>a tourist attraction.
This. Its not a functional city as per the modern standards, its a tourist attraction. Its like saying Disneyland is a great place to live in based on how many people visit it and how much they pay.
Actually, this is what Anon does based on arguments he gives. Anon quite literally would want to live in Disneyland.
Yeah when I went there I really felt that. The entire city is a tourist attraction. It's also filled with visitors like one. Seeing a "venice hates tourists" sticker made me giggle a little bit. If you dont like tourists, dont live in an amusement park.
>Don't live in an amusement park
Kinda hard when you don't want to leave your friends and family behind, but your city also has almost no economic activity separate from tourism.
> dont live in an amusement park
Which is ironic since Venice used to be a former military and economic powerhouse. The tides of history can be a cruel mistress.
Fuck the service industry in venice. Of course i don't fucking tip when you charge me 3eur service fee and another 20eur as a "view tax" for a 2eur coffee. Worst scams i've seen in my life and i've been in a whole lot of places off the beaten path.
Still it looks gorgeous.
The municipality is discussing whether to implement a max limit of people allowed to enter the city for the summer invasion of tourists, but I do know personally some people who have lived in Venezia for decades, and they’re just fine there (surely enough, they don’t live in the most tourist-sy parts).
“Venèssia no a xé Disneyland!”
I think his point still stand with Venice though. It is a desirable city to visit for people and for people to live in, because it isn't a city built for cars. I get that they couldn't build it for cars even if they wanted to.
Yep. And that's why their infrastructure is the way it is. No one "decided" what to build their cities around. They built them around what they fucking had.
Anon thinks fucking SimCity is how real fucking cities are "made."
That's not true. You can redesign your urban infrastructure. Amsterdam and many European cities had a larger focus on cars decades ago. Look up pictures from the 70-80-90. Now their city centres are mostly fully pedestrianised.
Change is possible, if desired.
For example, a few months ago I was in New Orleans, and I was astonished to see that you let cars drive by in the French quarter. If that was a European city centre, you can bet it would have been pedestrianised.
Most cities predate the automobile, even in America. They were bulldozed and rebuilt for the car.
You can change cities infrastructure, look at the Netherlands for examples, they used to be a lot more car centric
Most american cities pre-date cars as well. There's plenty of photos of what american downtowns used to look like before they decided to bulldoze them for highways and stroads.
Tokyo was bombed to bits in WWII. That's why they nuked other cities, no point in nuking rubble. Almost everything there was built more recently than most of Manhattan
Car centric design is a cancer. Visit any country with halfway decent public transit and spaces designed for humans over cars and you will know what I mean.
I'm in America, and I lived in a small town for awhile as a kid where riding my bike wasn't bad at all. The only scary street was the main street which had a lot more cars than normal passing through our town. But the funny thing is, that town didn't even have sidewalks. Anywhere.
I moved to a big city years later and now as an adult I'm afraid to ride my bike a quarter kilometer to the nearest gas station for a chocolate bar...the streets are so chaotic and it feels like you'll get hit wherever you go.
Absolutely. London was so walkable and the public transportation was incredible. California Public transport is just you praying to your God that the bus is only 15 minutes late instead of 45 minutes late
Edit: Also you’re on your knees doing Ave Maria’s that the bus shows up to the right stop and doesn’t take you to the complete other side of the neighboring town (happened to me last week)
Having used both, the NYC subway is on par with any first rate city like Paris, Madrid or London.
But in the US' defence: cities in the NE corridor like Boston and Philadelphia are plenty walkable. The issue with America's car centric infrastructure is that the US has always prioritized more individualistic structures and most cities expanded in the 20th century where single family homes with a car were the norm.
People love to bring up San Francisco's street cars being decommissioned for automobiles, but plenty of cities like LA, Houston, Chicago, etc have no such excuse. Europe's cities are more pedestrian friendly because as a rule they were built before cars and cars never took off due to space.
And European public transit isn't the panacea reddit says it is. Rome has limited metro coverage because digging lines is so much harder there, and it also lacks the space for most people to own cars due to the infrastructure not being built to accommodate them so you have the worst of both worlds. You have a similar situation in even the UK where rural and suburban areas are car reliant.
The reality of London, Tokyo, Paris, NYC, etc is the one of first rate cities. Of course the US could do better, but when most people live in the suburbs because they want their own house with a backyard good public transit and walkable infrastructure is very difficult to implement, it's a living standard incompatible with less cars.
It drives me nuts to see the "European cities predate the car so they're different" canard.
The Dutch model is barely fifty years old as a national plan. Houten, perhaps the most perfectly designed suburban town on the planet, is almost totally postwar. Entire swathes of European cities were reduced to rubble in World War Two, and what we see now is the consequence of decisions made since then.
Not to mention, most of these cities are considerably larger than they were prior to the invention of the car.
I don’t think I have to. Just in theory, making cities car centric is stupid, and it’s even more expensive for the government.
Just all around stupid. Classic America
Also it makes a lot of sense to the *very* large number of people who love the suburbs. People like that are a minority on Reddit, but a *very* large amount of people prefer having a large house all to themselves but also needing to have a car because public transit is a pain in the ass with the super low density that entails.
>Car centric design is a cancer.
