Do you support "15 minute cities" in order to save the planet from man-made global warming?

[save the frogs]

7 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

How is driving 15 minutes (per the OP) to get everywhere you want to go going the reduce traffic? 

you will be likey mostly be walking and cycling everywhere rather than driving.

like the Dutch are already doing.

 

the need for cars will diminish is what I understand.

i'm guessing a lot of streets will be converted into pedestrian and bike only. 

 

keep track of all the trips you make to the other end of the city with your car.

how many of them are really necessary?

how often do you take you car just to justify owning one?

 

Edited March 23, 2023 by save the frogs

[save the frogs]

5 hours ago, Red Phoenix said:

limit your personal movement in order to 'save the planet from man-made global warming'. 

if you don't believe in man-made global warming ...

 

limit the often mostly unnecessary use of your car to:

- combat air pollution. do you like clean air? 

- to give the streets back to people rather than cars, which are occupying all the space on the streets

- to replace parking lots (which occupy 60% of land) with greenery and parks and cycling paths

- to transform from an overweight pre-diabetic who never walks or cycles to someone who walks more and is fitter and leaner

- to stop wasting 1/4 of your waking life sitting in traffic

 

 

Edited March 23, 2023 by save the frogs

[Yellowtail]

20 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

you will be likey mostly be walking and cycling everywhere rather than driving.

like the Dutch are already doing.

I will likely not, but I'm happy for the Dutch. 

 

20 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

the need for cars will diminish is what I understand.

As the cost is driven up no doubt. 

 

20 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

i'm guessing a lot of streets will be converted into pedestrian and bike only. 

We'll see

 

20 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

keep track of all the trips you make to the other end of the city with your car.

how many of them are really necessary?

To who? I expect if the party elites have their way, the hoi-polloi will be reduced to subsistence living, yes? 

 

20 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

how often do you take you car just to justify owning one?

Never. How often do you take your car just to justify owning one? 

[Peterphuket]

11 hours ago, BritManToo said:

I can work up ill-feeling towards every climate alarmist poster that doesn't have solar panels already installed.

So many want others to follow their beliefs without following them themselves.

Yes, now on this days it is only: Do as I say, not as I do.

[save the frogs]

10 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Never. How often do you take your car just to justify owning one? 

Yeah, well let's just agree to disagree.

Keep on truckin'. 

 

[Peterphuket]

41 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

you will be likey mostly be walking and cycling everywhere rather than driving.

like the Dutch are already doing.

 

the need for cars will diminish is what I understand.

i'm guessing a lot of streets will be converted into pedestrian and bike only. 

 

keep track of all the trips you make to the other end of the city with your car.

how many of them are really necessary?

how often do you take you car just to justify owning one?

 

like the Dutch are already doing.

 

Are you from the Netherlands?

If the answer is yes, than you know you are telling lies.

[Yellowtail]

18 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

if you don't believe in man-made global warming ...

I believe in man-made climate change, I think we quit making global warming when sales went down.

 

18 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

limit the often mostly unnecessary use of your car to:

Necessary to who? Who gets to decide what is and is not necessary, the state? 

 

18 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

- combat air pollution. do you like clean air? 

What about e-cars? 

 

18 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

- to give the streets back to people rather than cars, which are occupying all the space on the streets

People drive cars on the street, and people can walk on the sidewalk.

 

18 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

- to replace parking lots (which occupy 60% of land) with greenery and parks and cycling paths

60%? That's hilarious. 

18 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

- to transform from an overweight pre-diabetic who never walks or cycles to someone who walks more and is fitter and leaner

Is this not mostly diet? 

 

[KhunLA]

55 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

keep track of all the trips you make to the other end of the city with your car.

how many of them are really necessary?

how often do you take you car just to justify owning one?

I don't need a car, mb or bicycle.  I could sit in my room all day & night.

 

Is that would you suggest ?

 

I must go to Hua Hin for Imm - 100 kms away

I must go to Krung Thep, at least once a year, sometimes twice. 

