this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2025
107 points (96.5% liked)
Electric Vehicles
1548 readers
259 users here now
Overview:
Electric Vehicles are a key part of our tomorrow and how we get there. If we can get all the fossil fuel vehicles off our roads, out of our seas and out of our skies, we'll have a much better environment. This community is where we discuss the various different vehicles and news stories regarding electric transportation.
Related communities:
- !automotive@discuss.tchncs.de
- !avs@futurology.today
- !byd@lemmy.world
- !ebike@lemm.ee
- !energy@slrpnk.net
- !geely@lemmy.world
- !micromobility@lemmy.world
- !polestar@lemmy.ca
- !rivian@lemmy.zip
- !teslamotors@lemmy.zip
- !xiaomi@lemdro.id
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Fuck that, we want good public transport! No oversized cars that are a danger to children and adults alike!
Sure, but I still need a vehicle to get to the closest stop and ride. It would be nice to have a truck for my weekend projects when I’m not commuting.
If you need a vehicle to get to public transit, that's terrible public transit.
That's how it is in most of America as well as some areas of Europe and Asia. Also disabled people exist.
FYI, public transit IS inherently more disability friendly. We have level steps, escalators everywhere, and so on. Can't say that cars are disability friendly when they are the perfect vehicles to create them. Most traffic deaths occur by car - and even per capita, they're pretty dang deadly.
And most deaths are CAUSED by the car driver being reckless and plowing like a terrorist into pedestrians and bicyclists. Which is why we must make it safe for the latter.
I'm aware. But how is the disabled person going to get there if they don't live close enough. The conversation was on park and ride.
You're aware that disability-friendly methods of transport without private cars exist?
Wheelchairs, wheelchair-bikes, hell, even quadriplegic bicycles exist.
And the issue of "not living close enough" can be resolved with public transport being widespread and widely available.
What we should do, is stimulate park & rides with those for disabilities and for bicycle users. Have a few centres where people with disabilities can live, and a bus stop outside of those centres (or close enough for such a park & ride to be feasible) with buses for everyone driving regularly and often for free, and boom, done.
If Switzerland and China can do it, in rural landscapes and on a large scale, then so can the US, self-proclaimed "best country" of the world.
I think frankly that that is much more useful and efficient. It also keeps the people more independent, as they no longer are dependent on expensive and energy-inefficient methods of transport to travel around.
So what about people that live outside the city?
That's also for public transit. They also can plenty be done in rural communities.
There's this myth that if it's not profitable or whatever, it shouldn't have service - but that is bullshit excuses spread by billionnaires so they can cut down on essential services and evade taxes like the leeches they are! People go before profit.
What I want, is that all cities are connected by train, for free; and that all towns are connected to those cities by bus. By far most Americans live within an hour from their commute, but this commute would be much more quickier and much more efficient, if public transit were available for all at a low cost.
I never said anything about profit. I'm just pointing out that you can't have good public transit everywhere. It's impossible.
This is an instance about electric cars. Most comments in this thread are talking about just wanting a basic electric car without the bells and whistles. Person A chimes in with Public transit being superior. Person B mentions they want to be able to go to a stop and ride.
Stop and ride exist in most countries. Even European countries with great public transit like Netherlands have some form of a stop and ride because for suburban and rural areas you'll only get a bus at most and a train if you happen to be near the line between cities.
But not everywhere. I was pointing out that fact, plus disabled people have issues. I'm aware good public transit is great for the disabled. Never said otherwise. I'm referring to the disabled person that can walk so they don't need an electric wheelchair, but experience pain for long walks due to a knee or hip thing. Something very common as people age.
So now this person living in the suburbs has to walk to a bus stop and experience a lot of pain because people wanted to get rid of the stop and go. Even though they have no issue driving to a place close to the city, parking, and then using the Intercity public transit to get around with minimal pain because they don't have to walk that much from tram to store.
