this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2025
491 points (96.8% liked)

Fuck Cars

12992 readers
1165 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
  1. Apparently you’ve never seen traffic in the US. We have a great highway system and a great airport system with many travelers. Too many. Way too many. Not only huge amounts of congestion for cars but huge amounts of congestion for flights, both in the air and on the ground. In the US, only a few cities have widely used transit and only one corridor has practical intercity rail. There’s lots of room for more. It needs to have regular service and be faster than cars to be useful. And it would be perfect everywhere there are two cities up to a few hundred miles apart …. Which covers like 80% of our population
  2. In the US, highways do not pay for themselves in direct costs. Gasoline taxes haven’t gone up in decades, most roads don’t have tolls, and even those who do don’t cover their costs. Roads aren’t directly profitable so why do we have a different standard for rail?
[–] theUwUhugger@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

On average, state and local governments collect roughly 10 percent of oil and gas of their revenue (https://www.rff.org/publications/journal-articles/us-state-and-local-oil-and-gas-revenue-sources-and-uses/)

If facts are not on our side lets make them up

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

How is this relevant? Sure the states that are oil producing collect taxes from oil producers. It’s a huge benefit especially to Alaska since they can support a soverigb wealth fund but others as well.

However that is not relevant to whether highways are directly profitable

Note that many US trains are diesel, so if you think oil production is a big enough benefit to the economy, it’s also thanks to rail

[–] theUwUhugger@lemmy.world -3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

How is you and 48 other people asking whether high ways are profitable relevant? I said I used profitibility as a metric of its usage as trains meant to transport an absolute fuck ton of people

And why do you only have an issue with the topic you started when it turns out that you lied?

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

And you don’t see the hypocrisy of using profitability as a metric for trains yet claiming profitability of highways as irrelevant? This inconsistency is exactly my point.

And no

[–] theUwUhugger@lemmy.world -3 points 2 weeks ago

No, the two are not comperative! Roads are not necessarily high ways; comparatively expensive (tho not nearly as so) and meant to conduct large traffic! Though I am sure you could make a comperative example if you even pretended to be good faith! Though fucking again, if a high way was constructed into the fucking nowhere, running through nowhere I would be angry for wasting so much money… Which, fucking again, is my problem

Thats not a yes or no question! Once again, why do you suddenly have an issue with a topic YOU started once it turned out that your assumption, for which you again LIED, was proven to be false?