After reading most of the no need to have a car post,i can really see why drivers think cyclist are A-Holes. Dont forget,cars have as much of a right as bikes. If you can be car free, fine but dont rag on the ones that need,want cars. I think its cool if you can get away with it but i'm a big boy and nobody has brainwashed me. I LIKE CARS. I LOVE MY CAR. I HOPE I ALWAYS HAVE A CAR,A FAST ONE. I happen to be a cyclist.

I LIKE CARS. I LOVE MY CAR. I HOPE I ALWAYS HAVE A CAR,A FAST ONE. I happen to be a cyclist.


I like bikes....I've always liked bikes..... I hope I always have a bike.....a FAST bike...

http://www.bianchiusa.com/06_fg_lite.html

my bike goes faster than your bike!! hahahaha!!!!!!!

Ladies and Gentlemen,
I think we have reach the conclusion of this conversation. Some people do not want the extra responiblity and financial cost that is associated with a car, while others like the ease of use and speed able with a car, so let's just leave it at that.

DataJunkie and FXjohn,

The point I'm making is: suburbs were originally much more livable places. You didn't even need a car to live in one. Every corner had a butcher, a baker (a candlestick maker?). In Europe, this is still common and in Canada, I'm happy to say we don't do too badly with this either.

I've lived in the US. This is NOT the way US suburbs are planned. You DO practically need a car to get around most US suburbs and certainly in rural areas.
It doesn't have to be that way and it hasn't always been that way.

Same question: have you seen the film "The End of Suburbia"? Disregarding the points it makes on "peak oil," it raises some very good points about suburban planning.

My next project, just for you guys, is to take a digital camera on a 15 minute walk around my suburb. Over the course of that walk, you'll see grocery stores, banks, video stores, vets, hair salons, clothing stores - anything you can imagine needing to "live." Many suburbs aren't planned so well.

I have no issue with cars or car ownership. The more important issue is why do we seem to depend on them and are there ways, as a species, we could break some of that dependence? Better urban planning would be a start. In the meantime, there are a lot of places where you really have no choice but to own one. A 10mile drive to the nearest shopping center isn't conducive to cycling.

I LIKE CARS. I LOVE MY CAR. I HOPE I ALWAYS HAVE A CAR,A FAST ONE. I happen to be a cyclist.

great addition to the living car free forum! :rolleyes:

I like bikes....I've always liked bikes..... I hope I always have a bike.....a FAST bike...

http://www.bianchiusa.com/06_fg_lite.html

my bike goes faster than your bike!! hahahaha!!!!!!!

I've never seen a fast bike,only a fast rider.

great addition to the living car free forum! :rolleyes:

Thanks!

Ladies and Gentlemen,
I think we have reach the conclusion of this conversation. Some people do not want the extra responiblity and financial cost that is associated with a car, while others like the ease of use and speed able with a car, so let's just leave it at that.
You are in the right ballpark.

But...

Some want to have a car, but without a great deal of expense. This is what the OP is driving at (no pun intended). Assuming it's already paid for, and doesn't cost much to maintain, why not have a car? Or maybe that could be better said: if it's not costing you much, why get rid of a car you already have?

Using myself as an example of this, I keep my old beater because I have tasks for which I feel my old beater is the best (simplest and least expensive) tool.

For some carfree folks, it's more than just "not want[ing] the extra responsibility and financial cost," it's a moral choice grounded in the belief that car culture does so much harm that owning a car is immoral. I share that belief to the extent that I believe unnecessary car use is immoral. What's "unnecessary?" That's between you and your conscience (if applicable).

Also, for some car owners, it's more than just "ease of use and speed," it's the ability to live, work and/or raise kids in places they couldn't do these things without a car. This is also a choice based on values, though many deny they have any real choice -- and some people do have more choice than others.

We shouldn't have to choose between a healthy, moral life and a fulfilling, rewarding one. Good city and regional planning can give more of us the best of both worlds: a wide range of opportunities (economic, social, cultural, et cet) and all vital services (education, health, et cet), entirely accessible by public transport, foot or bike.

YMMV.

Ladies and Gentlemen,
I think we have reach the conclusion of this conversation. Some people do not want the extra responiblity and financial cost that is associated with a car, while others like the ease of use and speed able with a car, so let's just leave it at that.
Not exactly; a more accurate statement might be that some posters don't need/want a car because their chosen lifestyle assumes/seeks no responsibility for others' transportation needs.