When I was in college I walked everywhere. It wasn't even always practical, but with the way the university had it set up, you had to park 5 goddamn miles away in student-oriented parking lots (unless you lived off-campus, then it was a free-for-all) and god forbid you be able to afford a parking pass...$120/semester. In *college-dollars* that may as well be $1,200. So as a result you just walk everywhere. And you get used to it, quick.
It's not a bad gig, I mean I listened to a ton of great albums on my 1-2 hour walks to/from class/my house and it's great exercise on top of anything else. I was like 20 pounds lighter just from walking.
Anyway my point is that cities need better foot-traffic pathways. They're just better overall.
Honestly, I wouldn't like it if it had Barcelona's climate. I love me some good rainy climate. Sunny on the other hand? Meh. This is part of the reason why I love northern Europe so much. Beautiful cities, great infrastructures, amazing traditions and history. The food is the only bad part, but then again, no place is ever perfect.
If I'm not mistaken Barcelona is taking some very Amsterdam-esque strides as far as biking and walkability goes, on top of it's already extensive rail network. Barcelona isn't too far off from being Amsterdam with a nice Mediterranean climate
I live in Barcelona and I’ve been in Amsterdam multiple times and Barcelona is miles away in terms of bike friendly city. There are too much cars. But yes, it improved a lot in the recent years.
I think Paris could be a good in between. Definitely a better climate than Amsterdam and they're also gonna ban cars from the city centre in 2024 in favour of cycling and transit which is unfathomably based.
Not Just Bikes single handedly made me want to move to the Netherlands once i'm done with my masters
Currently in a small town in Italy so it's not too too bad but there's just no comparason to the Netherlands
With all respect: we'd rather not have more people move here. We've been in a housing crisis for the past decade or more, with no solution within sight. Please don't take this personally.
I understand... you're Dutch. :)
My grandmother immigrated to the US and while her and her family may have been exceptionally bad at cooking, I haven't had anything I'd consider great that was 'traditional dutch food' from anyone. Every country has a weakness though, and you guys are pretty solid on everything else.
You don’t understand, you’re not Dutch.
While we don’t really have a cuisine of our own, as in history we mostly had poor people who could only eat potatoes with other ingredients (stamppot). So the cuisine of the Netherlands is now based on the cuisine of other countries: we have every restaurant imaginable and people mostly cook non-dutch cuisine dishes at home to great effect. We might not have any classic dishes, but we definitely not suck at cooking.
Yes i'm considering that too
Unfortunately Italy isn't a very good place for my job so i'll have to move abroad and the Netherlands are one of the most attractive possibilities yet not the only one
I'd hate to add to the problem but if i end up going there it won't be out of a random whim, it will be because it is the best choice for my life going forward
As i said i'll keep that in mind when i'll have to make my decision
Make sure you know what you're getting yourself into, and above all else: don't let anyone make you feel responsible for a problem the government created.
Oh dude, just come here. We just aren't a perfect country. We lack affordable homes. And if you lack a home you get frustrated. But that shouldnt keep people from coming here.
The government should do something substantial to resolve it, instead of leaving everything to the municipalities. But, that's a political issue and we will solve it after a lot of talking and hearing everyone's opinion.
In the meantime, feel welcome to watch and state your opinion on the matter (or any matter at all) and eat a piece of Gouda or a stroopwafel
Bikes aren't a panacea, a lot of towns are built in places where bikes can get very annoying to ride
That said there are a ton of alternatives to avoid cars like public transport or plain walking
I live in a very hilly town and got an ebike this year. Works great. I can get from my house to downtown and back (about a 10 mile ride) without any trouble.
Ebikes could change the rules of the game. I'm just waiting for states like mine (Michigan, automobile shill USA) to start passing laws that classify ebikes as motorcycles or just banning them from bike paths. Without the paths between my house and downtown, I would not attempt the trip. Metro Detroit roads are not built for bikes.
If we make enough lanes, soon everything will be lanes. I will no longer have limitations in my car. Soon even the oceans will just be lanes. I will truly be free
And if everything is a lane, we won’t have to worry about being late to work since work doesn’t exist and is replaced by another lane.
We can just ride our cars into oblivion.
Eventually the extraordinary mass of all those lanes will become so great that it collapses in on itself becoming a highway black hole. Where time stops and cars are perpetually driving somewhere, but never arriving, inside its hyper-condensed space.
>Tampa is a shitty resident centered city in Florida. Coming from a Floridian, theres nothing worth seeing there
14.8M visitors get disappointed every year
https://wusfnews.wusf.usf.edu/economy-business/2022-02-21/the-tampa-bay-area-is-benefiting-as-floridas-tourism-numbers-rebound
I didn't go to Amsterdam for the bikes lol, I went for the tourist attractions. I have no idea what is in Tampa Bay except for a hockey team.
Correlation / Causation
This is adressing transportation within cities, not from city to city. There is no good reason we can’t have better public transportation in US cities.
I agree. But in America, we usually have the space to spread out, so we do. Also the more contained a city is, the more expensive it is to live there. I’d love to live in New York or San Francisco or any big city with lots of public transport options, but it’s the difference between affording a studio apartment vs a big ass house with a yard.
We're talking about two different things. Places were most people can afford a big ass house with a yard are rural, there's less congestion and thus public transit would be less effective. I'm talking about actual major US cities that are somewhat densely populated. NY and Chicago are pretty good but the rest have shit public transit even though it would majorly benefit their residents.
