Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Living Car Free
Reload this Page >

Oslo: The Journey to Car Free

Living Car Free Do you live car free or car light? Do you prefer to use alternative transportation (bicycles, walking, other human-powered or public transportation) for everyday activities whenever possible? Discuss your lifestyle here.

Oslo: The Journey to Car Free

Reply

Old 05-03-17, 05:36 PM
  #76  
McBTC
Senior Member
 
McBTC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 3,657

Bikes: 2015 22 Speed

Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1432 Post(s)
Originally Posted by cooker View Post
Half the people in Copenhagen commute by bike and the average distance is under 3 km. Who's in a better position to save for retirement?

That depends on what you're worth per hour and the opportunities you are afforded to sell your skills and what your earnings will buy (see e.g., the Big Mac Index and metrics like residential square footage per occupant) and if your reasons for LCF are ideologically motivated -- such as a perceived need to reduce your carbon footprint -- it would be silly to believe you are saving the globe by walking to work if your "work" involves flying around the globe to sell your services (e.g., service and merchandise exports comprise >50% of the GDP there).

Last edited by McBTC; 05-03-17 at 05:41 PM.
McBTC is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-17, 05:49 PM
  #77  
McBTC
Senior Member
 
McBTC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 3,657

Bikes: 2015 22 Speed

Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1432 Post(s)
Originally Posted by tandempower View Post
It would be possible for people to live and work closer together, if employers were willing to put effort into it and employees were willing to be flexible in changing work patterns to make it possible. People just want to have an excuse to drive because they don't see the unsustainability in it. The moment they do, it will be amazing how fast the economy will be able to transition to LCF as primary transportation.


It must be a great burden to bear to know that recognizing the God-given rights of the many to individual liberty and the personal freedom to make decisions in the best interest of themselves and their families, may result in choices that fall outside the Utopian beliefs of the few who know how the rest of us should live.
McBTC is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-17, 07:13 PM
  #78  
cooker
Prefers Cicero
 
cooker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,762

Bikes: 1984 Trek 520; 1990s Peugeot (Canadian-made) rigid mountain bike; 2007 Bike Friday NWT; misc others

Mentioned: 74 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3409 Post(s)
Originally Posted by McBTC View Post
It must be a great burden to bear to know that recognizing the God-given rights of the many to individual liberty and the personal freedom to make decisions in the best interest of themselves and their families, may result in choices that fall outside the Utopian beliefs of the few who know how the rest of us should live.
LOL, yes we're coming for your cars and we will be relocating you to FEMA camps in the deserted office towers of Detroit.
cooker is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-17, 07:28 PM
  #79  
350htrr
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Canada, PG BC
Posts: 3,640

Bikes: 27 speed oryx with over 39,000Km on it, 11,000Km with a BionX assist on it

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 891 Post(s)
Originally Posted by McBTC View Post
It must be a great burden to bear to know that recognizing the God-given rights of the many to individual liberty and the personal freedom to make decisions in the best interest of themselves and their families, may result in choices that fall outside the Utopian beliefs of the few who know how the rest of us should live.
And, the other side of the coin... There has been many, I am sure... Who voluntarily went onto the ice-flow, and died for the future interest of their beloved... Or went to war, or even just Quit a very high paying job because it was .. Well, Just wrong, to keep on doing that, (short term gain|) for the future of their ancestors they decided to for go that, In Their Opinion it was the best option... Urging others to do the same is NOT evil, or in the long term even against the "American way"... Just a different perspective...


EDIT; and... Maybe, Yes, just maybe, it should actually be, a personal RESPONSIBILLITY, to say No, I will NOT do this, (whatever this may be) even tho I may make a $1,000,000,000. for going along with this, (whatever this is)... FUTURE generation matter more and will be better off if I and others didn't do "this"...

Last edited by 350htrr; 05-03-17 at 08:19 PM. Reason: add stuff
350htrr is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-17, 08:50 PM
  #80  
kickstart
Senior Member
 
kickstart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Kent Wa.
Posts: 5,422

Bikes: 2005 Gazelle Golfo, 1935 Raleigh Sport, 1970 Robin Hood sport, 1974 Schwinn Continental, 1984 Ross MTB/porteur, 2013 Flying Piegon path racer, 2014 Gazelle Toer Populair T8

Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 396 Post(s)
Originally Posted by cooker View Post
LOL, yes we're coming for your cars and we will be relocating you to FEMA camps in the deserted office towers of Detroit.
But some of the LCF community theories do sound way too much like a "company town". What we have now is the result of an overwhelming desire to get out of them.