...Also, for some car owners, it's more than just "ease of use and speed," it's the ability to live, work and/or raise kids in places they couldn't do these things without a car. This is also a choice based on values, though many deny they have any real choice -- and some people do have more choice than others.

We shouldn't have to choose between a healthy, moral life and a fulfilling, rewarding one. Good city and regional planning can give more of us the best of both worlds: a wide range of opportunities (economic, social, cultural, et cet) and all vital services (education, health, et cet), entirely accessible by public transport, foot or bike. ...

(emphasis added)

Couldn't have said it better myself.

The point I'm making is: suburbs were originally much more livable places. You didn't even need a car to live in one. Every corner had a butcher, a baker (a candlestick maker?)...I've lived in the US. This is NOT the way US suburbs are planned. You DO practically need a car to get around most US suburbs and certainly in rural areas. It doesn't have to be that way and it hasn't always been that way.
I can't speak for Canadian places.

But where in the U.S. suburbs or rural areas has it NOT been this way since the 30's. Where are those U.S. suburbs that had a butcher, a baker or candlestick maker on every corner AND had nearby significant employment opportunities for someone besides the butcher, a baker or candlestick maker?

But where in the U.S. suburbs or rural areas has it NOT been this way since the 30's. Where are those U.S. suburbs that had a butcher, a baker or candlestick maker on every corner AND had nearby significant employment opportunities for someone besides the butcher, a baker or candlestick maker?

well, i think the older suburbs based off of large cities like new york, philly, boston, chicago, etc. were like that. now, those suburbs have merged with the city and became neighborhoods instead. but they were considered suburbs at one time...

well, i think the older suburbs based off of large cities like new york, philly, boston, chicago, etc. were like that. now, those suburbs have merged with the city and became neighborhoods instead. but they were considered suburbs at one time...
Possibly; but the employment opportunities were in the city; which may have been accessible by an efficient trolley/rail system. Even if those trolleys and rail magically reappeared today to the suburbs, few if any suburban residents would choose give up personal transportation to share public transportation "opportunities" with the current residents of inner cities who have no economic choices.

You're pedaling as hard as you can to justify and rationalize your car ownership.
I don't own a car, I'm car-free. I just don't condemn people who have not made the same choices based on various factors in their individual lives. Sound rational? Those cars are not "huge," nor is the house. It seems like FX has a pretty good setup to me.
:)

Yes, I know I did not cover every single point on each side, but I wanted this interesting conversation to end on a positive note before name-calling or religous postulation really started.

Well, pre WWI half the people in this country were farmers.
Surely you don't deny RURAL folks an automobile???

Nobody's denying anybody anything..this is just forum for discussion of different attitudes and choices.

Is this the preferred Car-Free/Simple Life dream being marketed on this list by several posters? Don't worry, be happy; pack up all your possessions in a Brown Paper Bag?
http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/1430/moneyforbeer3kg.th.jpg (http://img33.imageshack.us/my.php?image=moneyforbeer3kg.jpg)

No.

After reading most of the no need to have a car post,i can really see why drivers think cyclist are A-Holes. Dont forget,cars have as much of a right as bikes.

Don't forget, this is the "living car free" forum. What did you expect?


nobody has brainwashed me. I LIKE CARS. I LOVE MY CAR. I HOPE I ALWAYS HAVE A CAR,A FAST ONE.

ROFL!

It's far easier to be car free in NYC than it is to be in Forsyth, Missouri.
Exactly right. So what's wrong with Forsyth, MO? What can folks do there to make the area more livable and especially more bikeable?

You and so many others are experts at pointing out the obvious. "It's easier in NYC." "It's harder if you have kids." "I don't have time to ride." "I don't know how to change brake pads." "I can't get the dogfood home from the Walmart." "The traffic around here is murder." And so on ad infinitum. Many of these are legitimate reasons to keep a car, some are just excuses for a lack of trying.

Let's take the next step, if we agree that car and oil dependence are damaging to our society. What can we, as individuals and as a society, do to make it easier for country folks, suburbanites, families, etc.? What changes need to be made in land use plans, zoning laws and traffic patterns? Most important, which hindrances are actual fatal flaws in the infrastructure and which merely reflect a lack of imagination?

You are in the right ballpark.

But...

Some want to have a car, but without a great deal of expense. This is what the OP is driving at (no pun intended). Assuming it's already paid for, and doesn't cost much to maintain, why not have a car? Or maybe that could be better said: if it's not costing you much, why get rid of a car you already have?