 

And that not to see my daughter, who lives there.  Or should we never see each other in person.  Oh yea, 3 brother & families, scattered all over the USA.

 

This year's outing, and I've needed to be near the house.

Previous 3 years outings, so I don't think 15 minute cities fits my lifestyle.  Do people with EVs & solar get an unlimited free range pass ?

 

Left to right, 2022, 2021, 2020

Feel free to sit in your room if you want, or explore that 5 kms radius... ENJOY

Edited March 23, 2023 by KhunLA

[save the frogs]

10 minutes ago, Peterphuket said:

like the Dutch are already doing.

 

Are you from the Netherlands?

If the answer is yes, than you know you are telling lies.

no, i'm not from Netherlands.

just from what I've gathered.

 

https://bicyclenetwork.com.au/newsroom/2021/03/11/the-netherlands-by-numbers/#:~:text=The Dutch make 28 per,km per day per person.

The Dutch make 28 per cent of all trips by bicycle

[save the frogs]

10 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

I must go to Krung Thep, at least once a year, sometimes twice. 

do you think they will prevent you from going there twice a year?

I don't think the restrictions will be that severe.

we need to get the exact data to see what the restrictions are exactly.

 

also keep in mind that some places have fairly good transport. like most parts of EU have a good rail system. i personally like trains when they are available. you can get on the laptop, which is more fun than driving to me.

 

Edited March 23, 2023 by save the frogs

[KhunLA]

14 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

do you think they will prevent you from going there twice a year?

I don't think the restrictions will be that severe.

we need to get the exact data to see what the restrictions are exactly.

 

You actually believe what they say.  History has proved that wrong.

 

I don't need any data, as I wouldn't cower & comply to any of that silliness.

 

First they want to tell you, you don't deserve to have 'that' much money, as nobody needs.

 

Now they want to tell you, you don't need to go anywhere, we'll provide everything.   They've done such a good job of all that already.

 

They actually wanted me to work until 65 for a company pension & 66 for govt Social Security.   My life expectancy for birth year 1954 is 67 yrs old.... hmm, let that sink in.

 

Take as long as you need.

 

You go ahead and follow their plan  ...

 

Edited March 23, 2023 by KhunLA

[save the frogs]

32 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

They actually wanted me to work until 65 for a company pension & 66 for govt Social Security.   My life expectancy for birth year 1954 is 67 yrs old.... hmm, let that sink in.

that's a different topic.

and that whole system of "work 40-80 hours a week until 65 and then retire" will be completely revamped. 

 

[MrJ2U]

5 hours ago, placeholder said:

afflicted by it.

By what. 

 

It's an app not a venereal disease.

 

 

Edited March 23, 2023 by MrJ2U

[Yellowtail]

50 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

do you think they will prevent you from going there twice a year?

The kept me from getting a haircut for over a year, 

50 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

I don't think the restrictions will be that severe.

Not at first, no.

50 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

we need to get the exact data to see what the restrictions are exactly.

What does this say:  laws and regulations that will limit your personal movement to no more than a 15 minute drive from your place of residence. 

 

Seems pretty clear doesn't it?

50 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

also keep in mind that some places have fairly good transport. like most parts of EU have a good rail system. i personally like trains when they are available. you can get on the laptop, which is more fun than driving to me.

Yes, I like riding in a helicopter when they are available, but they are often not. 

[KhunLA]

Just now, save the frogs said:

that's a different topic.

and that whole system of "work 40-80 hours a week until 65 and then retire" will be completely revamped. 

 

Actually, it's right on topic ... control.  

 

15 minute city has nothing to do with global warming.   If they really wanted to stop transport emissions, they could have developed solar & EVs decades ago.

 

You need to watch 'who killed the electric car?'

25 yrs ago, they, GM had a waiting list for EVs they weren't even trying to market.  They reversed the whole program, literally junked perfectly good cars, bought up & shelved the battery technology, and controlled the Govt committees that regulated it.  It's eye opening.

