of the slums and expect it to be a super positive force all on its own.
Even in nice parks, they are ruined by progressive policies which allow homeless to camp out and shit everywhere like it's India. I doubt putting a fucking park in bumfuck Detroit will help, not like Tyrone is going to stop shooting either.
 
I'm sure it was this house (though from looking at it, the highway is still kind of difficult to see unless you were standing up). I'm sure his political beliefs still line up closer to r/fuckcars than people in this thread but he's clearly neither a bugman nor a hippie with that sort of thinkin
The best resource making fun of architecture editorials like that is

 
They think everybody else makes irresponsible financial decisions like they do. It's another case of bugman projection.
They also rarely bring up that purchasing a used car is a valid means to avoid having to finance a new one.

They totally dismiss used cars as a concept.

They couch it in language about how a used one would be "unreliable" or "unsafe" or "too dirty for the environment" or whatever... but all these complaints ultimately are just to force everyone to accept their false narrative - that car ownership is inescapable forever-debt and nothing you do can change it.

But it is funny to watch them suddenly have to admit to virtues of a new car in the process of demonizing buying used.



That's a nice rule but in reality 99% of people on the roads, cyclists and motorists alike, do not know this and the reality is whoever has the guts to go first takes it.

Most people also have enough courtesy and heads-up driving experience to make it work by waving someone through if the stalemate doesn't break naturally through initiative. As much as we like to complain about the quality of drivers around us? Truth is? Most of us work together to get to where we're going. I don't care what the vehicles code says about how much advance warning you have to give before signaling a lane change, as long as you SIGNAL and give me a couple seconds to react and let you in? We're good. I don't care if you want to speed, just don't tailgate me and signal to go around.

This idea from anti-car people that every motorist is a psychopathic monster out to kill people who won't get out of their way fast enough is truer about bicyclists who bitch and moan when a car drives around them, even if they give them enough berth.
 
Last edited:
Many of those city and state subreddits are well known and even mocked that they don't represent the city or state, they are in. A good portion of them aren't from the state or city as well. It's pretty amusing to see how they think their policies are popular, and their candidates will win (see anytime they upload a poll or anything involving elections), before getting shocked that their candidates and policies lose. Even then, if they are from the area, they aren't really the type who go out.
The local city/state subs have been especially bad since the election. I wish there was a way to filter out the r/politics tier posts because every third post has been TDS and posting about the anti Trump protests. The same protests that were mostly boomers when I drove by them.
 
That's a nice rule but in reality 99% of people on the roads, cyclists and motorists alike, do not know this and the reality is whoever has the guts to go first takes it.
The real rule is you shouldn't go first if you'll lose the resulting crash.

So the fucking ginormous garbage truck has right of way over cyclists, pedestrians, and cars.

This is the LAW OF THE URBAN JUNGLE!
 
Might be offtopic, but guess what? Adam is, again, politisperging. This guy should have his own thread if he doesn't already

make up your mind, dude, is centrism a tragedy, is it dead, or is it a dangeroush myth. FFS i miss when adam actually did urbanism and not generic far left biased AF politisperging but... here
Sorry I’m far behind, but lol.

Imagine you’re a slave. You’re walking along chained to other slaves, you’re [sic] hands and feet shackled and you have to move slowly in lockstep. As you shuffle along, you see some people that have broken free of their masters and they’re enjoying life. Do you feel anger and resentment toward them? Probably. Instead of hating your masters, you hate those that broke free.

Home owners sit at their porch and see the homeless and their lizard brain thinks about the $1000/month mortgage, the electrical bill, the maintenance and repairs and lawn care and on and on - financial burdens that take away from their families and their possible enjoyment of other things. They assuage themselves thinking about how much more comfortable they are in their wood cocoon, but those thoughts are only feeble attempts at masking the reality of their slavery.
If car owners are angry at bikers because we are stuck in traffic all the time, why are the same cyclists concerned about road safety?

They know that apart from a few scenarios, cars are faster than bikes and due to the reckless riding by cyclist they tend to put themselves in danger. But rather than cycling better, they take their aggression out on drivers.
 
That's a nice rule but in reality 99% of people on the roads, cyclists and motorists alike, do not know this and the reality is whoever has the guts to go first takes it.
Hell, if we could get people to even understand what the difference between the left and right lane are intended for that would be swell.
 
An urban planner reveals his totalitarian tendencies:
Besides LITERALLY "just one more train bro", remember that when they cry about neighborhoods being demolished for freeways they will actively encourage eminent domain for trains. It was never about the "people" or the "city", it's whatever they think was better.

For an example, it's doubtful they even know that there was significant unrest during development of the Amsterdam Metro when it came to right-of-way demolition. I bet that even though they cry about freeway clearances, they'll turn around and say that the people who protested against the metro were 100% in the wrong.

Fun fact - astroturf was invented as a means to create "instant parks" for urban bugmen that you could put anywhere, even on top of polluted industrial waste ground that couldn't support even crabgrass or the roof of a tenement block, and suddenly everyone would be happier and healthier because their fish brains would be completely fooled and respond positively to plastic fake grass and the stress of city life would just instinctually shut off.

