Do you agree??

Do you agree? LULZ?

  1. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yeah, everyone should be legally required to competently drive a motorcycle before driving a car

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      THIS RIGHT HERE
      IF YOU CAN'T HANDLE A MOPED/MOTORCYCLE WHY THE FUCK ARE YOU DRIVING 2000 POUND MACHINES

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        I handled your're mom's 2000 pound tittys last night if you catch my drift?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Um so why but implement it in your cities then? Curious

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      This could make america cool again instead of being like sharing a room with an HR rep.

  2. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    day of the rake when.....

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous
  3. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yea because being forced to use cars has been the biggest thing holding society back. They'll blow stupid money on this but won't improve the dwindling rail system. Cars are so fucking slow and there haven't been any real advents in public transport anywhere outside of cities. I really want a high speed rail system so I can actually go places without saying "oh thats a 6 hour drive by car" and I don't have a choice.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Not everyone wants to see naggers or smell them like you do.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        I don't want to drive with them either since negro females are absolute fucking menaces behind the wheel.
        Honestly naggers should be banned from driving and forced to use public transport. At the very least it would have save tens of thousands of old land barges from getting the donk treatment.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Billions upon billions of automobile and road subsidies.
      Trillions over the years.
      But consider spending a fraction of that on allowing an alternative form of transport to be viable? Madness.

      I wish I could take a train and not be left in a shitty part of town with only a parking lot and maybe a bus service that comes every hour if I am lucky. I shouldn't need a car to go anywhere, and things shouldn't be so far apart inside a god damn city. Parking lots and cars have destroyed communities and made it near impossible to live nicely without an automobile.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >automobile subsidies
        Don’t exist
        >road subsidies
        Retard logic

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      100%, driving should be AN OPTION to get somewhere, not the only option (especially for longer distances). Most of our population is in urban / suburban areas, and most trips are short; we need real transit (non-commuter focused trains, trams, light rail) and least seasonal infrastructure for bicycles. This would also mean less retards and old people out on the roads when I'm driving.

      >I really want a high speed rail system so I can actually go places without saying "oh thats a 6 hour drive by car" and I don't have a choice.
      I'd like high-speed rail across the fucking flat ass prairies so that I have another option than flying to get out west for ski season; even if it means tacking on a day. There'd probably be time saving on the front end too (not having to deal with an airport) to bring it more in line for my total time investment (current airport recommendation is to arrive 3h+ early lmao).

      Billions upon billions of automobile and road subsidies.
      Trillions over the years.
      But consider spending a fraction of that on allowing an alternative form of transport to be viable? Madness.

      I wish I could take a train and not be left in a shitty part of town with only a parking lot and maybe a bus service that comes every hour if I am lucky. I shouldn't need a car to go anywhere, and things shouldn't be so far apart inside a god damn city. Parking lots and cars have destroyed communities and made it near impossible to live nicely without an automobile.

      >But consider spending a fraction of that on allowing an alternative form of transport to be viable? Madness.
      Yep. Everyone implicitly understands the public good and benefits of having roadways, but they dive into the "how will we pay for it" whenever someone wants to talk trains. They're talking about building another fucking highway in the GTA somewhere; fuck me. "Just one more lane bro, it'll fix traffic this time I swear".

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Just one more rail bro, this will fix the undesirables problem.

  4. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    where do you think you are? retard

  5. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I HATE THE ANTI-CHRIST

  6. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Paris Marx
    pottery

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      I do not understand? What does pottery relevant?

  7. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    this is retarded, Canada is perhaps the least densely populated country on earth. They will need cars into the future, especially after American annexation and climate change open up the northern territories to human settlement

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Eastern Ontario all the way up into Quebec is PRIME for high speed rail, connects all the major cities. So long as it's not dropping you off in a parking lot outside the city requiring you to need a car anyway.
      What we need more of is better city zoning and inner-city light rail, more regular busses, and dedicated bike lanes. Business prosper when people actually slowly walk by them rather than speed by going 50km/h. Density is key, cities are for living in, not for driving through. Being near to the things you need.

      I agree east west will always be a schism but the focus should be on the inner-city movement of people first before truly connecting all the dots with high speed rail. Cars are expensive, gas is expensive, insurance is expensive, they will only get more expensive.
      Cars/trucks will of course always be needed for certain niches and last mile movement of goods, but a great benefit is to be had in not needing them for literally everything you need to live.

