• baseless_discourse@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      60
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      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.

      FREEDOM!

      • Fried_out_Kombi@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        33
        ·
        1 year ago

        Don’t forget the Freedom™ zoning laws that make sure it’s illegal for any American to build any filthy communist multi-family homes on their own private property! It’s communist to grant private citizens freedom and property rights!

        • I Cast Fist@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          1 year ago

          And even when they can build stuff on their PRIVATELY OWNED TERRAIN, they damn better follow the rules and make their house look EXACTLY EQUAL to every other house on the street. Now that’s real red-blooded 'murican capitalism’n freedom, baby!

          • Fried_out_Kombi@lemmy.worldM
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            1 year ago

            You know it’s freedom when you’re not allowed to express yourself or be unique in any way whatsoever! Creativity is communism! I ain’t no special snowflake who needs to be unique and special like those dang woke libs commies!

      • Resonosity
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        When I found out about this after Climate Town’s video on the subject, I was so furious!!!

        • baseless_discourse@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          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%.

          https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-20/mapping-how-u-s-states-pay-for-roads

          • intensely_human@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Well, we all benefit from the road system even if we ourselves don’t drive, so I guess it’s fair.

            • baseless_discourse@mander.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              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.

    • Pipoca@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ironically, trucks have gotten larger precisely because of regulation. In particular, emissions standards are tied to vehicle size. So if you make your vehicles bigger and bigger, you don’t have to make them more efficient.

      Also, regulation makes it difficult to import small Japanese kei trucks, and regulation is the biggest reason that the Ford F series truck is the single most popular model of vehicle in the US. In particular, we’ve taxed foreign-built trucks at 25% since the mid 60s, so there’s dramatically fewer models of truck than SUV or cars.

      • fiah@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        1 year ago

        In particular, emissions standards are tied to vehicle size

        this definitely goes on the short list of “most idiotic laws ever”, courtesy of your local car industry lobbyist

        • Lev_Astov@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yet more evidence of how effective big government is when regulatory capture is a thing.

      • mailerdaemon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        And the Hilux isn’t available in the US. I use one as my daily driver. Seats four, has a useable bed, hauls anything I throw at it, gets car MPGs, and is narrower than a Camry. It is as much pickup truck as pretty much anyone really needs.

        • BigNote@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The Hilux and the older Tacoma are basically the same truck with different trim packages.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      This shit is the direct consequence of regulation, not lack of it!

      I’m talking about both CAFE standards that encourage manufacturers to build big vehicles to fit in the “light truck” loophole, and (infinitely more importantly!) the zoning regulations that led to all the car dependency in the fucking first place!

      • Zaktor@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The problem is that the regulations drop off in this one particular niche that requires/encourages larger vehicles, not that the regulations exist in the first place.

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          What part of…

          and (infinitely more importantly!) the zoning regulations that led to all the car dependency in the fucking first place!

          …did you and the idiots who upvoted you not understand?