Well, the name at least comes from the Houston Astros and their need for artificial turf in an enclosed stadium...though Wikipedia (while not mentioning the "instant park" aspect) mentions it was originally called "ChemGrass" which doesn't sound appealing at all.

What's with the 1000/month car payment these dingdongs always bring up? Yeah some people are getting absolutely bent over on a used BMW from a buy-here pay-here lot, but it's not the standard. Most people either pay off their car loans or lease and get a new car every four years. On the other hand, that 1400 USD rent on the tiny bugman apartment off an alley in NYC is FOREVER, even as it falls down around you.
We know that their comparisons either rely on outright lies or hypothetical bullshit like assuming that trains are 100% full 100% of the time, but a house payment is WAY better than rent on an apartment, if only for the reason that even if you were paying it forever, the bank will not give a shit about how you keep or decorate your house, but apartments have a litany of rules and regulations (along with the inevitable "fuck you, that's why" catch-all clause) which are selectively enforced.

This idea from anti-car people that every motorist is a psychopathic monster out to kill people who won't get out of their way fast enough is truer about bicyclists who bitch and moan when a car drives around them, even if they give them enough berth.
Pretty sure there was a quaawaa post within the last ten pages that with ample evidence that indicated that they think that motorists are psycopathic, angry people because they are.

The real rule is you shouldn't go first if you'll lose the resulting crash.

So the fucking ginormous garbage truck has right of way over cyclists, pedestrians, and cars.

This is the LAW OF THE URBAN JUNGLE!
My old driver's handbook said this about trains (paraphrased): "Never try to race a train to a crossing. Even in a tie, you lose."

Cyclists on some level know this, they have a hearty chuckle every time a car gets hit by a train but cry when a cyclist gets hit by a car. On that note, while there was no video, a few years ago some journoscum (possibly more than just journoscum) FAFO'd when it came to a railroad crossing, and you just know the motherfucker ran every red light he didn't like (I said so myself) until his luck ran out.
 
We know that their comparisons either rely on outright lies or hypothetical bullshit like assuming that trains are 100% full 100% of the time, but a house payment is WAY better than rent on an apartment, if only for the reason that even if you were paying it forever, the bank will not give a shit about how you keep or decorate your house, but apartments have a litany of rules and regulations (along with the inevitable "fuck you, that's why" catch-all clause) which are selectively enforced.
It's always baffled me that they hate on HOAs while promoting multifamily housing as if there is any that DOESN'T have an HOA (or worse, you can at least run for the HOA board if you disagree with how it's run, with a landlord, what they say goes).
 
It's always baffled me that they hate on HOAs while promoting multifamily housing as if there is any that DOESN'T have an HOA (or worse, you can at least run for the HOA board if you disagree with how it's run, with a landlord, what they say goes).
And the usual worst a HOA might do in single-family homes is require you paint a certain color, trim your grass, or not have your trash cans out overnight.

A condo board will have similar onerous requirements and every once in awhile hit you with a multi-thousand dollar levy for some deferred maintenance they forgot to save for.

Or the whole fucking thing will collapse. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surfside_condominium_collapse
 
It's always baffled me that they hate on HOAs while promoting multifamily housing as if there is any that DOESN'T have an HOA (or worse, you can at least run for the HOA board if you disagree with how it's run, with a landlord, what they say goes).
It's easier for them to sit around and bitch, scratching their asses instead of doing something worthwhile which includes changing things, or running for them. And believe me, no one is going to vote for the greasy balding redditor. Can they even talk at a podium?
 
/r/fuckcars member runs a stop sign:
View attachment 7432541
View attachment 7432544
There's a reason why he's only showing his rear cam footage: the nigga was in the right and the faggot was in the wrong.

He does stop, but he starts moving immediately without waiting for the car on his right to move. The rules of stop signs are: whoever gets there first has right-of-way, but if multiple people arrive at the same time, everyone yields to the person on their right.


View attachment 7432562
Google Maps (unsurprisingly, this occurred in Pittsburgh's "gayborhood")

View attachment 7432567
View attachment 7432571

lmao he's so naive:
View attachment 7432559

Source (Archive)
*almost gets run over because he didn't give the appropriate right if way*
"sir I'm here to help you do you need help?"
I have become so radicalized against cyclists that I genuinely don't care if they get hit on purpose. If I hear about a cyclist being killed on the news I don't care if the driver is at fault. I pray I get jury duty because I will hang that jury.
 
Even in nice parks, they are ruined by progressive policies which allow homeless to camp out and shit everywhere like it's India. I doubt putting a fucking park in bumfuck Detroit will help, not like Tyrone is going to stop shooting either.
Last time I tried to take my niece to a park (in a crime free middle class neighborhood!) I saw drug paraphernalia/human poop/evidence of hobo encampments. Now I just take her to Chuckie Cheese/indoor play places.