Sustainability goals should be reactive rather than proactive.
kickstart is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-17, 09:04 PM
  #81  
McBTC
Senior Member
 
McBTC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 3,657

Bikes: 2015 22 Speed

Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1432 Post(s)
Originally Posted by cooker View Post
LOL, yes we're coming for your cars and we will be relocating you to FEMA camps in the deserted area of Detroit.
New automobiles have gotten so expensive the market for them has fallen to but 5% of car-buyers-- the rest are buying used...
McBTC is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-17, 09:14 PM
  #82  
cooker
Prefers Cicero
 
cooker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,762

Bikes: 1984 Trek 520; 1990s Peugeot (Canadian-made) rigid mountain bike; 2007 Bike Friday NWT; misc others

Mentioned: 74 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3409 Post(s)
Originally Posted by McBTC View Post
New automobiles have gotten so expensive the market for them has fallen to but 5% of car-buyers-- the rest are buying used...
That may partly mean that people are driving less or fewer people are driving, and the demand for new cars has gone down a bit.
cooker is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-17, 09:20 PM
  #83  
cooker
Prefers Cicero
 
cooker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,762

Bikes: 1984 Trek 520; 1990s Peugeot (Canadian-made) rigid mountain bike; 2007 Bike Friday NWT; misc others

Mentioned: 74 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3409 Post(s)
Originally Posted by kickstart View Post
But some of the LCF community theories do sound way too much like a "company town". What we have now is the result of an overwhelming desire to get out of them.
I don't think either of those is true. Nobody is promoting "company towns" and there isn't a big exodus from urban areas. Anyway, "company towns" were often small or medium, rural or semi-rural communities with one major employer who had something of a captive labour market and could dictate or influence whatever happened in that town. I don't see how that applies to anything discussed in this thread, so please elaborate.
Originally Posted by kickstart View Post
Sustainability goals should be reactive rather than proactive.
I don't know what that means.

Last edited by cooker; 05-03-17 at 09:30 PM.
cooker is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-17, 09:58 PM
  #84  
McBTC
Senior Member
 
McBTC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 3,657

Bikes: 2015 22 Speed

Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1432 Post(s)
Originally Posted by cooker View Post
That may partly mean that people are driving less or fewer people are driving, and the demand for new cars has gone down a bit.
For many nowadays, LNCF not LCF that is the new reality:

In lower-income cities, however, affordable purchase prices for a typical family are far below the average cost of a new car. In Hartford, Conn., where the median income is about $29,000, an affordable purchase price is about $8,000 — about a quarter of the average new-car price. ~NYT
Meanwhile, rebates are given to California millionaires to buy a Tesla.
McBTC is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-17, 10:13 PM
  #85  
kickstart
Senior Member
 
kickstart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Kent Wa.
Posts: 5,422

Bikes: 2005 Gazelle Golfo, 1935 Raleigh Sport, 1970 Robin Hood sport, 1974 Schwinn Continental, 1984 Ross MTB/porteur, 2013 Flying Piegon path racer, 2014 Gazelle Toer Populair T8

Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 396 Post(s)
Originally Posted by cooker View Post
I don't think either of those is true. Nobody is promoting "company towns" and there isn't a big exodus from urban areas. Anyway, "company towns" were often small or medium, rural or semi-rural communities with one major employer who had something of a captive labour market and could dictate or influence whatever happened in that town. I don't see how that applies to anything discussed in this thread, so please elaborate.
I don't know what that means.
You're fond of saying what is and isn't being said, and frankly I find it a bit arrogant. You may not agree with my opinion, but it's my opinion none the less that some of what's been said in LCF does suggest a contemporary version of the company town.
I didn't mean to imply there's currently an "exodus from urban areas", I was referring to what happened many decades ago in the desire to escape those communities.

I think some of the ideas proposed here of compact urban communities where one lives, works, and shops in their own local community, combined with current retail, rental properties, and manufacturing consolidation trends could bring about a latter day version of those "company towns".
I'm all for making such compact communities possible, viable, and sustainable for those who want them, but I also believe in making the suburban and rural options equally possible, viable, and sustainable for everyone of every income level who wants them.

