I also started to see more of these in urban areas of europe. Not a huge amount but still recognizable. I dont get why one would buy something like this. You wont even be able to find a proper parking spot for these.
I work remotely as the president of an investment-accounting company. Internet connection is super important for me. I have to be on calls and frequently use 50 terabytes of cloud storage.
Why on earth does an investment company need 50 TB of cloud storage?
Sounds like an ex employee using it as a remote plex/jellyfin drive 😳
I have no idea how an accounting agency can consume 50TB of cloud storage… maybe 50k customers with a 1GB excel each? Would a spreadsheet that big even open?
I’ve worked with dozens of large financial firms, and even the largest databases don’t come close to this size. There is either some kind of insane media storage happening or the guy doesn’t know the difference between a GB and TB.
For real. Imagine going into a movie theater while Star Trek is playing and yelling at everyone “Man, I hate Jar Jar, can we just never play science fiction here?”
An Ohio law would require state transportation officials to build highway interchanges every 4.5 miles — even if they have to tear down homes and businesses to do it.
That’s crazy.
The targeted neighborhood homes primarily belong to retired persons, young families, or others on a fixed income.
Of course.
In March 2023, hours before the Ohio state governor signed the new House Bill 23, State Representative Tom Patton wrote new language in the transportation budget
Most people here are driving huge honkin' SUVs and are screaming about the lack of street parking, even though they have driveways.
The entitlement is pure insanity, and this is from so called leftist liberals. The same ones who support BLM, but viciously oppose any new development, especially anything that with affordable housing units.
Truth is a lot of lefties become conservatives when they the issues affect them.
You’re using “neighbor” to mean, “people who’s property is directly or nearly directly adjacent to mine”. This is a shitty little trick of sophistry where you pretend to be obtuse so you don’t have to acknowledge the obvious fucking point. I guarantee you, I fucking GUARANTEE you, there are people in your city who don’t own cars. How do they do it, Rab? How do they do it?? There are no other options!!
When it comes to public transportation, they rarely pull a profit on their own. What they do is drive the economy in the places they go, make a city more accessible to everyone (further driving the economy), and cut costs for the city in other places. They’re a loss leader to save money and improve quality of life in a multitude of other areas by huge margins.
Everything is profitable if you raise prices. In a way you’re just offsetting a certain segment of the populations transportation costs to everyone else under that system. Maybe you could privatize the roads too and use the tolls to fund more buses which operate at a profit. Its fun think of insane libertarian free marker solutions to such problems :) Cars might be less appealing if people had to pay the associated infrastructure costs on a per km basis.
The US government subsidizes farmers by a huge amount because for every dollar they spend they get a dollar and some change back in value. This happens all across different sectors and is beneficial for everyone involved. The farmers get a new pond for free and everyone else in the US gets a reliable, cheap supply of food. It’s a win/win.
Public transport is the same way. It needs to be cheap so everyone can afford it, otherwise you leave huge swaths of the population without access to their basic needs, or you cut their already short supply of money even shorter. There’s a reason progressive tax rates are ubiquitous across the world. By supporting public transport, you send people to places they produce value or spend money, increasing taxes earned across the board, while simultaneously reducing the cost of maintaining the roads because there’s significantly less wear and tear. It’s also CHEAPER to use public teansport. Cars are goddamn expensive! Repairs, insurance, the cost of it in the first place! A ride on the bus is like $2. You’d have to TRY to ride it enough to make it more expensive.
I digress. The point is that you indirectly get more out of it than you pay into it.
We’re at a point (and have been for a few decades) that just taxing cars isn’t going to fix the problem. We’ve demolished cities to replace them with vehicle infrastructure. If you tax cars without fixing the walkability, all you’ve done is make people pay more in taxes. You have to have the infrastructure before you can incentivize using it.
The reasons for farm subsidies are… Debatable. If you keep food cheap people don’t notice currency debasement as much. Personally I think it might make more sense for prices to rise to a point where farmers are profitable without subsidies. Those subsidies are value extracted from the tax payer anyway… You’re paying for it.
You’re right too in that buses and trains are a lot cheaper and should always out compete cars. How much do you think fares would have to rise to make public transport self sufficient ? Make it so it funds its own expansion and service improvement.
The Toronto Transport Commission is my local example. From what I can napkin math they get about 1 billion dollars in subsidies per year from the city (maybe some provincial and fed money too… I rounded up generously). They collect a little over 700k fares a day. Wouldn’t take much of an increase with like almost 250 million fares a year to close that gap.
Privatize the roads and have cars users pay their share of that infrastructure cost and get the burden off of working people and I bet a small share increase would be pretty affordable.