Somewhat off topic, but I'm sick of the liberal tolerance of hobos. A good majority of them are mentally ill drug addicts who shit in public/toss heroin needles everywhere. Round them up; put 'em in jail for all I care. If anything, they'd probably do good in jail - food, shelter, no access to drugs.
 
I have become so radicalized against cyclists that I genuinely don't care if they get hit on purpose. If I hear about a cyclist being killed on the news I don't care if the driver is at fault. I pray I get jury duty because I will hang that jury.
For the amount of times they act like kamikaze pilots, I lost plenty of sympathy. Even when there's bike lanes they refuse to stay in them.
Somewhat off topic, but I'm sick of the liberal tolerance of hobos. A good majority of them are mentally ill drug addicts who shit in public/toss heroin needles everywhere. Round them up; put 'em in jail for all I care. If anything, they'd probably do good in jail - food, shelter, no access to drugs.
Getting chased by one who had a boxcutter when I was in universe really fucking sucked. I lost empathy for the meth heads too, they may not be homeless like the ones in progressive cities, but they have ruined areas where people used to take their kids to. Yes, McDonalds is shit food and you shouldn't eat there, but there was a play place I remember parents would take their children to play in. Since the meth heads use the interior of the McDonald's, no parent understandably brings their kids, so they took down the play area since meth heads were also shooting up in there. It's sad when many drug addicts fuck everything up for the majority.
 
Somewhat off topic, but I'm sick of the liberal tolerance of hobos. A good majority of them are mentally ill drug addicts who shit in public/toss heroin needles everywhere. Round them up; put 'em in jail for all I care. If anything, they'd probably do good in jail - food, shelter, no access to drugs.
Then you get people complaining about "hostile architecture". Now I am sympathetic to people down on their luck, but a lot of these guys who are doing what they're doing are not that. Usually what they're describing is making a bench have arm rests so they can't ensure no one else is able to sit by occupying the whole thing by laying down on it.

It just brings up many questions like, why should they be entitled to the bench/property? Why is the property owner responsible for taking care of a societal problem? All the the "hostile" arm rests do is ensure that the bench can go back to being for its intended purpose again which is sitting. Same reason they wouldn't want the subway to be a mobile homeless shelter/drug den (more than it's already become).
 
Last time I tried to take my niece to a park (in a crime free middle class neighborhood!) I saw drug paraphernalia/human poop/evidence of hobo encampments. Now I just take her to Chuckie Cheese/indoor play places.

Somewhat off topic, but I'm sick of the liberal tolerance of hobos. A good majority of them are mentally ill drug addicts who shit in public/toss heroin needles everywhere. Round them up; put 'em in jail for all I care. If anything, they'd probably do good in jail - food, shelter, no access to drugs.
The issue is that progressives see "homelessness" as a monolithic category.

There are essentially two categories of homelessness: Transient homelessness and chronic homelessness. Those who are transiently homeless are normal people who have simply found themselves in a rough patch. Families who have lost their home in a flood/storm/fire. People who have had the bank foreclose their property. Kids fleeing abusive home lives without anywhere they can stay. These are people who, if given assistance, will quickly get back on their feet. They are only homeless because of very specific and unfortunate circumstances, and are highly unlikely to become homeless again.

The chronically homeless, on the other hand, have more profound issues. They're the people you're thinking of. Drug addiction, mental illness, personality disorders, or a combination of all three. They are unsafe, erratic, and unpredictable. Many of them don't even want to be helped in the first place. Any help they are given to get off the street will be quickly undone, and they will keep finding themselves back on the streets unless they are institutionalized.

The issue is that progressives tend to be quite naive and a bit sheltered, and they don't make this distinction. They idealistically assume everyone is fundamentally 'good' and just needs a soft but helping hand to get out of the rut they're in, and that just isn't true of everyone. They try and help all homeless people the same way, which is harmful to the transiently homeless and simply unproductive with the chronically homeless.
 
And the usual worst a HOA might do in single-family homes is require you paint a certain color, trim your grass, or not have your trash cans out overnight.

A condo board will have similar onerous requirements and every once in awhile hit you with a multi-thousand dollar levy for some deferred maintenance they forgot to save for.

Or the whole fucking thing will collapse. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surfside_condominium_collapse
Steve Lehto's channel has hundreds and hundreds of videos on HOA legal cases. I would never ever buy a home, especially a SFH in an HOA. Besides the "you never own your home either the bank owns it or you pay rent to the government" if you live in an HOA you *really* don't own it. You may say it's just about not leaving your grass 17" tall with cowtails or not painting it Hot Plum Purple but the nightmares are endless when they decide they don't like you.

Getting what amounts to an eviction notice on your HOUSE that you OWN because the HOA decided you've shown "repeated and flagrant violation" of the CC&Rs due to you driving a pickup which is now a "commercial vehicle" is not a pleasant experience. And that's on top of having to pay a micro-government on top of your local government on top of your state government. Build a fence if you don't like looking at your neighbors, don't start/invest into an HOA.
 
Back