By reactive rather than proactive, I mean working to make what people want, and have viable, and sustainable, rather than trying to change what people want and have to fit a viable and sustainable ideal.
kickstart is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-17, 10:13 PM
  #86  
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 27,462

Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Originally Posted by McBTC View Post
New automobiles have gotten so expensive the market for them has fallen to but 5% of car-buyers-- the rest are buying used...
Source for this factoid?
I-Like-To-Bike is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-17, 10:21 PM
  #87  
cooker
Prefers Cicero
 
cooker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,762

Bikes: 1984 Trek 520; 1990s Peugeot (Canadian-made) rigid mountain bike; 2007 Bike Friday NWT; misc others

Mentioned: 74 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3409 Post(s)
Originally Posted by McBTC View Post
For many nowadays, LNCF not LCF that is the new reality:
Meanwhile, rebates are given to California millionaires to buy a Tesla.
I have no idea what LNCF or LVC mean, and no particular interest in finding out. However, it sounds like you agree with me that subsidizing people's driving is stupid.
cooker is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-17, 10:29 PM
  #88  
McBTC
Senior Member
 
McBTC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 3,657

Bikes: 2015 22 Speed

Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1432 Post(s)
Originally Posted by cooker View Post
I have no idea what LNCF or LVC mean, and no particular interest in finding out. However, it sounds like you agree with me that subsidizing people's driving is stupid.
I think most persons instinctively understand it's better to choose to LCF than to have no other choice because the economy has been destroyed by ideologues.
McBTC is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-17, 04:02 AM
  #89  
tandempower
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,201
Mentioned: 89 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7922 Post(s)
Originally Posted by McBTC View Post
It must be a great burden to bear to know that recognizing the God-given rights of the many to individual liberty and the personal freedom to make decisions in the best interest of themselves and their families, may result in choices that fall outside the Utopian beliefs of the few who know how the rest of us should live.
I would love to get into a discussion about God and the devil here in response to this, but you know it would be frowned upon and you are provoking it. As for liberty, please read The Spirit of Liberty Speech by Judge Learned Hand where liberty is clearly distinguished from unbridled freedom as including responsibility. The automotive economy and infrastructure have evolved beyond responsibility toward pedestrians and cyclists. There has always been a certain bullying attitude toward those who resist the automotive paradigm, first its influx and later/now its ubiquity. Yes, we should have liberty, and no we can't expect utopia, but CAN expect that the automotive culture be limited to a level that doesn't inconvenience the choice to LCF. The fact is that it was disrespectful to liberty to ever have developed the automotive culture and sprawl beyond the common ability to function societally without driving. The moment driving became a social-economic pressure, liberty should have taken precedence and steps taken to prevent people's lives from becoming structured around the ability to drive in all the ways that have become common.
tandempower is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-17, 07:45 AM
  #90  
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 27,462

Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Originally Posted by McBTC View Post
I think most persons instinctively understand it's better to choose to LCF than to have no other choice because the economy has been destroyed by ideologues.
Do you really believe anybody in his right mind takes seriously the extreme P&R based (so-called) LCF ideology espoused on this list and elsewhere on BF?
I-Like-To-Bike is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-17, 09:35 AM
  #91  
McBTC
Senior Member
 
McBTC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 3,657

Bikes: 2015 22 Speed

Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1432 Post(s)
Originally Posted by tandempower View Post
I would love to get into a discussion about ...


.


Absurdity can be best demonstrated by a simple substitution of personal computing, demonstrating that angst against 'the car' by the LCF movement has risen to the level of religious dogma and completely outside common sense and reason--e.g.,



... The Spirit of Liberty Speech by Judge Learned Hand where liberty is clearly distinguished from unbridled freedom as including responsibility. The personal computing (including tablet computer and mobile phone) economy and infrastructure have evolved beyond responsibility toward pedestrians and cyclists. There has always been a certain bullying attitude toward those who resist the use of personal computers, first its influx and later/now its ubiquity. Yes, we should have liberty, and no we can't expect utopia, but CAN expect that the personal computing culture be limited to a level that doesn't inconvenience the choice to LCF (Live Computer Free). The fact is that it was disrespectful to liberty to ever have developed the personal computing culture and sprawl beyond the common ability to function societally without operating a computer. The moment operating a computer became a social-economic pressure, liberty should have taken precedence and steps taken to prevent people's lives from becoming structured around the ability to operate computers in all the ways that have become common.





Last edited by McBTC; 05-04-17 at 09:44 AM.
McBTC is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-17, 12:41 PM
  #92  
cooker
Prefers Cicero
 
cooker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,762

Bikes: 1984 Trek 520; 1990s Peugeot (Canadian-made) rigid mountain bike; 2007 Bike Friday NWT; misc others

Mentioned: 74 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3409 Post(s)
Originally Posted by kickstart View Post
You're fond of saying what is and isn't being said, and frankly I find it a bit arrogant. You may not agree with my opinion, but it's my opinion none the less that some of what's been said in LCF does suggest a contemporary version of the company town.
I didn't mean to imply there's currently an "exodus from urban areas", I was referring to what happened many decades ago in the desire to escape those communities.
Sorry, I didn't get that you were talking about the past exit from urban areas, but I still don't get the reference to "company towns". People who moved in the 1950s or 1960s to suburban Detroit or Long Island or Burbank or whatever, weren't trying to escape from under the thumb of a mill or mine conglomerate that dominated their lives, which is how I understand company towns, and I don't see how moving back to a downtown location would make them anymore vulnerable to that than people in a rural or suburban area.