Using myself as an example of this, I keep my old beater because I have tasks for which I feel my old beater is the best (simplest and least expensive) tool.

For some carfree folks, it's more than just "not want[ing] the extra responsibility and financial cost," it's a moral choice grounded in the belief that car culture does so much harm that owning a car is immoral. I share that belief to the extent that I believe unnecessary car use is immoral. What's "unnecessary?" That's between you and your conscience (if applicable).

Also, for some car owners, it's more than just "ease of use and speed," it's the ability to live, work and/or raise kids in places they couldn't do these things without a car. This is also a choice based on values, though many deny they have any real choice -- and some people do have more choice than others.

We shouldn't have to choose between a healthy, moral life and a fulfilling, rewarding one. Good city and regional planning can give more of us the best of both worlds: a wide range of opportunities (economic, social, cultural, et cet) and all vital services (education, health, et cet), entirely accessible by public transport, foot or bike.

YMMV.Very well put, especially the last paragraph. Even car owners must, if they are rational beings, realize that our society has been engineered for the automobile. That's not a criticism, just an observation. That which has been engineered can be re-engineered, and eventually will be. Also just an observation.

I can't speak for Canadian places.

But where in the U.S. suburbs or rural areas has it NOT been this way since the 30's. Where are those U.S. suburbs that had a butcher, a baker or candlestick maker on every corner AND had nearby significant employment opportunities for someone besides the butcher, a baker or candlestick maker?

Our little suburb over here looks like Main Street America, circa 1950. Yeah, we have 5 pubs within walking distance, but 2 streets over we have 2 banks, a post office/newsagent, the family doctor, a mini-grocery, a shoe store, 3 fish & chip shops, a decent cafe, the veterinarian, 2 realtors, a jeweller, a bakery, a TAB, a chemist, and a few other specialty shops. My wife, who doesn't drive, finds this very convenient, as would anyone.

The only employment I found at a decent wage is off a main highway, with no public transport. I rode a few days last year, but it's not really safe to ride on the side of 80 or 90Km/h roads in a major transport corridor. My wife works at the hospital, and starts at 6. The first bus is at 7:07AM. Her knees could not take the long, steep climb to the hospital. I'm not making excuses, as I have no need to. We try to ride our bikes when we can. Do we ride to the local fruit barn, and buy poor quality produce, or do we drive out of town to the one that has nice produce? And with 3 kids in the house, doing a full week's shopping by bike is not really feasible. We do what we can to minimize our impact. That's all we can ask of anyone else.

I don't own a car, I'm car-free. I just don't condemn people who have not made the same choices based on various factors in their individual lives. Sound rational? Those cars are not "huge," nor is the house. It seems like FX has a pretty good setup to me.
:)Nor do I condemn him or anybody else who must have a car due to shortfalls in the design of their environments, which might even include a majority of North Americans.

I do quarrel with (not condemn) those who accept current land use patterns as a given, while never questioning the design assumptions that have made our infrastructure so hostile to those who would prefer not to have a car. If you can't live without a car, at least try to understand the reasons, and realize that generations of government planners have stolen your options in order to benefit certain industries.

I also will kindly (I hope) dispute with those who mistakenly believe that they cannot live without a car, when they have not tried creatively to surmount the various obstacles they imagine stand in the way of carfree living.

I would much less kindly dispute those (not you or the OP) who dare to imply that those of us who don't drive cars are irresponsible hippies who can't handle modern life in the big city. Except I think it's better to ignore trolls.

Roody, I hope you find something of interest in this tidbit. At the bike shop where I work for a few hours a week, a very nice couple came in to buy helmets the other day. Neither had an Aussie accent, nor did they have the same accent. Turns out that they're from England and Scotland by way of Northern California. Naturally, I asked what brought them to Newcastle. Their response? They were tired of living on top of their neighbours, and wanted to live someplace with a bit more space.

Roody, I hope you find something of interest in this tidbit. At the bike shop where I work for a few hours a week, a very nice couple came in to buy helmets the other day. Neither had an Aussie accent, nor did they have the same accent. Turns out that they're from England and Scotland by way of Northern California. Naturally, I asked what brought them to Newcastle. Their response? They were tired of living on top of their neighbours, and wanted to live someplace with a bit more space.
Well England and Scotland were deforested by the 15th century. Then they came over here and deforested my Michigan in less than 50 years, by 1900. Don't turn your back on them out there or they'll take you trees too. :D

Seriously, the need for space is certainly one of the "needs" driving this insane society. I still can't figure out why my taxes have to go to pay for the sewer hookup of somebody who chooses to live on God's quarter-acre, 25 miles from town. I also helped pay for the freeway interchange that makes possible the 50 minute commute from his McMansion that he likes to cuss about every afternoon. And then he gets home, garages his SUV, and brags about how hard *HE* worked to enjoy life in the "country."