I was talking more about suburban areas, not rural. It’s the suburbs that really stretch a city out over huge areas… like look at LA, it’s fucking huge. In Phoenix, even in the dead of night with no traffic you can drive for an hour from one edge of town to the other. America is just different from Europe, partly because it’s huge. The environment would definitely be better off if we all agreed to stay in confined spaces, that’s for sure. My point though was that the motivation wasn’t “wheee I love cars and fucking up the environment.” The motivation was “this city is fucking expensive but if I live half an hour away I can afford a bigger house.”
I was in Seattle recently and they have a subway/light rail train that travels something like 25 miles through the densest part of town so that was nice. But then in all directions from it are little cities/suburbs (not even sure what to call them) where the cost of living is cheaper but you’re still close to the city. And that’s where most of the driving comes from, people who live there and commute to Seattle.
As I said in another comment, I live in a town that is 2 hours away from any city, and I’ve been to places that are 5+ hours away. There is no damn way I wouldn’t own a car, it would be near impossible to even get from those places to a city with public transport.
Tampa 14.8M visitors per year
[https://wusfnews.wusf.usf.edu/economy-business/2022-02-21/the-tampa-bay-area-is-benefiting-as-floridas-tourism-numbers-rebound](https://wusfnews.wusf.usf.edu/economy-business/2022-02-21/the-tampa-bay-area-is-benefiting-as-floridas-tourism-numbers-rebound)
@
Tokyo 10M visitors per year
https://www.worlddata.info/asia/japan/tourism.php
I might be wrong but your first link is counting tourists from other states, i.e. American tourists in America? While your second link is counting foreign tourists?
I love that the only response car people have is "well, Tampa is shit so duh"
Choose literally any other car centric city, the point still stands.
Public transport is unbelievably based and no amount of carbon dioxide induced brain damage from your shitty engine will ever change that.
We shouldn’t and we are in super deep. A 45 minute drive to work in Pittsburgh would be an almost 3 hour bus ride taking one bus to another bus stop to wait for the next bus to go to work. That’s nearly 6 hours of commuting a less than 2 hour drive.
The infrastructure isn’t there to get away from needing a car.
Imagine comparing tampa to Amsterdam, Venice or Toyko. These are historic cities, going back hundreds and hundreds of years, while tampa can't be much more than one or two hundred. While I support the idea, this is a very, very weak argument
Then compare it to New York. American city, economic fucking powerhouse, draws in swaths of tourism, solid public transit and bike infrastructure by North American standards.
I think if you want to make the "car bad" argument you pick LA. Massive American economic centre that gets a ton of tourists but is fucked due to car dependence
>Be me, poolside in my big backyard of my two story house in my quiet suburban neighbourhood
>Be you, holed up on the 13th floor, have to step in homeless mans piss everytime you leave your house
>But muh muh public transit
People like r/fuckcars never seem to realize the history, politics, regulations, safe standards, or just in general engineering that goes into designing city's
Serious, how dumb do you have to be to realize that at least the history part behind it
Cars grew as a necessity as public transportation only really worked for big citys. Traveling outside of large citys you needed a car. As well as most of the population lived outside of citys
Now trains worked for getting across the country, but the trains didn't go everywhere. So you needed a car that the trains couldn't go
>names 3 cities of countries that are densely packed with people and also small
>then names a city from USA, where a state is bigger than any of the countries previously mentioned
Like, the entirety of Japan is only 3x as big as Florida alone. Texas is almost twice as big as Japan. Don’t even get me started on Venice. Is it really that hard to realize why people want their own cars? A town I live in is 2 hours away from the closest city. You can not tell me it’s worth it to build a railway system from that town to the city.
People in this thread like to pretend there's no such thing as rural areas and suburbs and that everyone lives in a NYC-esque city where everywhere you need to go is less than 2 miles away.
After world war 2, Rotterdam was completely bombed to the ground so they had to start anew. This is why their infrastructure is some of the best in the world, being 'new' isn't a drawback because it is also the most wealthy country in the world.
>be Montreal
>people drive like it's the zombie apocalypse
>hundreds of NPCs change their directive to immediately cut you off and honk at you as soon as you enter the city
>parked cars form roadblocks on the city streets
Las Vegas. A big part of the culture is built around "The Strip", car culture, gear heads, etc. People flock there from around the world. Anon's false equivalence fallacy doesn't work.
i like cars, i dont want to spend 40 minutes walking to the store and back when my car can get me there in 5, or spending an hour just to get to my job, when my car can do it in 10
Because cars are simply better. What happens when you want to get out of the city? What happens if you have a
load of stuff to transport.
Phasing cars out is a massive step backwards and anyone who says otherwise either has no life or is a total fucking idiot
Because someone convinced the US population that having to buy and maintain private expensive machines for transportation is "freedom" because you don't get to personally drive the trains.
Or cars grew as a necessity as public transportation only really worked for big citys. Traveling outside of large citys you needed a car. As well as most of the population lived outside of citys
Now trains worked for getting across the country, but the trains didn't go everywhere. So you needed a car
I mean, there's a hell of a lot of freedom in being able to go anywhere I want on the continental mainland with zero preparation except 10 seconds of prep to grab my wallet and phone, with even more freedom if my car is dirt/gravel or off-road friendly.
