Roads… socialist model… tell that to Bechtel.
Right now my work commute is Cap hill to Downtown Elliot and Wall st. After I sell my house I plan to [panic attack] Where am I going to live[/panic attack] find a place downtown or maybe stay on cap hill. Stay tuned to see if I end up living in an RV.
4 Likes
They don’t need a windows server admin right now do they?
4 Likes
I don’t know. Let me see if I can find the external link to our job postings.
ETA:
Select Seattle in the search to see if we have anything that suits your skill set.
5 Likes
It’s really worrying that so much global capital is flowing into “blue sky” projects rather than traditional infrastructure and public transportation
Traditional infrastructure doesn’t produce “unicorns” with >10,000% returns. Why earn a few million dollars in profit building roads and trains, when you can cash out of Lyft for billions?
3 Likes
2 Likes
Nice of him to postpone the announcement until after Uber’s IPO. Those CEO’s will scratch each other’s back, God Bless 'em.
2 Likes
Is a late model white Buick Century considered something to make you more attractive? Asking for a friend.
3 Likes
Here’s the problem with the “ban cars”: it’s privileged as fuck.
Not everybody can walk a few blocks. If transit isn’t right outside their door, they can’t get there. Cabs, even Uber or Lyft are expensive, especially if you have to use them everyday. Not to mention the fact that some drivers will drive right on by if you have darker skin. Not everyone can afford to live close to where they work. An hour commute in a car is better than 3 hours by transit. And yes, that is often what happens.
For women, a car can offer safety, because you’re less likely to be assaulted driving by yourself.
Maybe those groups aren’t a huge demographic, but they still don’t deserve to be left behind in some car-free utopia.
9 Likes
So much this. See my earlier comments about commute time.
4 Likes
I don’t think cars will go away either but I don’t think personal ownership of cars are going to be a common thing anymore. Folks are slowly going back to the rentier economy as it was in the past for many things (most folks didn’t own horses as it was expensive to even house and feed them). I’m just waiting for state govts to expand the neoliberal policies of privatization on the road networks. Forget how bad it is in New Jersey. Think of having to pay a toll or whatever to get the groceries from the store two miles down. Oh the joys of late stage capitalism. /s
I am 40 minutes (one way) by car (longer with traffic problems worst was 90… But that’s what you get when a plane crashes on the freeway) or 3 hours by transit. On days when it’s hard to walk, that would be impossible, because the closest bus stop is still three blocks away.
And that’s just work. Try Costco shopping without a car. Hell, just regular groceries if you buy anything heavy. Especially if you have disabilities.
I am also about 45 minutes from my parents by car. There is no transit. It takes 20 minutes to get to the first stoplight from their place, let alone a transit stop. Not everywhere is transit viable. These kinds of arguments are exactly the kind of thing that will get a rural person who might otherwise lean left politically to shake their heads and vote for the other guy.
If you plan to ban cars, you better have a plan that addresses all the reasons people use cars. “Just add more transit, walk and use bikes” doesn’t do that.
7 Likes
Or it doesn’t solve oh yeah your new job/you are being transferred to a location that is now a 40 miles away but you have a house, kids, spouse has a job. You can’t just up and fucking move close to work every time.
5 Likes
One complaint against the carbon tax in Alberta came from somebody who lives in the country and commutes 120km return to the city. That makes sense if fuel is cheap and the roads are free. Housing is much cheaper and the commute time is no worse than for most people in city traffic. Of course, the carbon tax is intended to discourage such FF intensive lifestyles.
1 Like
I would think step one would be ICE-to-electric conversions. All people can’t afford all new electric vehicles, and that would be a huge waste of resources. A good mass-produced conversion kit should be feasible for $5-10k (yes, that would still have to be subsidized to get any reasonable amount of conversion). It’s not even as difficult as creating a kit for every single model of car on the road. Most manufacturers have been standardized for decades to a small set of engine/transmission combinations through their whole product lines. Within a decade or so, most of the converted cars will have been replaced with native EVs.
I really don’t understand the push all the way to autonomous. It doesn’t really support carbon neutrality in itself.
3 Likes
Even with the carbon tax, it still might be cheaper.
I am not opposed to alternatives. My next car will probably be electric, and not just because my province has mandated all vehicles be non-emissions by 2040 (my guess is there’ll be collector exemptions, but you’ll pay through the nose). They are working to expand charging infrastructure. Carbon tax is old hat around here.
It’s the idea of just outlawing all private vehicles without considering the reasons why they’re used or who will be harmed that I have a problem with.
2 Likes
Well, in the same sense that the finite human population is “grim news” for Ponzi schemes, yes.
What Uber say in order to run on continuous investment has very little to do with what they believe. Their business model is entirely based on taking lucrative ideas that were made illegal 100 years ago and then just doing those exact things, on the correct assumption that they will make a lot of money before they get in serious trouble.
3 Likes
By “carless” I mean being able to practically go without a car. (I mean, regardless of where one is, one can always walk - it may take several days to get where you’re going, but it’s an option, right?) If it takes you two+ hours to get somewhere that would take a 20 minute car ride…
Where I live in urban California, even poor people have cars. In most cases it’s impossible to economically function without one. Perhaps especially if one is poor, because they’re having to do the most traveling. To not drive is to be unemployed, unless you’re wealthy enough to live in an urban core and have access to good transportation options (which include employer shuttles, etc.).
Mass transit becomes more vital because you have more cars on the road, creating terrible congestion. Besides the current drivers, you now have empty cars - cars, as you say, running errands, cars traveling between two users (hire cars, one car households), empty cars waiting for their passengers to be done with their current task (because why, for example, pay for urban parking when the car can just circle until you’re done shopping?). You also have more people willing to sit in their cars, not driving, because the car effectively becomes another “room” in which one lives one’s life, but mobile. (And people are already talking about taking every current function of a room, except perhaps the restroom, and making an autonomous vehicle that does that. I’m not sure why anyone would want a mobile conference room, but more than one person has already proposed such a thing.)
Assuming you have replacement of all non-autonomous cars with autonomous cars (i.e. not in my lifetime). Even assuming you legally mandated everyone get rid of their existing cars and switched to autonomous (not bloody likely), you’d also have to eliminate non-car uses for streets (e.g. bicycles, motorcycles).
I guess. Once you’ve eliminated all non-car uses for streets. Oh, and also eliminated pedestrians. So sure, in this future, human-less dystopia, streets will definitely have fewer cars on them.
But GM will undercut you, because that’s literally their stated future business model - not so much selling cars, but selling cars as a service. The whole notion of private car ownership will be undermined by autonomous vehicles. There’s no reason for most people to own a car in (semi-) urban areas if they can rent one as needed (and not have to worry about maintenance, etc.).
1 Like
3 Likes
In my opinion, the most exciting thing about self driving cars is how they could change the lives of people who can’t currently drive themselves.
So in terms of helping the environment it would be great to have better battery/fuel cell tech, but if I was blind or elderly I’d be more excited about self-driving cars.
1 Like