Well England and Scotland were deforested by the 15th century. Then they came over here and deforested my Michigan in less than 50 years, by 1900. Don't turn your back on them out there or they'll take you trees too. :D



Haven't been to the UP lately?...THERE'S GOD'S COUNTRY...you can HAVE Florida :D

Just kidding...let's ride up north some time, roody

If I had gotten rid of all my car expenses sooner, I would own my house free and clear today because my mortgage would already be paid off. Now that I am car-free, all of the money that I would be spending on engine work, gasket head work, transmission work, car purchase costs, insurance, gasoline, licensing, fees, is now goining towards strengthtening a nest egg and paying off my house several years ahead of schedule. This means I will be debt-free and able to have a lot more flexibility in my career arrangements. Getting rid of my car is helping me get my life back.

I've lived in the US. This is NOT the way US suburbs are planned. You DO practically need a car to get around most US suburbs and certainly in rural areas. It doesn't have to be that way and it hasn't always been that way.


It isn't always that way. There are burbs where you can bike/walk/bus 6 days a week, and keep the car in the garage for the odd once-a-week errand. I agree with the OP that cars don't have to be expensive - the less you use them, the less expensive they are. A 15 year old Toyota is cheap to buy and own and nearly maintenance free when you only drive it once every week or two. It will run forever on cheap spare parts. It isn't car-free living, but it can be very close, and for my money it's the same concept. (Not that I'm saying this sub-forum should go that way.) Sometimes I still feel car-free even though technically I'm not. Most people with the motivation and a bit of planning can do the same. That is how I hope we can transform our burbs and cities.

It isn't always that way. There are burbs where you can bike/walk/bus 6 days a week, and keep the car in the garage for the odd once-a-week errand. I agree with the OP that cars don't have to be expensive - the less you use them, the less expensive they are. A 15 year old Toyota is cheap to buy and own and nearly maintenance free when you only drive it once every week or two. It will run forever on cheap spare parts. It isn't car-free living, but it can be very close, and for my money it's the same concept. (Not that I'm saying this sub-forum should go that way.) Sometimes I still feel car-free even though technically I'm not. Most people with the motivation and a bit of planning can do the same. That is how I hope we can transform our burbs and cities.
That's exactly how I feel about it. If I didn't own a car, I would need to rent or borrow one fairly often. It would cost more, be more of a hassle and cause the same amount of environmental harm.

So maybe some of us are "carfree" in the sense of not being shackled into driving one everywhere.

Don't forget, this is the "living car free" forum. What did you expect?

Intelligent discussion about ways to use a bicycle to facilitate living car-free? Not smug self rightous moralizing nor smarmy Luddite rants bashing middle class "cager-culture".

I know, foolish me.

Is this the preferred Car-Free/Simple Life dream being marketed on this list by several posters? Don't worry, be happy; pack up all your possessions in a Brown Paper Bag?
<With picture of some simple life comrades>
No.

Could have fooled me. No one on this Forum will be bashing those guys for being "fat butt cagers" despoiling the environment for those who appreciate the happy, uncomplicated, carefree/carfree simple life.

If I had gotten rid of all my car expenses sooner, I would own my house free and clear today because my mortgage would already be paid off. Now that I am car-free, all of the money that I would be spending on engine work, gasket head work, transmission work, car purchase costs, insurance, gasoline, licensing, fees, is now goining towards strengthtening a nest egg and paying off my house several years ahead of schedule. This means I will be debt-free and able to have a lot more flexibility in my career arrangements. Getting rid of my car is helping me get my life back.

If you had to get rid of your car to get your life back,somethings wrong. I'm like you,no debt,just reg bills and a house payment,oh and 2 cars. House will be paid off in 7 years.

Nor do I condemn him or anybody else who must have a car due to shortfalls in the design of their environments, which might even include a majority of North Americans.

I do quarrel with (not condemn) those who accept current land use patterns as a given, while never questioning the design assumptions that have made our infrastructure so hostile to those who would prefer not to have a car. If you can't live without a car, at least try to understand the reasons, and realize that generations of government planners have stolen your options in order to benefit certain industries.