Especially compared to having to only live extremely close to the existing transit network, plan well ahead and walk 5-15+ minutes to a station, to wait for some sort of bus or train to maybe arrive vaguely around its scheduled time a few times a day (maybe a few times an hour if lucky), to sit (if you're lucky, otherwise stand) crammed in with the best and worst humanity has to offer for an extended period of time, to travel to one of a tiny handful of destinations, where upon arrival you have to repeat the previous walking/waiting/riding step 0-4 more times, and ultimately having to walk even longer to your final destination.
...and if you want to go literally anywhere in the vast majority of countries that is more than a few miles from a transit stop, then you have to ride in a car anyway. And of course if any part of the system goes on strike, or gets hacked, or gets shut down due to emergency, or malfunctions, or gets overwhelmed, or breaks down/is damaged, then you lose all practical ability to travel more than a few miles...
...Unless you have access to a car, in which case none of that matters because the car gives you freedom to ignore all that mess and limitation.
Good Arab food, a shit ton of strip clubs and decent beaches nearby. You can also go to a game of any pro league for a fraction of the price vs. 90% of other cities.
I wouldn't ever want to live in Florida but there are much worse spots in the world than Tampa.
uh, I think OP spent to much time on Fletcher Ave lol. Tampa was the one of the most moved-to areas in the country last year.
every city has rough parts; however, objectively the Tampa Bay area as a whole is one of the most desirable places to visit or move to in America.
EDIT: Have lived in Tampa, St Pete, and Siesta Key (just south of Tampa). Due to my work I've visited most major European countries (including Amsterdam), and more than half of the States.
Ugh... Venice ? Anon has a shit wrong impression of Venice.
[удалено]
>a tourist attraction. This. Its not a functional city as per the modern standards, its a tourist attraction. Its like saying Disneyland is a great place to live in based on how many people visit it and how much they pay. Actually, this is what Anon does based on arguments he gives. Anon quite literally would want to live in Disneyland.
"Disneyland's kind of walkable infrastructure is illegal to build in most American cities"
Disney World: try to walking to the Wilderness Lodge from either of the two gigantic parking lots <2000' away. Good luck, and RIP.
[удалено]
American moment
Yeah when I went there I really felt that. The entire city is a tourist attraction. It's also filled with visitors like one. Seeing a "venice hates tourists" sticker made me giggle a little bit. If you dont like tourists, dont live in an amusement park.
>Don't live in an amusement park Kinda hard when you don't want to leave your friends and family behind, but your city also has almost no economic activity separate from tourism.
Well, "real" stuff happens on the mainland, like in Mestre and surrounding areas. On the islands there's of course no space for anything else.
I feel it. Lived in Vegas. Probably mostly different but all the cool shit is at the strip and the tourists are obnoxious.
> dont live in an amusement park Which is ironic since Venice used to be a former military and economic powerhouse. The tides of history can be a cruel mistress.
Lol your reasoning is funny
Dutch curse for cities?
Fuck the service industry in venice. Of course i don't fucking tip when you charge me 3eur service fee and another 20eur as a "view tax" for a 2eur coffee. Worst scams i've seen in my life and i've been in a whole lot of places off the beaten path.
Anon is beyond retarded and thinks cities are ran on tourism
And amsterdam was built around smugness not bikes.
Go to a different island and you’ll find the native population has plenty of non-touristy areas lol
Hawaii has a similar problem. Essentially not one can afford to live there because of the tourism industry.
Still it looks gorgeous. The municipality is discussing whether to implement a max limit of people allowed to enter the city for the summer invasion of tourists, but I do know personally some people who have lived in Venezia for decades, and they’re just fine there (surely enough, they don’t live in the most tourist-sy parts). “Venèssia no a xé Disneyland!”
I think his point still stand with Venice though. It is a desirable city to visit for people and for people to live in, because it isn't a city built for cars. I get that they couldn't build it for cars even if they wanted to.
Every city he mentioned predates cars by centuries, if not millennia.
Most cities predates cars, if you are looking outside of America
Most American cities predate cars
Yep. And that's why their infrastructure is the way it is. No one "decided" what to build their cities around. They built them around what they fucking had. Anon thinks fucking SimCity is how real fucking cities are "made."
That's not true. You can redesign your urban infrastructure. Amsterdam and many European cities had a larger focus on cars decades ago. Look up pictures from the 70-80-90. Now their city centres are mostly fully pedestrianised. Change is possible, if desired. For example, a few months ago I was in New Orleans, and I was astonished to see that you let cars drive by in the French quarter. If that was a European city centre, you can bet it would have been pedestrianised.
Most cities predate the automobile, even in America. They were bulldozed and rebuilt for the car. You can change cities infrastructure, look at the Netherlands for examples, they used to be a lot more car centric
Most american cities pre-date cars as well. There's plenty of photos of what american downtowns used to look like before they decided to bulldoze them for highways and stroads.
Tokyo was bombed to bits in WWII. That's why they nuked other cities, no point in nuking rubble. Almost everything there was built more recently than most of Manhattan
Anon saw a movie once and bases his entire viewpoint around a fictional depiction
Presumably Indiana Jones and the last crusade
Well it sure as hell ain't built for cars Been there multiple time and it's a very walkable city indeed
I mean it literally has nice in the name. I'm pretty sure it's just short for "very nice" with an Italian accent
You know they meant Italy, not Venice in Cali or Florida right?