Originally Posted by kickstart View Post
I think some of the ideas proposed here of compact urban communities where one lives, works, and shops in their own local community, combined with current retail, rental properties, and manufacturing consolidation trends could bring about a latter day version of those "company towns".
I'm all for making such compact communities possible, viable, and sustainable for those who want them, but I also believe in making the suburban and rural options equally possible, viable, and sustainable for everyone of every income level who wants them.
I don't think "everybody of every income level" should have whatever they want, or that suburban and rural (or urban) options should be "equally possible", because that would have to involve some kind of equalization payment. People should have what they can afford, and if it costs more to live in the city due to real estate costs, they should personally bear it, and if it costs more to live in the country due to road and infrastucture costs they should personally bear that.

Originally Posted by kickstart View Post
By reactive rather than proactive, I mean working to make what people want, and have viable, and sustainable, rather than trying to change what people want and have to fit a viable and sustainable ideal.
Those aren't that different. To make stuff sustainable you have to change it and the people are going to have to accept the change.
cooker is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-17, 02:02 PM
  #93  
kickstart
Senior Member
 
kickstart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Kent Wa.
Posts: 5,422

Bikes: 2005 Gazelle Golfo, 1935 Raleigh Sport, 1970 Robin Hood sport, 1974 Schwinn Continental, 1984 Ross MTB/porteur, 2013 Flying Piegon path racer, 2014 Gazelle Toer Populair T8

Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 396 Post(s)
Originally Posted by cooker View Post
Sorry, I didn't get that you were talking about the past exit from urban areas, but I still don't get the reference to "company towns". People who moved in the 1950s or 1960s to suburban Detroit or Long Island or Burbank or whatever, weren't trying to escape from under the thumb of a mill or mine conglomerate that dominated their lives, which is how I understand company towns, and I don't see how moving back to a downtown location would make them anymore vulnerable to that than people in a rural or suburban area.

I don't think "everybody of every income level" should have whatever they want, or that suburban and rural (or urban) options should be "equally possible", because that would have to involve some kind of equalization payment. People should have what they can afford, and if it costs more to live in the city due to real estate costs, they should personally bear it, and if it costs more to live in the country due to road and infrastucture costs they should personally bear that.

Those aren't that different. To make stuff sustainable you have to change it and the people are going to have to accept the change.
I guess the difference between us is you want people to meet the solutions​, and I think the solutions should meet the people. Both can be done, the former through judgment of others, the latter through empathy of others.
Maybe I'm being pessimistic, but I think there's too much of the former because of those who want to feel superior to the "average person".
kickstart is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-17, 02:55 PM
  #94  
cooker
Prefers Cicero
 
cooker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,762

Bikes: 1984 Trek 520; 1990s Peugeot (Canadian-made) rigid mountain bike; 2007 Bike Friday NWT; misc others

Mentioned: 74 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3409 Post(s)
oops -I accidentally rewrote this post instead or adding a new one. See quoted excerpt in post 96 for original content.

Last edited by cooker; 05-05-17 at 09:37 AM.
cooker is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-17, 03:09 PM
  #95  
tandempower
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,201
Mentioned: 89 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7922 Post(s)
Originally Posted by McBTC View Post
Absurdity can be best demonstrated by a simple substitution of personal computing, demonstrating that angst against 'the car' by the LCF movement has risen to the level of religious dogma and completely outside common sense and reason--e.g.,
You are using the term, dogma, in a way that has nothing to do with its actual meaning. If anything, it is the driving culture that has become dogmatic, insofar as people drive for no other reason than the ingrained idea that it's "just what you do."
... The Spirit of Liberty Speech by Judge Learned Hand where liberty is clearly distinguished from unbridled freedom as including responsibility. The personal computing (including tablet computer and mobile phone) economy and infrastructure have evolved beyond responsibility toward pedestrians and cyclists. There has always been a certain bullying attitude toward those who resist the use of personal computers, first its influx and later/now its ubiquity. Yes, we should have liberty, and no we can't expect utopia, but CAN expect that the personal computing culture be limited to a level that doesn't inconvenience the choice to LCF (Live Computer Free). The fact is that it was disrespectful to liberty to ever have developed the personal computing culture and sprawl beyond the common ability to function societally without operating a computer. The moment operating a computer became a social-economic pressure, liberty should have taken precedence and steps taken to prevent people's lives from becoming structured around the ability to operate computers in all the ways that have become common.
Personal computing is a totally different type of technology with totally different effects and dependencies. Some of what you quote above could apply to personal computing, especially where smartphones, tablets, social media, video games, and other pop culture computing are concerned, but computing has little if anything to do with sprawl. If anything, computing and internet offer telecommuting possibilities and other methods of organizing economic activities that could be used to make driving more of a choice, if managers chose to use them toward this goal instead of simply expecting people to show up at work and work 40+ hours/week in the spirit of pre-computer, driving-dependency traditions.
tandempower is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-17, 03:28 PM
  #96  
kickstart
Senior Member
 
