770
Murica (lemmy.ml)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] sorghum@sh.itjust.works 1 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

Not everyone lives in cities in the US and even then they are really spread out. It's the one thing I think the world doesn't comprehend about the US; we're spread way out.

[-] grue@lemmy.world 0 points 2 hours ago

Not everyone lives in cities in the US

But 80% do, so what's your excuse for refusing to solve the problem for the vast majority? The "and even then they are really spread out" is not it, BTW.

[-] sorghum@sh.itjust.works 0 points 31 minutes ago

Money for the most part. It's cheaper to own, no HoA or Condo association. Not to mention it's quieter.

https://youtu.be/3kf_im01RC0

[-] grue@lemmy.world 1 points 7 minutes ago
  • "'Murica big" has fuck-all to do with anything
  • Owning a single-family house in the suburbs only seems cheaper than owning a condo because single-family houses are massively subsidized. You're a welfare queen and you don't even realize it.
  • Cars are the things that make cities loud in the first place.
[-] infinitesunrise@slrpnk.net 15 points 7 hours ago

My brother in christ, the reason we got this spread out in the first place was a robust national network of passenger rail lines.

[-] CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social 4 points 7 hours ago

It isnt like the rest of the world doesnt have rural areas, unless one lives in like singapore or something. Something like 80% of the US population lives in urban areas, and most trips arent trips between cities except perhaps for those that are close to one another anyways. So even if one accepts that rural areas are car centric by nature, that still leaves the vast majority of the population that isnt affected by that. The buildings within cities being spread out over a wide space making transit less efficient is a failure of city design rather than something fundamental and unchangeable about the US, we have a fairly serious housing shortage anyways, if we really wanted to decrease car dependence we could absolutely build up denser housing in urban cores to shift the population over time into areas that allow for more efficient transportation.

[-] sorghum@sh.itjust.works -3 points 5 hours ago

we could absolutely build up denser housing in urban cores to shift the population over time into areas that allow for more efficient transportation.

Sounds like prison

[-] CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social 4 points 3 hours ago

No, it really doesn't, unless one simply does not know what "prison" means. Improving access to transportation is entirely counter to the point of a prison, given that the primary characteristic of a prison is being hard to leave.

[-] sorghum@sh.itjust.works 1 points 22 minutes ago

Having someone live below, above, and on either side within a couple of feet absolutely sounds like prison conditions. As far as hard to leave, unless you're walking or biking, you don't have that much freedom of movement, at least in comparison to a car or a motorcycle which becomes much more of a hassle of owning in cities. I'm also not saying cities should cater more to cars either.

[-] grue@lemmy.world 0 points 2 hours ago
[-] JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 3 points 4 hours ago

Or you know, just how cities work...

[-] piccolo@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 hours ago

Where are you going in rural america that you need to rent a car if you arent already living there?

[-] EtherWhack@lemmy.world -1 points 6 hours ago
[-] piccolo@sh.itjust.works 3 points 6 hours ago

Then... they can get their family to come pick'em up in their pickup truck.

[-] EtherWhack@lemmy.world -2 points 5 hours ago

So, someone's sister who works in a 100% remote IT job and who moved to a quiet rural town to raise her family is supposed to pick up and fit 5 people (including luggage) in her early 90's Civic hatchback from the closest airport/train station that's 100-200mi (160-320km) away?

I'd suggest that you work on your prejudice and critical thinking skills, as how that comment was worded was uncalled for and easy to poke holes in the logic of. You have to keep in mind that not everyone who lives in a quiet and isolated (even possibly self-sufficient) town is the stereotypical blue-collar farmhand that is commonly displayed by the media.

[-] grue@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

I just love how these threads always lead to anti-bike reactionaries coming up with increasingly contrived hypothetical situations to "justify" continuing to cling to their cars like a security blanket.

And then have the audacity to accuse the other side of "prejudice" and lack of "critical thinking skills."

You have to keep in mind that not everyone who lives in a quiet and isolated (even possibly self-sufficient) town is the stereotypical blue-collar farmhand that is commonly displayed by the media.

You have to keep in mind that only a tiny minority of Americans live in tiny and isolated towns at all, and pretending the solution for the vast majority of people doesn't work by pointing to those outliers is bad-faith idiotic bullshit.

[-] piccolo@sh.itjust.works 2 points 5 hours ago

You dont need to be a redneck to understand the value of a pickup in rural america. Shes gonna haul sheet of plywood with that hachback? Lmao

[-] JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 1 points 6 hours ago

I'd hope they'd pick you up

this post was submitted on 23 Feb 2025
770 points (97.2% liked)

Greentext

5158 readers
1276 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS