• Zephorah@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    3 hours ago

    The US huge. Unless you live in a metro area and never leave you’re going to need a vehicle.

    Moving state to state, generally, it will take you an entire day at a freeway speed to get 2 states over. We have 48 on the drivable side.

    • CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      You could similarly say that the Europe is huge, or that China is huge, or that the whole planet is huge, and therefore the people living there must need a vehicle. Except, most people dont leave their local area all that often, and when they do, theres nothing that inherently requires that the vehicle used to do so much be individually owned. This isnt to say that nobody needs a car, obviously if you live way out in the middle of nowhere, running transit might not be so viable- but that does not describe how and where most people live, even in the US, and for the majority that do live in urban areas, the size of the whole country is irrelevant to if they would need cars if we just built the proper infrastructure.

        • CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 hour ago

          There are many such areas, what I was trying to say was more that that is a solvable problem, if the government of the area was sufficiently motivated to solve it, rather than something like “we’re too big for anything but cars”, which is more of an excuse to not do any of that change to the infrastructure because it implies that nothing can reasonably be done and that cars are simply the natural way of things.

          • Boomer Humor Doomergod@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            35 minutes ago

            The problem is that making my area pedestrian friendly would involve doing a lot more than just adding sidewalks.

            For example, it would make much more sense to link all the cul de sacs with walking/biking paths. But to do that we’d need to bulldoze some houses, get easements from property owners, and then pay for the paths to be put in while hearing construction equipment for months.

            And our local government just doesn’t have the power to do that in a reasonable amount of time, or with any guarantees of it even surviving election season.

            And that’s not even talking about dealing with improving the main thoroughfare which is a state highway, meaning the local government has no say in how it’s built.

      • CombatWombat@feddit.online
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 hour ago

        The Local Group, which includes the Milky Way galaxy, is over 10 million light years, so you can easily see that I have no choice but to own a car to be able to get around.

    • FishFace@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      The size isn’t that relevant. Trains are far better than cars for long distance travel. The problem with the US is the many areas of low but non-zero population density.

      To accommodate that you need a good rail network and then probably cars to take you the last few hours. This would work best if those cars were self driving, so they can get back to a hub rather than wherever you are in bumfuck nowhere.