I also will kindly (I hope) dispute with those who mistakenly believe that they cannot live without a car, when they have not tried creatively to surmount the various obstacles they imagine stand in the way of carfree living.

I would much less kindly dispute those (not you or the OP) who dare to imply that those of us who don't drive cars are irresponsible hippies who can't handle modern life in the big city. Except I think it's better to ignore trolls.

OK,lets go,tell me why i can be car free? I cant ride to work. 5:30 in the morning through the worst part of town with no bike lane and poles that block half the sidewalks.
Wife cant get up that early to take me because she doesnt get home until 9-10pm and works 10-12 hours aday.
My mom is old and sick and i take her shopping,to the doctor and none of those are close.
My wifes father had a stroke and at 6'4" and 275 pounds of dead weight she needs a van to get him in to everywhere.
Thats a few reasons some just cant be car free and i dont think anyone rags on any of you that can be,it pretty cool but dont tell me we can do it if we really want to.

5:30 in the morning through the worst part of town with no bike lane and poles that block half the sidewalks.

Some here don't think bike lanes are worth very much. Personally I think they're nice. But I ride on the road, through the worst parts of town, without bike lanes. I ride on roads where people drive 55mph and make motorists go around me to get by.

As for transporting elderly people in your situation: I suggest you use an automobile.

Thats a few reasons some just cant be car free and i dont think anyone rags on any of you that can be,it pretty cool but dont tell me we can do it if we really want to.
Yes, but none of those reasons mean anything to sanctimonious dreamers and holier-than-thou car free moralists. These posters apparantly assume that their preference for a "simple life" gets them extra credit from The Great Spirit or whomever they think blesses them over all others.

Their lack of empathy for others' situations or lifestyles is astounding unless they really are simple.

If they can do it by avoiding all personal responsibility for others, you should too, and phooey on assuming family responsibilities. At least that's the way the extreme simple life holy rollers come across on this Forum.

Yes, but none of those reasons mean anything to sanctimonious dreamers or holier-than-thou car free moralists. Their lack of empathy for others' situations or lifestyles is astounding unless they really are simple.

If they do it by avoiding all responsibility for others, you should too, and phooey on assuming family responsibilities. At least that's the way the extreme simple life holy rollers come across on this Forum.

some people's situations do not allow them to be car free. but those are their choices. nobody puts a gun to your head and forces you to have 2 kids, a house in the country, a job 50 miles away, and a bunch of stuff to haul around.

being car free (remember the forum is titled "living car free") is possible for some of us because we made drastically different lifestyle choices. there is far too much talk in here about cars and the justifications for owning one. why would anyone come to a forum about living car free only to justify their car usage? it's totally inappropriate. some forums just aren't meant for some people. i don't go into the 50+ forum and talk about how young i am for example. the 50+ forum isn't meant for me. just like the living car free forum isn't meant for folks who want to talk about car ownership.

being car free (remember the forum is titled "living car free") is possible for some of us because we made drastically different lifestyle choices.
That's it in a nutshell. The voluntary car free crowd is NOT representative of anything but a tiny sliver of individuals who have made drastically different lifestyle choices; bicycles are besides the point for these counterculture afficianados. Few individuals will make drastically different lifestyle decisions just to accomodate bicycling.

If bicycling is irrelevant in this forum why does it exist at all on Bike Forums? It certainly was a good move to direct all such traffic here from the advocacy and commuting forum, since the car free moralizing was counterproductive to discourse there. Perhaps it would be good to set it up as a subthread of the a Political or Religous forums. The Car free (and bicycling irrelevant) social, political, moral and economic rants and proselytizing belong in a political or religous forum.

When individuals write about how easily bicycles can replace all automobile usage for everybody, it is writen from the perspective of someone who has a drastically different lifestyle than everybody else.

When individuals write about how easily bicycles can replace all automobile usage for everybody, it is writen from the perspective of someone who has a drastically different lifestyle than everybody else.

true. the pattern of discussion often goes like this: someone makes a generalizing statement about how great life is without a car. a few agree and then someone posts something about needing a car once in a while or all the time. then we all get derailed and end up talking about car ownership and why having one is a good idea, etc.

the truth is - car free individuals are a very small subset of the population. only in a few places in this country is it reasonsible to do so. the way we've decided to set up our societies means that the vast majority are, in fact, car owners. but that doesn't mean that every discussion has to be about car ownership. i actaully had the idea that this forum would be a break from all that - but it's basically become the car forum.