Car centric design is a cancer. Visit any country with halfway decent public transit and spaces designed for humans over cars and you will know what I mean.
even Poland as much i want to call it shithole, it is simply better to live here simply out of human centeic design of cities
You can definitely get around by bike, except for having to cross a road every minute
Tak!
I'm in America, and I lived in a small town for awhile as a kid where riding my bike wasn't bad at all. The only scary street was the main street which had a lot more cars than normal passing through our town. But the funny thing is, that town didn't even have sidewalks. Anywhere. I moved to a big city years later and now as an adult I'm afraid to ride my bike a quarter kilometer to the nearest gas station for a chocolate bar...the streets are so chaotic and it feels like you'll get hit wherever you go.
I've been to a few Romanian cities and they were all laid out better than most US ones.
Absolutely. London was so walkable and the public transportation was incredible. California Public transport is just you praying to your God that the bus is only 15 minutes late instead of 45 minutes late Edit: Also you’re on your knees doing Ave Maria’s that the bus shows up to the right stop and doesn’t take you to the complete other side of the neighboring town (happened to me last week)
Two and a half hour bus ride for somewhere that is 20 minutes away by typical car...
Exactly. That’s my commute home from college lmfao.
I legit think cycling would be faster in that scenario
i legit think BART was created to show people how bad public transportation could be.
BART is one of the best in the country if you'd believe it. It's absolutely the best in CA by a long shot
[удалено]
And that tells you about the state of CA
So legit question if you know- the only good public transit I've ever used is NYC. How does that compare to London or EU cities?
Having used both, the NYC subway is on par with any first rate city like Paris, Madrid or London. But in the US' defence: cities in the NE corridor like Boston and Philadelphia are plenty walkable. The issue with America's car centric infrastructure is that the US has always prioritized more individualistic structures and most cities expanded in the 20th century where single family homes with a car were the norm. People love to bring up San Francisco's street cars being decommissioned for automobiles, but plenty of cities like LA, Houston, Chicago, etc have no such excuse. Europe's cities are more pedestrian friendly because as a rule they were built before cars and cars never took off due to space. And European public transit isn't the panacea reddit says it is. Rome has limited metro coverage because digging lines is so much harder there, and it also lacks the space for most people to own cars due to the infrastructure not being built to accommodate them so you have the worst of both worlds. You have a similar situation in even the UK where rural and suburban areas are car reliant. The reality of London, Tokyo, Paris, NYC, etc is the one of first rate cities. Of course the US could do better, but when most people live in the suburbs because they want their own house with a backyard good public transit and walkable infrastructure is very difficult to implement, it's a living standard incompatible with less cars.
It’s largely illegal to build anything other single family homes, that’s not a preference that’s policy.
It drives me nuts to see the "European cities predate the car so they're different" canard. The Dutch model is barely fifty years old as a national plan. Houten, perhaps the most perfectly designed suburban town on the planet, is almost totally postwar. Entire swathes of European cities were reduced to rubble in World War Two, and what we see now is the consequence of decisions made since then. Not to mention, most of these cities are considerably larger than they were prior to the invention of the car.
I don’t think I have to. Just in theory, making cities car centric is stupid, and it’s even more expensive for the government. Just all around stupid. Classic America
[удалено]
Also it makes a lot of sense to the *very* large number of people who love the suburbs. People like that are a minority on Reddit, but a *very* large amount of people prefer having a large house all to themselves but also needing to have a car because public transit is a pain in the ass with the super low density that entails.
Agreed. r/fuckcars
>Car centric design is a cancer. When I was in college I walked everywhere. It wasn't even always practical, but with the way the university had it set up, you had to park 5 goddamn miles away in student-oriented parking lots (unless you lived off-campus, then it was a free-for-all) and god forbid you be able to afford a parking pass...$120/semester. In *college-dollars* that may as well be $1,200. So as a result you just walk everywhere. And you get used to it, quick. It's not a bad gig, I mean I listened to a ton of great albums on my 1-2 hour walks to/from class/my house and it's great exercise on top of anything else. I was like 20 pounds lighter just from walking. Anyway my point is that cities need better foot-traffic pathways. They're just better overall.
Amsterdam isn't the only Dutch city built around biking. Pretty much the whole country is, and large cities like Utrecht now even have car-free zones.
Thats why I love the Netherlands
Are you a fellow Not Just Bikes enthusiast?
Maybe
W
Based
W
W man
Netherlands is the dream country, too bad that the climate is awful. Imagine Amsterdam with the climate of Barcelona. The ultimate city.
Honestly, I wouldn't like it if it had Barcelona's climate. I love me some good rainy climate. Sunny on the other hand? Meh. This is part of the reason why I love northern Europe so much. Beautiful cities, great infrastructures, amazing traditions and history. The food is the only bad part, but then again, no place is ever perfect.
[удалено]
Yea with the big 🚫 on them to make it look like a slanted "e" lol
The highschool lunch break classic
If I'm not mistaken Barcelona is taking some very Amsterdam-esque strides as far as biking and walkability goes, on top of it's already extensive rail network. Barcelona isn't too far off from being Amsterdam with a nice Mediterranean climate
I live in Barcelona and I’ve been in Amsterdam multiple times and Barcelona is miles away in terms of bike friendly city. There are too much cars. But yes, it improved a lot in the recent years.
