Lowering the standard of living in that way is murder? That sounds a bit melodramatic. You’re probably even saving people since there are less traffic accidents.
Also speak for yourself. For me, not having to drive means a better quality of life.
Well, yeah. That’s why it would be nice to work on walkable infrastructure isn’t it? Because then we can reduce cars without lowering anyone’s quality of life. That’s the whole discussion.
Holy crap, dude. Obviously I’m not actually literally suggesting we should just bury all cars with the people still inside them. Long term cars are actually terrible for standard of living, but there needs to be a rational transition and effective mass transit in place before we start getting rid of cars. It is stupidly, ridiculously obvious that no one in their right mind would actually want to bury people alive for doing the only things that work with our current terrible transit system.
Maybe don’t just go around assuming everyone who says anything you don’t like is a monster in a medium famous for it’s lack of a serious tone?
That’s how I feel about SoCal. I noticed on Google Maps a lot of homes are taking up the sea cliffs south of LA. I always thought that all coastline in CA was public…
The Gardiner in Toronto desperately needs to be pulled down (before people die) and replaced with tunnels.
The viaduct in Vancouver is being torn down but I don’t think they plan to build a tunnel. It’s the fastest way into downtown from East Van.
The difference between these inevitable projects and Dusseldorf is that property value in Canadian cities is so insane that developers will likely push for the construction of biggest types yet in these cities.
Add comment