I'm talking about a very real world and already happening situation. You are talking about an ideal situation that currently doesn't exist. I also would love it if public transit extended to more areas, but it's unlikely for rural areas globally, not just the US. There are people that live miles from their neighbors. A tram line isn't going to be built for them a train is much more expensive and would likely miss them. Best they can do is hope for a bus. Then sit on the bus for a few hours as it picks up all the neighbors.
It is certainly possible to have good public transit everywhere -- as I mentioned, Switzerland for an example, which also has rural areas - and even there, access to public transit is excellent. The issue is that billionnaires try to weasel out of paying their due share, which benefits everyone. The ideal situation is definitely possible, and we need to strive for it!
The stop and ride is a thing in the Netherlands BECAUSE public transit got less and less funding while CEOs and billionnaires greedily hark in money. Often, there used to be bus stops there, and then the neoliberal and right wing governments, propped by the far right sometimes, broke that down, while lowering taxes for the ultra rich.
As for the disabled person that can walk but not for long distances -- for those bicycles, again, would be excellent because it doesn't strain the knee or hip a lot, compared to walking.
The situation I describe is also very real and certainly achievable. A doomerist mindset of "it's impossible" or "it's too rural for that" won't cut it. Again, what we need is to tax billionnaires as much as we did in the '50s - if not more - and eliminate all billionnaires. Only by having the oligarchs pay can we actually instate proper infrastructure. Utopias only stay utopias with a doomer mindset. When we set ourselves to action, to campaigning for it actively, we also set for pressure to actually build it.
That said, I agree that a no-nonsense vehicle without all the bells and whistles would be excellent.
Look at OC. We're talking good public transit. Why are you scrapping the bottom of the barrel?
In places with good public transit, disabled people have more mobility than with cars, not less.
The person is talking about going to a stop and ride. You can't just say that's bad public transit then pretend it's not an issue when you get called out.
"Pretend is not an issue"? I'm making it the central issue, saying that is bad public transit, and therefore not a solution. That was me calling you out for strawmaning the discussion. Twice. You basically said "you want good public transit and less cars? You can't have it because bad public transit requires cars."
Either discuss in good faith or I'm out.
Do you know what a park and ride is? Not everyone lives right next to public transit or is able to walk to it.
Also learn what a strawman is. Considering I never said any of what you claim.
It's a clutch for a public transit system that doesn't serve the people. A park and ride is a symptom of a public transit that isn't attending the population. It's in no way, shape, or form an example of good transit.
My criticism is concerning those carbrained big vehicles. Look at those Cybertrucks and Jeeps and tell me that that's not dangerous for pedestrians, bicyclists, children, and all alike. More dangerous for other car drivers as well.
Cars are the problem. That's the harsh fact.
And they also clog the roads.
It also takes like 15 kids in front of the SUV to see any kid. Hell, even with adults you can often not see them... They are very, very dangerous.
Cars demand large parking spots, pollute the environment, aren't convenient (you constantly need to watch traffic rules, get honked at, have to fuel, have to look for a parking spot, or can get fined...). With a bicycle, this is all much less the case, and with widespread public transit, all of that is gone. Much more convenient and luxurious!
Sure, I'll admit -- if you ignore all of those above, it's attractive to be able to hop and go everywhere.
But with good public transit and pedestrian & bike infrastructure (as well mixed-use development), a carless life is much nicer. Hell, it's actually nicer having a car when those things are present. More bicyclists and walking people, denser development - means fewer people on the road - means fewer traffic jams - means driving is nicer.
I feel like you don't know what a park and ride is.
That's what public transit is for. Stops every 500 m is possible.
Plus, how often do you even transport heavy things with your truck? Most I know only need it once a year -- way cheaper and less antisocial to have a smaller car and to use a trailer for those days.
I have snow to plow all winter so it gets used a lot.
Understandable, but for that there are snow blowers. Takes less space and uses less energy as well.
I’d agree if my driveway wasn’t 600ft.
180 m long a driveway? Dang, now that's rural.
Very!