Look at the title and the first thread. Thats was the first thing i saw,not which fourm it was in. If it would have said something about be bike free,i would have read with interest but no reason to reply as i cant be nor want to be car free. I sure dont have a problem with someone being able to be carfree but for 99% of us,its just not possible

Haven't been to the UP lately?...THERE'S GOD'S COUNTRY...you can HAVE Florida :D

Just kidding...let's ride up north some time, roody
That sounds great. I'm going to do my first century this spring (on a mountain bike!), then buy a touring bike this summer or fall and really hit the road. You'll have to drive us up there, of course. :)

being car free (remember the forum is titled "living car free") is possible for some of us because we made drastically different lifestyle choices. there is far too much talk in here about cars and the justifications for owning one. why would anyone come to a forum about living car free only to justify their car usage? it's totally inappropriate. some forums just aren't meant for some people. i don't go into the 50+ forum and talk about how young i am for example. the 50+ forum isn't meant for me. just like the living car free forum isn't meant for folks who want to talk about car ownership.

+1

I-Like-to-bike:

You seem to always make generalizations of the folks around here... Anytime someone posts an intelligent message about tips on being car-free, you're not there to congratulate them. You overlook all the people who are here with the "right" intentions and go on categorizing everyone into branches like "sanctimonious dreamers and holier-than-thou car free moralists".

Again, you want to use cars, I’m not against you, but why are you devoting so much time and energy into bashing the car-free moralists Get out if it aggravates you?

Hell, even some calls for helps with aspect of the car free life without any political views or trashing of the cars will turn out with some car owners defending their lifestyle. So the small amounts of helpful threads become infested (with political views from both ends I'll grant you that). It is a bit aggravating.

While I agree that there are many posts politically biased messages on this board, this happens on every forum from my experience. Also I must remind you that this forum is polluted by political views from both ends (car owners, and car-free alike). Those who are here really looking for help need this section to be here. The bike CAN be a great tool to facilitate life for those who want to be car free, or even car-light, WHATEVER their reasons are. Move that to another section and then the small amounts of help available will go away.

Hey, I’m probably not white as snow, I might’ve posted some political views here, but I DO respect those who chose a different lifestyle than me. Do YOU?

some people's situations do not allow them to be car free. but those are their choices. nobody puts a gun to your head and forces you to have 2 kids, a house in the country, a job 50 miles away, and a bunch of stuff to haul around.

being car free (remember the forum is titled "living car free") is possible for some of us because we made drastically different lifestyle choices. there is far too much talk in here about cars and the justifications for owning one. why would anyone come to a forum about living car free only to justify their car usage? it's totally inappropriate. some forums just aren't meant for some people. i don't go into the 50+ forum and talk about how young i am for example. the 50+ forum isn't meant for me. just like the living car free forum isn't meant for folks who want to talk about car ownership.

A discussion always has to have two different points of view. This forum would be meaningless if the only people who came on here were car-free-ers. Everyone would look at eachother and say, "Hi, my names Hal, how 'bout you?" Discussion would have no point. The Living Car Free forum was designed for discussing various points of view and different ideas, not for the 'elite few' car-free people to yak about how cool they are.

Having said that, I think it's great that you guys can live without a car. I don't have one; I'm 14. My parents do, though, because they've got lots of kids. Thats fine, in my point of view,

RBM

here is what the forum was designed for:


Here is the new forum for car free living. Feel free to discuss your car free concerns here... but keep in mind, this is NOT the forum for discussion about multi-use paths, arguing about your problems with cars, SUV's etc. or to flame people who drive. It's the spot for people to discuss getting around without cars, utility trailers, living without the car, etc. Any topics that deviate beyond the spirit of the forum will be moved out into their proper forums.

and also:

Did you give up your car for good? Is your bike and public transportation the only way you travel from point A to point B? If your only mode of transportation is your bike, discuss your car-free lifestyle here.

do you go to the road forum to talk about your mtn. bike? do you go to the singlespeed forum to talk about problems with shifting? do you go to the vintage forum to talk about your brand new trek? why do people, then, feel the need to talk constantly about their cars in the car-free forum?? i just don't get it.

do you go to the road forum to talk about your mtn. bike? do you go to the singlespeed forum to talk about problems with shifting? do you go to the vintage forum to talk about your brand new trek? why do people, then, feel the need to talk constantly about their cars in the car-free forum?? i just don't get it.
I'm with you in spirit, at least. I enjoy the more "political" threads here, and I think carfreee is, in part, a political issue. I also get a lot of utility from the "practical" threads.