 

15 minute cities simply don't fit into anyone's idea of freedom   Choice of medical facilities, docs.  Do you think the inner city slums will get any close to what uptown will get.   Now they won't even have the option of going anywhere to get better anything, with 15 minute cities.

 

If I had to rely on medical care, 15 minutes away, I would have died last year.

 

15 minute cites will benefit 1 segment of society, those that already have. 

[Yellowtail]

45 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

You actually believe what they say.  History has proved that wrong.

 

I don't need any data, as I wouldn't cower & comply to any of that silliness.

 

First they want to tell you, you don't deserve to have 'that' much money, as nobody needs.

 

Now they want to tell you, you don't need to go anywhere, we'll provide everything.   They've done such a good job of all that already.

 

They actually wanted me to work until 65 for a company pension & 66 for govt Social Security.   My life expectancy for birth year 1954 is 67 yrs old.... hmm, let that sink in.

 

Take as long as you need.

 

You go ahead and follow their plan  ...

You will not be made to cower & comply to it. They will just make sure that everything they do not want hoi-polloi to have. like big homes, cars, carports yards, pets and whatnot will just become incredibly unaffordable.

 

You need to be stuffed in a tiny apartment, work from home, have your stuff delivered, and only read and see what they approve. 

[StreetCowboy]

11 minutes ago, MrJ2U said:

By what. 

 

It's an app not a venereal disease.

 

Excellent, even for those who are of the  "unawares " grouping. 

Waze diverts traffic onto unsuitable roads, causing congestion on roads that cannot cope with it, while doing little to alleviate congestion on trunk roads.  It is of limited use for those that know the roads, and less for those that don’t, other than route finding, for which other applications are just as good.

[Yellowtail]

1 hour ago, save the frogs said:

 

- to stop wasting 1/4 of your waking life sitting in traffic

 

 

How much time do you spend in traffic now? 

 

[KhunLA]

What are retired, longer living people supposed to do ?

 

Been retired for 23 yrs.   TH is too small for me, but I'm too lazy to explore elsewhere.  It would literally be suicidal, if I had to hang out in the same 5 kms or even 100 kms radius for 20+ yrs.

 

THAT'S NUTS

[MrJ2U]

4 minutes ago, StreetCowboy said:

Waze diverts traffic onto unsuitable roads

No it doesn't. 

 

Crazy talk.

 

You obviously don't have a car or clue how these applications work. 

 

 

[placeholder]

8 hours ago, connda said:

This is what Connda (me) wrote:

"Will you support laws and regulations that will limit your personal movement to no more than a 15 minute drive from your place of residence in order to save the planet from man-made global warming?"

You know, sometimes reporters get unfairly blamed for the headlines of their article. But usually, they don't write the headlines. But in this aren't you the party who wrote this:

"Do you support "15 minute cities" in order to save the planet from man-made global warming?"

Are you claiming this was entirely irrelevant to the second question posed? That the 15 minutes in the second question was unrelated to the first If that's the case, you should fire yourself.

[StreetCowboy]

1 minute ago, MrJ2U said:

No it doesn't. 

 

Crazy talk.

 

You obviously don't have a car or clue how these applications work. 

 

 

Keep making up your stories, if it helps maintain your prejudices.

 

In the meantime, perhaps you might like to educate me by explaining how Waze works?

[Yellowtail]

5 minutes ago, placeholder said:

You know, sometimes reporters get unfairly blamed for the headlines of their article. But usually, they don't write the headlines. But in this aren't you the party who wrote this:

"Do you support "15 minute cities" in order to save the planet from man-made global warming?"

Are you claiming this was entirely irrelevant to the second question posed? That the 15 minutes in the second question was unrelated to the first If that's the case, you should fire yourself.

Well, he got five people to vote for it with that headline, so maybe he should get a raise. 

 

 

[save the frogs]

47 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

they could have developed solar & EVs decades ago.

that argument doesn't hold up.

they could have decades ago, therefore it's a hoax.