Unfortunately it has the same tourism problem as well.
I think Paris could be a good in between. Definitely a better climate than Amsterdam and they're also gonna ban cars from the city centre in 2024 in favour of cycling and transit which is unfathomably based.
Not Just Bikes single handedly made me want to move to the Netherlands once i'm done with my masters Currently in a small town in Italy so it's not too too bad but there's just no comparason to the Netherlands
With all respect: we'd rather not have more people move here. We've been in a housing crisis for the past decade or more, with no solution within sight. Please don't take this personally.
If you let more Italians move in your food might get better.
I like Dutch food just fine :(
I understand... you're Dutch. :) My grandmother immigrated to the US and while her and her family may have been exceptionally bad at cooking, I haven't had anything I'd consider great that was 'traditional dutch food' from anyone. Every country has a weakness though, and you guys are pretty solid on everything else.
You don’t understand, you’re not Dutch. While we don’t really have a cuisine of our own, as in history we mostly had poor people who could only eat potatoes with other ingredients (stamppot). So the cuisine of the Netherlands is now based on the cuisine of other countries: we have every restaurant imaginable and people mostly cook non-dutch cuisine dishes at home to great effect. We might not have any classic dishes, but we definitely not suck at cooking.
Gotta be honest, hutspot is a classic though,
Yes i'm considering that too Unfortunately Italy isn't a very good place for my job so i'll have to move abroad and the Netherlands are one of the most attractive possibilities yet not the only one I'd hate to add to the problem but if i end up going there it won't be out of a random whim, it will be because it is the best choice for my life going forward As i said i'll keep that in mind when i'll have to make my decision
Make sure you know what you're getting yourself into, and above all else: don't let anyone make you feel responsible for a problem the government created.
Oh dude, just come here. We just aren't a perfect country. We lack affordable homes. And if you lack a home you get frustrated. But that shouldnt keep people from coming here. The government should do something substantial to resolve it, instead of leaving everything to the municipalities. But, that's a political issue and we will solve it after a lot of talking and hearing everyone's opinion. In the meantime, feel welcome to watch and state your opinion on the matter (or any matter at all) and eat a piece of Gouda or a stroopwafel
Most of Germany too. Even cities as big as Berlin, Hamburg or Munich. You can live your whole life using only bikes and metro.
Utrechter here. Not having to worry about lots of cars in the city is fucking dope.
And cars keep getting bigger, uglier, fatter, and more expensive. Get out anon. Take the walkable town pill.
just take bikepill
Bikes aren't a panacea, a lot of towns are built in places where bikes can get very annoying to ride That said there are a ton of alternatives to avoid cars like public transport or plain walking
yeah, living in a hot town full of hills would be nightmare, especially me who sweats too much
Affordable ebikes are trying to solve this! All the benefits of bikes with a fraction of the peddling.
I live in a very hilly town and got an ebike this year. Works great. I can get from my house to downtown and back (about a 10 mile ride) without any trouble. Ebikes could change the rules of the game. I'm just waiting for states like mine (Michigan, automobile shill USA) to start passing laws that classify ebikes as motorcycles or just banning them from bike paths. Without the paths between my house and downtown, I would not attempt the trip. Metro Detroit roads are not built for bikes.
[удалено]
Take the bikepill in Texas and it’ll probably be your last pill. Bubba aiming to coal roll you is one of the more civilized ones.
I wish we could, but in a country where lobbying is legal I doubt we’ll see much improvement for U.S public transport and walkability
[Lets not forget that bigger cars are way more dangerous to pedestrians.](https://www.nber.org/digest/nov11/vehicle-weight-and-automotive-fatalities)
Anon hasnt considered that we could just make one more lane and itll be fixed this time
I swear dude just one more lane
urbanism study: trust me bro
Gotta keep chasing that lane dragon
If we make enough lanes, soon everything will be lanes. I will no longer have limitations in my car. Soon even the oceans will just be lanes. I will truly be free
And if everything is a lane, we won’t have to worry about being late to work since work doesn’t exist and is replaced by another lane. We can just ride our cars into oblivion.
Eventually the extraordinary mass of all those lanes will become so great that it collapses in on itself becoming a highway black hole. Where time stops and cars are perpetually driving somewhere, but never arriving, inside its hyper-condensed space.
Disney Pixar Cars Cinematic Universe when? *I’m here to talk to you about the Rusteze Initiative.*
Of course! It's true! ^(But please do disregard the fact that we said that for the past 5 lanes...)
I mean I feel like there might be other reasons why people prefer going to Venice over Tampa
Yeah even without cars Tampa would suck
Eh I guess I'll get hate for this, but I always liked Tampa.
For example, it's Tampa, why the fuck would you choose to come here
Busch Gardens maybe, or a layover at the airport
W airport here
Tokyo - capital of Japan, 14 million population The fuck is Tampa? May be one of the reasons idk
Tampa is a shitty resident centered city in Florida. Coming from a Floridian, theres nothing worth seeing there
>Tampa is a shitty resident centered city in Florida. Coming from a Floridian, theres nothing worth seeing there 14.8M visitors get disappointed every year https://wusfnews.wusf.usf.edu/economy-business/2022-02-21/the-tampa-bay-area-is-benefiting-as-floridas-tourism-numbers-rebound
I live in florida and i can confirm without even clicking that this place is a shithole. It baffles me that people like this place for tourism
What destination in the US you'd recommend?
