this post was submitted on 22 Feb 2025
1404 points (97.5% liked)

Fuck Cars

11636 readers
323 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
 
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

What if we just altered zoning laws so they don't restrict high-density residential buildings?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Oh, they didn't change that, people living there need to get real good at dodging golf balls.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

Keeping all of the trees while also building a 40,000 unit apartment building on the same lot is gonna be a bit of a trick. Unless the building is 30 stories high. That might be normal in New York, but that’s not something you’re gonna see very much outside of the city.

I’m all for vertical city building, but keep in mind what is likely to happen in your local community.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago

But where would we play golf?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

Yeah but then rich fucks wouldn’t have a place all to themselves to be rich fucks, so that’s a fuck you, poors, just be rich like us, thanks.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago
[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I guess that technically counts as a public sex forest then

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Lovely weather we're having in Minneapolis this weekend!

Edit: Here, for anyone who didn't get the joke. NSFW

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago
[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

There isn’t any context on where this is, but:

  • there aren’t enough golf courses to really impact housing supply
  • parks and recreational facilities also serve a societal good assuming they’re accessible and serve the community as a whole
  • golf courses aren’t usually located along transit
[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago

There are enough to reduce housing supply issues.

Private golf courses provide little to no benefit to anyone especially after we factor in the environmental costs.

Golf courses not being on pubic transit is the only part I agree with.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›