 

it's highly disruptive to many industries.

and many job losses are incurred.

it's a massively complex undertaking.

also, if unemployment rates are too high, then there may be revolts, the economy may break down, etc..

they don't want that.

so there are many reasons why they could have but didn't decades ago. 

also, i'm guessing the newer technologies were available, but not sufficiently available to make the shift.

 

do you realize how complex it is to run a govt and manage all of this?

 

do you think they do nothing but sit around figuring out ways to "control" you for no apparent reason? that's all they do, right? it's one elaborate hoax to control you.

 

the massive shift to EVs now is about control?

 

there needs to be some level of "control" to keep society functioning. they can't just let everybody do whatever they want.

 

having said that, it's possible that the measures they put in place may become TOO strict? 

 

i'm outta here.

 

Edited March 23, 2023 by save the frogs

[save the frogs]

41 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

How much time do you spend in traffic now? 

a lot?

[Yellowtail]

1 minute ago, save the frogs said:

that argument doesn't hold up.

they could have decades ago, therefore it's a hoax.

 

it's highly disruptive to many industries.

and many job losses are incurred.

it's a massively complex undertaking.

also, if unemployment rates are too high, then there may be revolts, the economy may break down, etc..

they don't want that.

so there are many reasons why they could have but didn't decades ago. 

also, i'm guessing the newer technologies were available, but not sufficiently available to make the shift.

 

do you realize how complex it is to run a govt and manage all of this?

do you think they do nothing but sit around figuring out ways to "control" you for no apparent reason?

 

Manage all of what? 

 

So do you think the governments are full of really smart people working hard to improve the lives of their constituents? 

 

Most of them only care about being reelected and staying on the gravy-train, and looked at how rich they seem to get as "public servants". 

 

You can believe it's only us that will be crammed into tiny rooms, waiting for our two-day-late f'ed-up grocery order, not them. 

 

 

 

[Yellowtail]

Just now, save the frogs said:

a lot?

Not me. You must be driving or riding around a lot unnecessarily, stop it. Don't you care about the planet? 

[save the frogs]

38 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

What are retired, longer living people supposed to do ?

 

Been retired for 23 yrs.   TH is too small for me, but I'm too lazy to explore elsewhere.  It would literally be suicidal, if I had to hang out in the same 5 kms or even 100 kms radius for 20+ yrs.

 

THAT'S NUTS

you don't need to live in the same area your entire life. 

don't be too lazy. 

 

also, you won't be trapped in your local area.

I think you will be able to drive out occasionally. i think you will get a quota.

also, you can take planes, buses, trains. 

 

 

 

[save the frogs]

9 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

So do you think the governments are full of really smart people working hard to improve the lives of their constituents? 

most people from western countries have reasonably comfortable lives.

if you're from a decent country with a decent standard of living complaining that the govt does nothing but stomp on your head, i am not drinking your Kool-Aid.

 

[placeholder]

45 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

You will not be made to cower & comply to it. They will just make sure that everything they do not want hoi-polloi to have. like big homes, cars, carports yards, pets and whatnot will just become incredibly unaffordable.

 

You need to be stuffed in a tiny apartment, work from home, have your stuff delivered, and only read and see what they approve. 

It's funny. One of the accusations that climate change denialists level at the climatological community is that they are being alarmist. Yet alarmists mangle the 15 minute city concept to draw the most hysterical dystopian conclusions on the basis that it redirects automobile traffic. No plan prohibits people driving cars for as long and as far as anyone wants to. None.

And since when haven't the rich been privileged in cities? They can afford to rent on a monthly basis expensive parking spaces that most cannot afford. And casual parking in cities is very costly. Can the "hoi polloi' afford to park in those? Spare us your crocodile tears.  

On the other hand, the poorer you are the less likely you are to own a car. With less traffic congestion, public transit will provide much better service between districts.

And emergency vehicles will be able to arrive at their destinations more quickly.