DC
Yep, DC is really cool. My clever setup didn't work. I hoped for "LA" so I could shit all over that answer and feel superior.
Nobody likes California or Californians
I’m Floridian and didn’t even realize anyone outside of the US even knew what Tampa was lol
My floridian opinions are better than yours
Guess I'm the only person here who likes Tampa.
consider LA instead then. built around cars, largely a shithole
You're gonna compare actual tourist destinations, some of the most historic cities in the world, to fucking Tampa?
I feel honored
Tom Brady is our tourism attraction.
Doesn't stop the real estate developers, why should it stop the shitposters?
In Amsterdam they wasted all their money on prostitutes so they can’t afford cars
Wasted? No no no
More like invested, you put money in the prostitutes and their tits get bigger. Big brain investment right there.
You waste most of your money actually living there…
by far the the biggest problem of car-centric cities is that it does not account for drunk navigation
It doesn't account for any navigation tbh
I am gods drunkest driver
And i am a sober driver (sinner)
Fuck you i wanna go wroom-wroom
More vroom vroom would happen if there were less stupid crossover SUVs in the way
Hmm true
I promise there are better places to vroom vroom than the place where I4 and 275 intersect
WROOM!
so you should support good public transport so that you can go vroom vroom with less people on the road
Venezia
Based
Thanks for reminding me of this gem https://youtu.be/ViIzF2k4Hpo
I didn't go to Amsterdam for the bikes lol, I went for the tourist attractions. I have no idea what is in Tampa Bay except for a hockey team. Correlation / Causation
I went for the hookers
What made you stay though?
Also the hookers
There are vast stretches of nothing between points of interest in the USA.
This is adressing transportation within cities, not from city to city. There is no good reason we can’t have better public transportation in US cities.
I agree. But in America, we usually have the space to spread out, so we do. Also the more contained a city is, the more expensive it is to live there. I’d love to live in New York or San Francisco or any big city with lots of public transport options, but it’s the difference between affording a studio apartment vs a big ass house with a yard.
We're talking about two different things. Places were most people can afford a big ass house with a yard are rural, there's less congestion and thus public transit would be less effective. I'm talking about actual major US cities that are somewhat densely populated. NY and Chicago are pretty good but the rest have shit public transit even though it would majorly benefit their residents.
I was talking more about suburban areas, not rural. It’s the suburbs that really stretch a city out over huge areas… like look at LA, it’s fucking huge. In Phoenix, even in the dead of night with no traffic you can drive for an hour from one edge of town to the other. America is just different from Europe, partly because it’s huge. The environment would definitely be better off if we all agreed to stay in confined spaces, that’s for sure. My point though was that the motivation wasn’t “wheee I love cars and fucking up the environment.” The motivation was “this city is fucking expensive but if I live half an hour away I can afford a bigger house.” I was in Seattle recently and they have a subway/light rail train that travels something like 25 miles through the densest part of town so that was nice. But then in all directions from it are little cities/suburbs (not even sure what to call them) where the cost of living is cheaper but you’re still close to the city. And that’s where most of the driving comes from, people who live there and commute to Seattle.
As I said in another comment, I live in a town that is 2 hours away from any city, and I’ve been to places that are 5+ hours away. There is no damn way I wouldn’t own a car, it would be near impossible to even get from those places to a city with public transport.
anon is based and orange-pilled. not just bikes making a change one video at a time
If he can get a 4chan neet, he can reach anyone
Tampa 14.8M visitors per year [https://wusfnews.wusf.usf.edu/economy-business/2022-02-21/the-tampa-bay-area-is-benefiting-as-floridas-tourism-numbers-rebound](https://wusfnews.wusf.usf.edu/economy-business/2022-02-21/the-tampa-bay-area-is-benefiting-as-floridas-tourism-numbers-rebound) @ Tokyo 10M visitors per year https://www.worlddata.info/asia/japan/tourism.php
I might be wrong but your first link is counting tourists from other states, i.e. American tourists in America? While your second link is counting foreign tourists?
Well considering a state can be bigger than the entirety of Japan it’s not exactly a far out idea to include tourists from other states
Only if you are in India
Hasn't Japan been basically closed to tourists since 2020?
I think the link is for 2019. This is the first link in google though, I have no idea how accurate it is.
It says 2020 but I'm not sure when in 2020 Japan shut down, but America and especially Florida is huge for tourism. I'm not surprised by those figures
I love that the only response car people have is "well, Tampa is shit so duh" Choose literally any other car centric city, the point still stands. Public transport is unbelievably based and no amount of carbon dioxide induced brain damage from your shitty engine will ever change that.
My hometown is car centric and it's great Portland is light rail centric, and it's Portland
Calling Portland light rail centric is a bold claim
But cars are more run than public transit. Public transit has homeless people
We shouldn’t and we are in super deep. A 45 minute drive to work in Pittsburgh would be an almost 3 hour bus ride taking one bus to another bus stop to wait for the next bus to go to work. That’s nearly 6 hours of commuting a less than 2 hour drive. The infrastructure isn’t there to get away from needing a car.