My proposed solution is that we keep the two issues "separate but equal," by keeping threads purely political or purely practical. It's trolling to go into a political rant on a thread about trailers, for example. And it's also a waste of time to read the political threads if they bore you or upset you. So, my advice is to please yourself by sticking to what you like, and not worrying about the rest.

(I have seen threads by two people who really are gratuitously anti-carfree. One of these people has been on my "Ignore List" for a long time, in fact he is the totality of my Ignore List, so I see his epistles only when others quote him. The other one posts infrequently, so it isn't too much of a hassle. I won't mention their names because they like that.

On the other hand, I enjoy posts by others who are not carfree--FXjohn and expatriate com to mind.)

Well if some of us non-carfree people didnt come here,it wouldnt be much going on,you should thank us,this thread alone might be a car-free record. LOL

That's it in a nutshell. The voluntary car free crowd is NOT representative of anything but a tiny sliver of individuals who have made drastically different lifestyle choices; bicycles are besides the point for these counterculture afficianados.
Which specific posts or posters do you have in mind when you say that bicycles are beside the point? What's the ratio of such posts to your normalmongering complaints about them? I do associate myself with people for whom car avoidance is more important than bicycle love, but I don't see a lot of that on this forum.


If bicycling is irrelevant in this forum why does it exist at all on Bike Forums?
Straw man argument. For whom is bicycling irrelevant? "This forum"? Nonsense.


When individuals write about how easily bicycles can replace all automobile usage for everybody, it is writen from the perspective of someone who has a drastically different lifestyle than everybody else.
Again, who writes about easy/all/everybody? You're way off in the weeds if you mean to characterize that POV as the dominant one in this forum, if indeed you can find it at all. And the "drastically different lifestyle" bit you keep on about is circular, or at least backwards. It's not that they can bike only because they have drastically different lifestyles, and are therefore irrelevant fringe weirdo children. I have a drastically different lifestyle because I bike as much as possible, viewing car trips as missed opportunities to bike, and it's precisely because my household is real with real responsibilities that we orient our livelihood, food, clothing, shelter, childrearing, politics, etc. by different stars than Joe Normal, with whom your sympathies seem always to lie. As if he needed your help in validating his "responsible" mobility choices, and in keeping his bicycling (or non-bicycling) unchallenged by examples contrary to his own narrow, normal views about the practical scope of bicycling.

The Living Car Free forum was designed for discussing various points of view and different ideas, not for the 'elite few' car-free people to yak about how cool they are.

Actually, the Car-Free forum was recently created for advocating a car-free life and discussing ways to enable that. If people want to learn about being car-free, or seek ways to be car-free, this is the place. If people just want to make excuses for not being car-free... well, that's the 99.9% of the world outside this forum.

Various people have posted "if you don't like it, don't read it" messages over in A&S. Here's a hint to all, if you're not car-free or genuinely interested in being car-free, why post here? I for one don't want to hear what you have to say, since its off topic.

I think I need to move to moderated forums, BF.net feels more like a waste of time every day (with the notable exception of the mechanics forums... which coincidently stays on topic).

When this forum was new, the gentle hand of moderation here encouraged us to be ever so meek and nonconfrontational in putting carfree views forward. The case of Secret Satellite comes to mind. As best I was able to read that situation, it is okay for people to come here to disparage carfree folk and their lifestyles, but it is not okay for us to advocate carfree except in the gentlest terms. Has anything changed?

Actually, the Car-Free forum was recently created for advocating a car-free life and discussing ways to enable that. If people want to learn about being car-free, or seek ways to be car-free, this is the place. If people just want to make excuses for not being car-free... well, that's the 99.9% of the world outside this forum.

Various people have posted "if you don't like it, don't read it" messages over in A&S. Here's a hint to all, if you're not car-free or genuinely interested in being car-free, why post here? I for one don't want to hear what you have to say, since its off topic.

I think I need to move to moderated forums, BF.net feels more like a waste of time every day (with the notable exception of the mechanics forums... which coincidently stays on topic).

A differing point of view is not off topic. You also state that, "Various people have posted "if you don't like it, don't read it" messages over in A&S. Here's a hint to all, if you're not car-free or genuinely interested in being car-free, why post here? I for one don't want to hear what you have to say, since its off topic." Do you mean to say that anyone who is not car-free cannot be of use in such an environment? Why not? I, for one, think everyone would like to be car free, so technically that makes them 'eligible' for this forum. Sometimes that is just not possible, though. So, what's wrong with them coming and voicing their opinion also? Will it taint the nature of the thread? No. And 'discussing ways to enable that', is not restricted to the car-free. There is no higher potentate that will punish us for having cars; why make excuses? We certainly don't do it to make ourselves feel good in the presence of car-free people.