      Annexation is inevitable though.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        High speed rail is a meme, and the operating costs are far higher than what is made in revenue for any place that doesn’t have the population density of Japan.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Operating costs change literally every day.

  8. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yes but a shift to public transport should be a productive measure not a reductive one

    >What the fuck do you mean by this anon?
    What I mean is the solution to car dependency should be a massively improved public transport infrastructure, not making roads so shit that the awful public transport is somehow better. Hell, with that maybe cars would return to advertising to the "driver experience" as a weekend toy instead of the boring over-utilitarian design we have right now.

  9. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    We will own nothing

  10. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    I don't disagree with the sentiment, but wtf was that truck doing plowing into the shoulder anyway?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Truck probably couldn't see the homosexual with his limp hand out like that. Even when you use a turn signal, you look before you change lanes right? What are they doing on a highway anyway

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Cheap excuses for god awful driving. If you're sitting ten feet up in a truck without any other large vehicles around you there's not a single excuse for your not seeing cyclists a quarter mile in advance.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      probably trying to get around the slow as fuck bikers on the fucking highway

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        SHARE
        THE
        ROAD

  11. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Take a look at flightradar24 and tell me it's cars that are the problem.

  12. 2 months ago
    Gears

    This idea has been pushed in Germany for a while to terrible effects.
    It's an idea that bears great potential to do good, but will only lead to things getting worse because achieving that good would require efford that our politicians won't take.
    It's not wrong, many people are way more depended on cars than they should be. By all means they could have alternatives, and in many cases these could be very attractive if done right. However, public transport keeps being run as a for-profit operation rather than basic service, so a lot of people get either none at all or just some alibi-buses so the city can claim they have bus-stops everywhere. Often enough I would've wished I could just take a bus or train to the city instead of driving, but then couldn't because services are sparce, lines wiggle through half the county to serve everyone with next to no lines and the pricing systems are deliberatly incomprehensible to mask just how high the final price will be.
    Honestly, everyone would profit from better public transport (within their area anyways). Even those not looking to use it would have less people on the road and have an alternative just in case. Same goes for bike lanes (when they aren't, as usual, more aimed at inconveniancing the drivers than at helping cyclists). No one wants cyclists on his roads.
    However all of this would require actual efford. More buses, more trains, new lines, cheap prices (also for occasional use), understandable pricing (even when crossing into the next county), much more frequent service in the 'off-hours', maybe even being on time so that connections work.
    It's just so much easier to marr what isn't wanted anymore, and bully the drivers to use a train that has been defunct for decades, or uses buses where they don't drive. Sadly, that's what's going to come out of this. Everything will be made worse until even our shitty public transport seems decent.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Even here in Italy public transportation just works and as a for-profit operation. The GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD is unable to setup a few buses and my shithole of a town can? Lmao
      The amount of lobbying you got would be called corruption here, nothing will ever change. Consoome the electric vehicle, gas bad car good

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >let me tell you about your country
        Major cities in the USA (and Canada) have ample bus lines, comparable to any european city. 99% of ‘muh public transit’ seething comes from suburban americans bitching why their neighbourhood doesn’t have a London Underground/Tokyo Subway equivalent, despite having a population density a small fraction of Tokyo or London.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Yes. I find these pubic policy dickheads extremely fucking annoying, but they're mostly correct in that more public transit is a net benefit for pretty much everyone. Would rather have a future with more trains instead of driverless Teslas shitting up the road.

          I lived in San Antonio for a few years. It has a population bigger than Milan, yet it only had a bus line. Population density is thinner in most American cities, but that's not the main thing preventing cities from getting more public transportation.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Milan size: 70 square miles
            >San Hambonio size: 500 square miles
            Lol

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              Charles Barkley is that you nigga

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >but that's not the main thing preventing cities from getting more public transportation.
              Case in point, Houston is over 600 square miles and has a light rail system because they actually bothered spending money on it.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Houston Metro
                Lol there are so many crashes that the city pays more in settlements than it makes from the system, and it’s only useful downtown (where nobody lives)
                Pure vanity project

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                The light rail is so stupid. Who the hell does it serve ? People who already parked downtown and just want to get around to other spots in town? Makes driving a pain in the ass sometimes as well.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Let me put it to you this way:
                There’s a reason why all modern public transport systems have to be subsidised by governments. Remember, all those cute streetcars and early subway systems back in the 19th and early 20th centuries were privately funded owned and maintained. Those systems died because they could not compete on the free market when cheap cars came on the scene. The reason yuros and nips have so many trains is because their socialist statist governments made it illegal for the peasants to own cars.