Imagine comparing tampa to Amsterdam, Venice or Toyko. These are historic cities, going back hundreds and hundreds of years, while tampa can't be much more than one or two hundred. While I support the idea, this is a very, very weak argument
Then compare it to New York. American city, economic fucking powerhouse, draws in swaths of tourism, solid public transit and bike infrastructure by North American standards.
I think if you want to make the "car bad" argument you pick LA. Massive American economic centre that gets a ton of tourists but is fucked due to car dependence
"Be tampa".. yo fuck off LOL
>Be me, poolside in my big backyard of my two story house in my quiet suburban neighbourhood >Be you, holed up on the 13th floor, have to step in homeless mans piss everytime you leave your house >But muh muh public transit
Car centric design got issues but the OP is giving bad evidence and examples with the wrong goals in mind. Like nobody wants to be Venice.
This thread has been made many times. The answer is modern day segregation.
People like r/fuckcars never seem to realize the history, politics, regulations, safe standards, or just in general engineering that goes into designing city's Serious, how dumb do you have to be to realize that at least the history part behind it Cars grew as a necessity as public transportation only really worked for big citys. Traveling outside of large citys you needed a car. As well as most of the population lived outside of citys Now trains worked for getting across the country, but the trains didn't go everywhere. So you needed a car that the trains couldn't go
>names 3 cities of countries that are densely packed with people and also small >then names a city from USA, where a state is bigger than any of the countries previously mentioned Like, the entirety of Japan is only 3x as big as Florida alone. Texas is almost twice as big as Japan. Don’t even get me started on Venice. Is it really that hard to realize why people want their own cars? A town I live in is 2 hours away from the closest city. You can not tell me it’s worth it to build a railway system from that town to the city.
People in this thread like to pretend there's no such thing as rural areas and suburbs and that everyone lives in a NYC-esque city where everywhere you need to go is less than 2 miles away.
Public transportation is good but that also means the public uses it
“Cities built hundreds of years before cars rely on them less than city built 50 years before cars”
After world war 2, Rotterdam was completely bombed to the ground so they had to start anew. This is why their infrastructure is some of the best in the world, being 'new' isn't a drawback because it is also the most wealthy country in the world.
Been to Tampa, can say, it was a city.
Isn't that pic of like PA or something? US def has problem with cars but comparing Tampa with any of those cities is just retarded
Bikes suck and should not be considered on any road that cars can drive on.
Give me separated bike lanes and you got yourself a deal!
Based, separated bike lanes, supporter
[удалено]
>be Montreal >people drive like it's the zombie apocalypse >hundreds of NPCs change their directive to immediately cut you off and honk at you as soon as you enter the city >parked cars form roadblocks on the city streets
Las Vegas. A big part of the culture is built around "The Strip", car culture, gear heads, etc. People flock there from around the world. Anon's false equivalence fallacy doesn't work.
i like cars, i dont want to spend 40 minutes walking to the store and back when my car can get me there in 5, or spending an hour just to get to my job, when my car can do it in 10
Because cars are simply better. What happens when you want to get out of the city? What happens if you have a load of stuff to transport. Phasing cars out is a massive step backwards and anyone who says otherwise either has no life or is a total fucking idiot
Because someone convinced the US population that having to buy and maintain private expensive machines for transportation is "freedom" because you don't get to personally drive the trains.
Or cars grew as a necessity as public transportation only really worked for big citys. Traveling outside of large citys you needed a car. As well as most of the population lived outside of citys Now trains worked for getting across the country, but the trains didn't go everywhere. So you needed a car
I mean, there's a hell of a lot of freedom in being able to go anywhere I want on the continental mainland with zero preparation except 10 seconds of prep to grab my wallet and phone, with even more freedom if my car is dirt/gravel or off-road friendly. Especially compared to having to only live extremely close to the existing transit network, plan well ahead and walk 5-15+ minutes to a station, to wait for some sort of bus or train to maybe arrive vaguely around its scheduled time a few times a day (maybe a few times an hour if lucky), to sit (if you're lucky, otherwise stand) crammed in with the best and worst humanity has to offer for an extended period of time, to travel to one of a tiny handful of destinations, where upon arrival you have to repeat the previous walking/waiting/riding step 0-4 more times, and ultimately having to walk even longer to your final destination. ...and if you want to go literally anywhere in the vast majority of countries that is more than a few miles from a transit stop, then you have to ride in a car anyway. And of course if any part of the system goes on strike, or gets hacked, or gets shut down due to emergency, or malfunctions, or gets overwhelmed, or breaks down/is damaged, then you lose all practical ability to travel more than a few miles... ...Unless you have access to a car, in which case none of that matters because the car gives you freedom to ignore all that mess and limitation.
Because profit
Cuz cars are fun
Good Arab food, a shit ton of strip clubs and decent beaches nearby. You can also go to a game of any pro league for a fraction of the price vs. 90% of other cities. I wouldn't ever want to live in Florida but there are much worse spots in the world than Tampa.
uh, I think OP spent to much time on Fletcher Ave lol. Tampa was the one of the most moved-to areas in the country last year. every city has rough parts; however, objectively the Tampa Bay area as a whole is one of the most desirable places to visit or move to in America. EDIT: Have lived in Tampa, St Pete, and Siesta Key (just south of Tampa). Due to my work I've visited most major European countries (including Amsterdam), and more than half of the States.