Why?

A differing point of view is not off topic. You also state that, "Various people have posted "if you don't like it, don't read it" messages over in A&S. Here's a hint to all, if you're not car-free or genuinely interested in being car-free, why post here? I for one don't want to hear what you have to say, since its off topic." Do you mean to say that anyone who is not car-free cannot be of use in such an environment? Why not? I, for one, think everyone would like to be car free, so technically that makes them 'eligible' for this forum. Sometimes that is just not possible, though. So, what's wrong with them coming and voicing their opinion also? Will it taint the nature of the thread? No. And 'discussing ways to enable that', is not restricted to the car-free. There is no higher potentate that will punish us for having cars; why make excuses? We certainly don't do it to make ourselves feel good in the presence of car-free people.

Why?
Very sensible. I'm not sure that "everyone would like to be car free," but I do think that those who truly would like to be carfree should be welcome here. I hope so anyway.

I'm 'car lite,' which to me means 'as free from the shackles of car culture as possible.' The reason I come here is to learn ways to use cars as little as possible. Because I want to do as little harm as possible.

Many completely carfree folks have posted, in many different threads, that they are not completely free from needing to use cars; they just don't own them. This thread is compelling because it raises a good, simple, practical point along those lines: why not own a car if doing so is the most practical, least expensive, least harmful way to deal with those things that everyone occasionally needs a car for? If we do have to use a car, why shouldn't we own one?

This question doesn't disparage anyone's choice not to own a car. Each person's answer seems to vary, as usual, by geography and demographics. For some, it will confirm their decision not to own a car; for others (like me), it will help us know we're on the right track, accomplishing the primary goals of a 'carfree' lifestyle in the most practical way for us at this time.

I think that's perfectly relevant to this forum.

A differing point of view is not off topic.

It may be, or it may not be. Does it advance the forum's topic, mandate, or reason for being? This forum is called, "Living Car Free". Saying "I can't be car-free because of x, y, z" has nothing to do with Living Car Free. On the other hand, "I would like to be car-free, but x,y,z seems to be stopping me, what can I do?" would be on-topic.


Do you mean to say that anyone who is not car-free cannot be of use in such an environment?

No. I mean to say that anyone who does not have a genuine interest in being car-free (entirely or partially) is not likely useful here and probably not making a positive contribution to this forum.

Skim through this thread, look at the many messages disparaging car-free people, saying some version of "I can't be car-free", etc. Do those messages advocate car-freeness? Do those messages help anyone become car-free? Do those message help those already car-free? Do those messages say anything we car-free types haven't heard before? If not, then in my opinion those message do not contribute to this forum and are thus off-topic.


I, for one, think everyone would like to be car free, so technically that makes them 'eligible' for this forum.

You think everyone would like be be car-free? Really? I don't. I think most people are attached to their cars, and strongly resent any suggestion they not own one. What makes you think everyone would like to be car-free?

I am not talking about whether or not people are eligible to post in this forum, rather I am talking about the legitimacy of posts in this forum. Posts are on-topic if they are related to "Living Car-Free".


And 'discussing ways to enable that', is not restricted to the car-free. There is no higher potentate that will punish us for having cars; why make excuses?

Well, I'll skip discussion or religion re: being punished for owning cars. ;) In environmental terms, I think we are all being punished for our car-oriented society, and very directly. As to why make excuses, simply because its human nature when confronted with a negative reaction to one's decisions or actions.


We certainly don't do it to make ourselves feel good in the presence of car-free people.

I disagree, I think many of the reactions from car owners toward the car-free are due to an attempt to "make themselves feel better". Similar reactions occur from couch potatoes toward bike commuters, and from overweight people toward those who have lost weight.

I say all this from my mindset, which is that forums are supposed to be useful. I realize not everyone shares that mindset, and for many these forums are just entertainment. I have other outlets for entertainment, when I read forums I want useful info, though-provoking discussion, and/or challenging ideas. If the posts in a forum/sub-forum do not, in general, stick to the forum's mandate then the forum is a waste of my time and a waste of time for anyone else looking for useful information.

Hope I explained this well, I've been writing business correspondence all day and the communication centres of my brain are threatening job action.