  13. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I’m not taking the fucking bus or train

  14. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >cars are bad but you need to commute to the office every day to do a 'job' you can do on laptop at home

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      this is a great fucking point
      remember all those memes at the start of the lockdowns?
      "sky is so clear we can see the universal logo in the sky?"
      not forcing knowledge workers (~half the population in developed countries) to do a needless commute 240 days a year would help a lot more than a couple of rail lines.

  15. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Dam city slickers always trying to make decisions for everyone. They have no idea how tedious and wasteful it is to implement public transportation for rural living.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      NOBODY GIVES A FUCK ABOUT YOUR FLYOVER SHITHOLE, DO WHATEVER THE FUCK YOU WANT BUT DON'T TELL US WE CAN'T GET BY WITHOUT DRIVING JUST BECAUSE YOU CAN'T

  16. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yeah, been saying this for years. Good ol capitalism and the auto industry cucked us all

  17. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yea. Cars should be a sometimes thing. Roads will still be maintained because commercial chads need them and the modern world runs on the redbull flavoured sweat of commercial chads. There will be less ware on the road because of less use so they'll be nicer when you do take your car out. Not to mention empty.
    You need to drop the persecution complex. Big gobberment isn't trying to crack down on 'petrol heads'. it's too much work for too little gain. Despite what angry tree huggers and fart sniffing journalists have to say.
    >ohh but I love the thrill of traffic jams and I can't figure out how to pass a single person on a bike.

  18. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    drivers have unironically been getting exponentially worse and worse these past few years
    how can anybody want MORE of them on the road?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Simple solution. Remove all nonwhites and ban women from driving.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Take old people's license and cut social security. Boomers ruining the whole country

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        because the current generation is any better when they live on a fucking cellphone lmao

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          indeed the most boomer comment yet

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >phone an them subcripstions dang youngins usin ehhh pay yer taxes sonny ah need muh social security

  19. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    A big part of the reason to not use public transit is the exponentially higher travel times, why would I take a bus/train to work when it takes an hour instead of 20 minutes? Honestly, if it was actually competitive in terms of time to destination I'd probably use it to save some money.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      This is where robotaxis come in. I think people really underestimate the massive shift robotaxis are going to make to vehicular transportation as we know it.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >uhhhh we got a car dependency problem
        >lets replace CARS with CARS THAT USE REDDIT TECHNOLOGY to fix it

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      The only reason it takes an hour in the first place is because it's a maldesigned, underfunded garbage fire where you live.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Driving to work
        >get in car
        >drive to work
        Taking the bus
        >wait at bus stop
        >bus makes 35 stops between me and my work
        >nearest bus stop is still a 15 minute walk to the actual site

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Why do you refuse to see the possibility of improvement to that underfunded system?

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >public transport gets improved
            >5 minute walk to bus stop
            >bus makes 50 stops between home and work now but has free wifi

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              I don't even get what you're so butthurt about. Eeach person seating in the bus rather than in their car is one less person clogging up traffic.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >btfo
                >starts talking about traffic
                Each stop takes about 2-3 minutes for passengers to embark and disembark. Multiply that by 20. You’re spending an hour just sitting and waiting for people to get on/off, this isn’t even accounting for the actual time taken to drive to each stop.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Lol
        Lmao

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          This chart says "commute times" not "public transport commute times", so I fail to see your point.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >d-doesn’t count
            What matters is how long it takes between you exiting your house and entering the front door of your destination.

  20. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    No it's about an economic system that requires constant growth and encourages pointless consumption to achieve it.

  21. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Having the option to get to work without a car would mean I could sell my daily and get a dedicated weekend car/track car again.

    Having access to good public transport benefits us massively.

  22. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    BECOME LESS DEPENDENT ON CARS BY BEXOMING MORE DEPENDENT ON OUR SHITTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION. THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH CONTROLLING YOUR FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT GOYIM. ITS FOR YOUR OWN GOOD

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous
  23. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    you WILL own nothing and you WILL like it

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      meeeeeds

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >own a van
      >do carpooling.
      The Escalade V will rise.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >you WILL own nothing and you WILL like it
      schizo

  24. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    END WASTEFUL CAR OWNERSHIP

  25. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Trudeau will take your cars away, and leafs WILL be happy.

  26. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I do agree to a certain extent when it comes to cities it should be prioritized to pedestrians and mass transit done right.

