this post was submitted on 23 Jan 2026
175 points (99.4% liked)

Fuck Cars

14379 readers
920 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 26 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] NarrativeBear@lemmy.world 17 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

This photo summarizes this concept clearly.

1000054535

Density is the solution. Dense urban areas are the most economically viable portions of a city/town. Large parking lots and wide 4 or 6 lane roads are subsidized on the the otherhand.

Bring places closer that people want to be, no need to build a home in a field and then a Walmart 40min away on the opposite side of town. Only to then need to subsidize the road and parking to get between the two points.

[–] Rooty@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

How the fuck do you get from the carpark to the stadium in the upper picture? Park you car and then hail a taxi?

[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 7 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (1 children)

I've been to some attractions in america that have shuttles for their massive surface level parking lots

[–] saimen@feddit.org 1 points 1 hour ago

So like buses? That pool several people together? To go always a certain route? Wild idea: Why not extend these "shuttles" to and throughout the city?

[–] notso@feddit.org 1 points 22 hours ago

Those photos give a nice visual comparison. Do you have a source?

[–] palmtrees2309@lemmy.world 35 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Capitalism for mass transit and Socialism for cars.

[–] GreatWhite_Shark_EarthAndBeingsRightsPerson@piefed.social -5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

That is BLANKING BS!

Scandinavia SOCIALIST countries have better Mass Transit, than the Automobile focused & Mass Transit ignored The USA!

[–] MrMakabar@slrpnk.net 12 points 1 day ago (2 children)

You missunderstand that. Mass transit has to finance itself, so it is basically capitalism. Cars on the other hand get a lot of support from the government, so it is much more like socialism.

[–] AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Mass transit typically doesn't support itself anywhere. It's a net cost for the region / city / whatever that's only partially offset by the fees.

[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 3 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

Yea, and in north america we barely build any transit because our policy makers see that and go "how the hell will this ever be profitable?"

They would never apply the same attitude to roadway costs though cause we need that for the economy (but somehow transit for the workers isn't also for the econmy)

No you misunderstand socialism practice do the same thing.

[–] GreatWhite_Shark_EarthAndBeingsRightsPerson@piefed.social 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Most importantly you miss-understand what Capitalism is, it is always been about moving money up, not making something that is able to financing itself. Only FDR became USA President did at least taxes reach 90%, loopholes did not help though, of businesses/Super Rich Economic Class/Owners & that built a Caucasian Middle Class, living their best lives, a lot better than 70s-until now.
Where Socialism is about moving money down, & under non-Capitalist dominate country, through taxes & out to the rest of the people, in a country.
Also important to know COOP is money moving out to all in the organization & under non-Capitalist dominate country, through all their taxes & out to the rest of the people, in a country. So yes, it does COOP businesses finance themselves.

[–] NewOldGuard@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Scandinavian countries are not socialist…

[–] GreatWhite_Shark_EarthAndBeingsRightsPerson@piefed.social 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

You are right, I should have said, Democratic-Socialist. Thanks, for bringing the correction to my attention.

[–] novibe@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Still wrong. They are 100% liberal capitalist democracies. Welfare states are not socialist.

Ignorance go away I am done with you!

[–] novibe@lemmy.ml 2 points 5 hours ago

That’s the spirit! We should always be ready to shun our own ignorance. But now you learned!

[–] lysol@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Social democracy ≠ democratic socialism

[–] regdog@lemmy.world 1 points 23 hours ago

Interesting read

[–] Horsecook@sh.itjust.works 25 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I really enjoyed that they’re criticizing Los Angeles’ freeways with a picture of a San Diego freeway.

[–] Ludicrous0251@piefed.zip 6 points 1 day ago

Needed the "Los Angeles" sign in the foreground.

[–] ramble81@lemmy.zip 9 points 1 day ago

The DFW metroplex is running into the thing. Even stupider is that the suburbs are voting to leave DART (the bus and metro system) because it “doesn’t benefit them enough”. The way that the middle class will cut off their nose to spite their face is absolutely amazing at times.