kickstart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Kent Wa.
Posts: 5,422

Bikes: 2005 Gazelle Golfo, 1935 Raleigh Sport, 1970 Robin Hood sport, 1974 Schwinn Continental, 1984 Ross MTB/porteur, 2013 Flying Piegon path racer, 2014 Gazelle Toer Populair T8

Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 396 Post(s)
Originally Posted by cooker View Post
I suppose that's true, that I want people to meet the solutions, instead expecting other people solve it for them. Again, as I often repeat, this isn't about you, but many people in rural areas (if they are not farmers or other obligatory rural workers), are living less sustainably than they would in a denser community, because of higher mileage, more distributed electric grid, larger land footprint, less efficient delivery of services and so on. How do we solve that for them?
There are issues that can't be solved in every circumstance, I don't see non "obligatory" rural residents as an important issue, but just a judgmental distraction.

I believe things will work out as what we have today doesn't represent the future, things will continue to improve, and without pulling the rug out from under people.
kickstart is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-17, 04:28 PM
  #97  
tandempower
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,201
Mentioned: 89 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7922 Post(s)
Originally Posted by kickstart View Post
There are issues that can't be solved in every circumstance, I don't see non "obligatory" rural residents as an important issue, but just a judgmental distraction.

I believe things will work out as what we have today doesn't represent the future, things will continue to improve, and without pulling the rug out from under people.
I think you're ignoring the economic motive behind rural living, in many cases, which is to settle land early and begin creating the infrastructure so that it can eventually fill in with subdivisions, strip-malls, etc.

It's not just that people who move out into the country are trying to live there without developing the area, they are often betting on the land-value appreciation that comes with development, and doing what they can to attract developers and the payoff that comes with them 'biting the hook.'
tandempower is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-17, 05:39 PM
  #98  
McBTC
Senior Member
 
McBTC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 3,657

Bikes: 2015 22 Speed

Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1432 Post(s)
Originally Posted by tandempower View Post
You are using the term, dogma, in a way that has nothing to do with its actual meaning. If anything, it is the driving culture that has become dogmatic, insofar as people drive for no other reason than the ingrained idea that it's "just what you do"...

Personal computing is a totally different type of technology with totally different effects and dependencies....
The automobile has long been seen as a symbol of personal freedom and like the computer, a symbol of modernity; and, like other aspects of modernity, the automobile also has become the subject of the dogmatic prophecy from witchdoctors on the Left (typified by the LCF movement) who point to soccer moms as killing polar bears because of the CO2 that their SUVs emit.
McBTC is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-17, 06:03 PM
  #99  
McBTC
Senior Member
 
McBTC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 3,657

Bikes: 2015 22 Speed

Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1432 Post(s)
Cycling can be -- and, for most everybody on Bike Forums is -- a hobby and a bike-centered lifestyle choice. But, on the LCF sub-forum, the bike is just an aspect of a lifestyle choice that especially touches on matters of politics not cycling.
McBTC is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-17, 06:08 PM
  #100  
jon c. 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 3,589
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 913 Post(s)
Originally Posted by cooker View Post
I suppose that's true, that I want people to meet the solutions, instead expecting other people solve it for them. Again, as I often repeat, this isn't about you, but many people in rural areas (if they are not farmers or other obligatory rural workers), are living less sustainably than they would in a denser community, because of higher mileage, more distributed electric grid, larger land footprint, less efficient delivery of services and so on. How do we solve that for them?
As one who lives in a rural area wholly by choice, I see no need for any solution. Yes, there are trade offs but on balance to me they are more than worth it. And there's no reason it isn't sustainable for the foreseeable future.
jon c. is offline  
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service