Not sure why you’re being downvoted, but judging by the replies it seems like everyone is assuming that by “people have no choice but to buy a personally-owned vehicle” you must have meant “people have no choice but to buy a giant gas-guzzling truck.”
It’s a crazy leap and a strawman and precisely the kind of lack of nuance that makes it all but impossible to have intelligent discussions about issues that matter. But then again, this is the internet…
I was specifically talking about gigantic gas guzzlers in my original comment. Not even in the US do all cars fall into that category. People do have choices and they choose the monstrosities. I was not in any way trying to blame people for owning a car.
Okay I get it, I was reading the comment in light of the post which talked about “mandatory expensive vehicle in order to be employable because we abandoned trains.”
Like, you’re right, nobody needs those giant trucks.
But also, even relying on smaller, more efficient POVs as a society is still a bad thing, and being required to buy something in that category is still an injustice that individual people don’t have much agency in, at least if they want to be able to get a job without uprooting their lives (and usually living somewhere more expensive in order to have pedestrian access to public transit)
I mean, given the comment the reply is to it’s not a crazy leap in logic or strawman considering the comment itself specifically was talking about gas guzzling vehicles and not having sympathy for people who bought them.
Perhaps as a reply to the original post it would be read differently but the context it’s in makes it so it reads the way it does.
Ah, yeah, I read it as if it were a top-level comment. I see the connection now.
I’ll still give her the benefit of the doubt and say she likely meant it in the broader sense, because her takes are usually fairly reasonable.
But yeah, the giant trucks are unnecessary in probably 98% of cases. Honestly even in the 2% where one is needed, a smaller one will do. But those are harder to find these days.
The problem of compulsory POV ownership more broadly though is systemic in the US, and people trapped in that situation don’t really have an alternative option.
Not sure why you’re being downvoted, but judging by the replies it seems like everyone is assuming that by “people have no choice but to buy a personally-owned vehicle” you must have meant “people have no choice but to buy a giant gas-guzzling truck.”
It’s a crazy leap and a strawman and precisely the kind of lack of nuance that makes it all but impossible to have intelligent discussions about issues that matter. But then again, this is the internet…
I was specifically talking about gigantic gas guzzlers in my original comment. Not even in the US do all cars fall into that category. People do have choices and they choose the monstrosities. I was not in any way trying to blame people for owning a car.
Okay I get it, I was reading the comment in light of the post which talked about “mandatory expensive vehicle in order to be employable because we abandoned trains.”
Like, you’re right, nobody needs those giant trucks.
But also, even relying on smaller, more efficient POVs as a society is still a bad thing, and being required to buy something in that category is still an injustice that individual people don’t have much agency in, at least if they want to be able to get a job without uprooting their lives (and usually living somewhere more expensive in order to have pedestrian access to public transit)
No argument there. I was just pointing out that people do have choices and unfortunately many people make dumb choices.
Yeah you can always just buy a civic
I mean, given the comment the reply is to it’s not a crazy leap in logic or strawman considering the comment itself specifically was talking about gas guzzling vehicles and not having sympathy for people who bought them.
Perhaps as a reply to the original post it would be read differently but the context it’s in makes it so it reads the way it does.
Ah, yeah, I read it as if it were a top-level comment. I see the connection now.
I’ll still give her the benefit of the doubt and say she likely meant it in the broader sense, because her takes are usually fairly reasonable.
But yeah, the giant trucks are unnecessary in probably 98% of cases. Honestly even in the 2% where one is needed, a smaller one will do. But those are harder to find these days.
The problem of compulsory POV ownership more broadly though is systemic in the US, and people trapped in that situation don’t really have an alternative option.