    Why?
    Because I fucking hate morbidly obese people. Go fucking walk.

  27. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Making public transpiration good so that people want to use it
    That sounds expensive
    >Levying heavy taxes on personal vehicles and neglecting the infrastructure to make it as unpleasant and expensive as possible to use them and force people into public transport or into poverty
    Now that's more like it!

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      There’s a reason why gasoline is $9 a gallon in europe, and why it’s functionally impossible to own anything bigger than a kei car in Japan

  28. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Your car has been taxed by the government, it's registered by the government, driving without the government cuckstamp on front and rear bumper is illegal, you can only use it when the government allows it after taking a government test (which you have to pay the government for), the government reserves every right to rob you of the goverment-issued priviledge of driving on a whim and you can only use it on government-owned roads (paid for by money the government stole from you).

    With a train you enter a business agreement with an entity exchanging money for a service (being transported from A to B) There are no goverment-mandated requirements, prerequisites to do so and the government cannot stop you from doing that.

    Cars = centrally planned transportation, aka communism

    Prove me wrong

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Just recently you were required to take the vax to use a train in Cucknada. Fuck off leftist

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      You can drive your vehicles on your property without any licensing.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        and you can move around your house while on house arrest with a tracking ankle bracelet
        whats your point?

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          I can drive the 8 miles to town on back dirt roads on farm land, crossing maybe a couple state owned roads. Easement laws makes it fine to cross.

          But I’m not anon, I’m just making an observation.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Who owns and operates the public transportation system?

  29. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    North American urban/suburban roads were so much more pleasant to drive on during the first few months of the 2020 lockdowns, so yes, getting more people off the roads who don't want/need cars would be nice for everyone except maybe automakers.

  30. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    It could be that people don't like being caught in traffic for hours every day of their life.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Much better to spend even longer on a bus that smells like piss and diesel while naggers cough on you

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >longer.
        The whole point is that they should get better transportation.

  31. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I think the only solution to anything is to start levitating.

  32. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >get on bus
    >full of homeless drunks pissing on the floor
    >the qt girl who gets on would rather sit beside one of them than me
    let's start with this problem first

  33. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I disagree with Trudeau. Flexfuel vehicles and renewable fuels are the alternative to EVs.

  34. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    They want us to ride the bus and have little to no freedom of movement.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      As opposed to what? being forced to use a car with no choice at all?

  35. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    And soft of criminal attitude

  36. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Politicians say shit like this while owning 4 cars, a private plane and a yacht

  37. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Knowing that he will never take whatever public transport method they come up with really puts things into perspective.

  38. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Man they really don't make it easy on themselves.

  39. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Country with the 2nd largest landmass on the planet.
    >we need to keep people from having independent transportation.

  40. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    WHY THE FUCK DO YOU KEAFS KEEP ELECTING THIS LITTLE SHIT!?

  41. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    everyone who wants to own evs should just buy a bicycle or an easy-out bag, society needs a mass exodus of fags so I can road race all the time with the new absence of traffic

  42. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >private ownership BAD
    Yeah, we get it.

  43. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Commies

  44. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    This is honestly true.

    Less retards on the road is better for everyone.

  45. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Shut the fuck up, >>>>>l/n/

  46. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Cars give people freedom of movement. Not everyone wants to ride public transportation.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Not everyone wants to drive

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >not everyone wants freedom
        That’s fine, but majority rules. Democracy. Cry about it. Move somewhere you don’t have to take care of yourself.

        Who is taking cars away from you by improving public transit for those who do not want to drive, but have no viable alternative?

        Literally OP, retard

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Having to have a massive depreciating asset is freedom.

          Burger here.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >freedom is when other people take care of you
            Yuro here

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Who is taking cars away from you by improving public transit for those who do not want to drive, but have no viable alternative?

  47. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >accept a lower standard of living, goy

  48. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Marx

    Auto-discard.

  49. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I love how the leader of the second largest country in the world, with an absolutely tiny population spread out across thousands of kilometers of land thinks people can just not own cars and live. Meanwhile we have a useless long range transit system, and even the regional transit systems are so underfunded they're all but useless.

    Public Transit can work, but it'll never work in Canada to the degree they want it to. How the fuck would you even take a load of groceries home on the fucking bus? Christ this guy is dumb.

  50. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yes more cities should be way more accessible through public transportation so I can have all the shitters off the road.

  51. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    how about make people stop buying new cars, and just make parts for the old ones.

Your email address will not be published.