Ideally taxes are progressive, whereas food price increases are always regressive. That is to say that taxes affect the rich more, and food prices affect the poor more.
I think there’s a huge percentage of truck drivers who never use their truck for truck stuff. It’s simply a status symbol to them which is pathetic. And bigger equals better in their feeble minds.
I have a 13 yr old Tacoma and it’s tiny compared to even the modern “small” trucks. When this thing finally dies, I have no idea what I’ll get. I love the size of it though. Maybe a Ford Maverick, but those are on backorder for years I heard from several friends who tried to get one.
Meanwhile, builds the largest highway network in the world, many even in cities; maintain shitload of free parking; also enforces minimum parking requirements, all at the expense of tax payer.
People without cars are literally forced to pay to make everyone’s life worse.
In some state, yes, if by “most” you mean “more than 50% of road expense is paid by toll and car related taxes”.
But that is still a huge percentage not covered by tax for car users, requiring other foundings to cover them. The highest percentage paid by user tax and toll is not even 70% in all the U.S. states.
Not to mention many state dont even cover 50%; some only cover as low as 19% or even 12%.
It depends, in a country where the road system makes sense, sure. In rural area where every road serves a purpose: connecting business to transport goods, sure.
But excessive roads in cities and suburbs? No. Many roads in city and suburbs of the U.S. should be closed for cars, and be bike, bus, and emergency vehicles only. Since cars either don’t use them that much or just don’t have good experience on them because of the congestions. This also saves road maintainance, enables a smoother experience in transport and emergency vehicles, controls emission, and encourage a health life style in general.
It is again about the right tools for the job. A loaded van to transport fruit to the local farmer’s market, emergency vehicles, these are times where cars are the right tools. On the other hand, F150 is not the right tool to get a Mcdonald’s drive through for one.
So, is the community against all cars? Or just the ones for cities? I went to LA last month to see my brother and we went to this nice area that had blocked the street off permanently and all the restaurants and businesses had taken over the road. I. Fucking. Loved. It. All the extra space was great. So in city life, I completely get it.
That being said… I am a car person. I have an MR2 turbo I love to death. I have a lifted F250 (I grew up on a farm in a small shithole town in SC. I know I’m considered bad here but eh, the Kia Sorento isn’t going to pull the dump trailer or the tractor and the lift is because I’m 8 at heart and still smile driving it around) and a heavily modified Jeep Cherokee I play off-road with. Plus my daily Honda Civic. Cars have souls and driving is a sense of freedom I am addicted to. I can promise you 100% of “grown ups” (age is subjective here) with loud cars isn’t to impress anyone else, it’s for us. I won’t even drive my MR2 at certain times to make sure I don’t disturb anyone and when I’m around a populated area, I shift at low RPM and keep the noise down a lot, but away from everyone in bum fuck rural America, that exhaust note is all for me.
I get you hate cars, I even agree for the most part. But does that mean ALL cars? Am I bad here?
Personal vehicles have a place, and a lot of people really enjoy the hobby of it. But at least what I’m against is how they’ve completely and utterly, fully enveloped our modern Life, paving over the places we have to live in the process. The auto industry has made people addicted to the concept that every place has to be accessable and beholdent to the automobile, making it inaccessible and very unpleasant for anyone who doesn’t buy into that system (pedestrians, disabled people, cyclists etc). It’s honestly a violation of personal freedom that many people can not perform their day-to-day basic functions of socializing, gathering food and working without paying into the micro transactional hell that of the Auto/Oil industry.
Being able to go somewhere and visit worry people without dribble feeding that piggy industry with my hard earned money into gas/electricity is freeing and should be the default. If someone wants to blast down a country road listening to the purr of the engine, power to them. Forcing everyone through deliberately exclusionary infrastructural planning to pilot a few Tons of metal plastic and combustion engines just to perform basic tasks? Fuck off.
(Edit: my bad language is not directed at you, but at the industry, you sound chill)
Nah man, I completely get it. Like I said above, I live in a rural shithole in SC and transportation is like 1/4rd or more of a lot of people’s income. Its easy to say “JuSt bUy SoMeThInG oLdER, yOU DoNt NeEd AnyTHiNg NiCe” but Im a technician at heart and full understand the depth of knowledge you need to properly maintain and repair an old car. If you are super duper lucky, you’ll have an uncle or brother to help you but most people are at the mercy of the shops around them and I personally have been F’d in the A because of ignorance or compliance and I know in some rather silly and not on purpose detail how a vehicle works. Public transportation doesn’t seem to be a possibility in our neck of the woods but doesn’t mean being a slave to car manufacturers is the only solution. I love the freedom, I even drive for a living now and still love it, but I’m not foolish enough to think I am not the outlier.
fuckcars
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.