moonbattery.gif


« Moonbats' Primordial Yearning | Main | Michael Musto, Beauty Queen »


May 13, 2009

Moonbats Dream of Taking Our Cars

Even after the Ascension of the Anointed One, we'll have to hurry to catch up to Europeans in the race into the encroaching dark ages of moonbat totalitarianism. The New York Slimes praises the Nazi military base turned Green Party haven of Vauban, Germany for making it almost impossible to drive a car:

Street parking, driveways and home garages are generally forbidden in this experimental new district on the outskirts of Freiburg, near the French and Swiss borders. Vauban's streets are completely "car-free" — except the main thoroughfare, where the tram to downtown Freiburg runs, and a few streets on one edge of the community. Car ownership is allowed, but there are only two places to park — large garages at the edge of the development, where a car-owner buys a space, for $40,000, along with a home.
As a result, 70 percent of Vauban's families do not own cars, and 57 percent sold a car to move here. "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way," said Heidrun Walter, a media trainer and mother of two, as she walked verdant streets where the swish of bicycles and the chatter of wandering children drown out the occasional distant motor.

All we have to do is give up our cars and the independence they offer us, and we'll all be much happier. But since we don't know what's best of us, the government will have to impose the bliss of not owning a car by force:

In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency is promoting "car reduced" communities, and legislators are starting to act, if cautiously. Many experts expect public transport serving suburbs to play a much larger role in a new six-year federal transportation bill to be approved this year, [David] Goldberg [of Transportation for America] said. In previous bills, 80 percent of appropriations have by law gone to highways and only 20 percent to other transport.

Those percentages will be changing dramatically. While bureauweenies pour fortunes we can't afford down light rail boondoggles, highways will be left to crumble.

Meanwhile, in the statist dystopia formerly known as Great Britain:

"Development comprising jobs, shopping, leisure and services should not be designed and located on the assumption that the car will represent the only realistic means of access for the vast majority of people," said PPG 13, the British government's revolutionary 2001 planning document. Dozens of shopping malls, fast-food restaurants and housing compounds have been refused planning permits based on the new British regulations.

Eventually we'll all live in "smart communities," where no one can go where planners haven't decided we should go.

On a tip from Franco.

Posted by Van Helsing at May 13, 2009 10:29 AM

Comments

This is nothing new, really. The thing they aren't thinking about is the fact that most of these isolated communities are VERY exclusive of the 'wrong types' of individuals. It will not fly here because we don't have the right infrastructure and of course we don't 'profile' potential residents.
I have seen some of these communities and actually they are quite nice, little Galts Gulches, if you prefer.

Posted by: Eric at May 13, 2009 10:43 AM

Another one of those stupid ideas from stupid mindless moonbats whos brains have shrunken from their vegan diets

Posted by: SPURWING PLOVER at May 13, 2009 11:24 AM

"When I had a car I was always tense."


Yeah, me too! I sold my Ferrari and I'm still tense.
Maybe I should get out more? Ya know, meet some girls, maybe get laid once in a while? But I can't now, hot girls laugh at me when I say we should take the tram to save the Earth. Green babes say I should recycle condoms and toilet paper! Greens are all flat, ugly and geeky anyway. What's a nerd to do?

Posted by: Shooter1001 at May 13, 2009 11:26 AM

Urban Monad here we come.

cf: The World Inside is a science fiction novel written by Robert Silverberg and published in 1971.

It does have its advantages though: "The Urbmons are a world of total sexual freedom where men are expected to engage in "night walking"; a woman refusing an invitation for sex is considered a crime." [from Widipedia]

works for me.... ;-))

Posted by: chuck in st paul at May 13, 2009 12:04 PM

There's a distinction that needs to be made here: building "smart", mixed-use, car-unfriendly developments is fine, and anyone that wishes to live in such a place is more than welcome to do so. Making it impossible to live any other way is not. Likewise refusing viable new businesses just because they don't fit into the "master vision" the government has strikes me as just poor policy. Successful businesses generate more tax revenue, and as government can't get enough tax revenue you'd think they would be all about promoting business growth. Except the left isn't happy unless they can be the puppet master, and they have a severe phobia regarding free markets - or free anything - so they have to "manage" it. The results are wholly predictable.

Posted by: CoderInCrisis at May 13, 2009 12:10 PM

Where in God's name is Britain getting ANY tax revenue from?

Posted by: Karin at May 13, 2009 12:27 PM

Well, I can't afford a car right now because I have a daughter in college, and I absolutely HATE having to take public transportation, beg for rides, or walk everywhere. It sucks!

Posted by: MST at May 13, 2009 12:34 PM

Do any of you actually live in a community where you can walk to shopping, restaurants, the movies? Don't knock it till you try it. I have a car, but prefer to walk whenever possible. Saves money on gas, no hassles finding parking, you get exercise. Actually get to see your neighbors and have social interaction in the neighborhood... you know, old fashioned values, the kind of stuff that true conservatives should actually get behind.

And yes, the people that live in the community you mention do so by choice. It's a growing movement so, better get used to it. New urbanism/smart growth is here to stay.

Posted by: Joe the Plumber at May 13, 2009 1:34 PM

Might be a great time to move to Vauban and start my rikshaw taxi service!

Posted by: Pointer at May 13, 2009 1:35 PM

I thought this comment on the NYT article summed it up perfectly. So, this is the change that you fear, huh?:

"Back to the future. I hope we get there in time. At 74, I remember as a child taking a bus downtown with my mother, shopping along Main Street, taking a bus home. As a young adult, I had the convenience of buying fresh fruit and vegetables, locally grown, from a horse drawn wagon coming down my street once a week. In Fall, women gathered in the community factory to can locally grown produce. Then government policy, by subsidizing transportation and irrigation, engineered the destruction of local agriculture, replacing it with the corporate giants that, in the process of destroying local economies also created the water shortages of the west. In Maine, where I live now, sustainable agricultural practices are coming back. And I live again in a town where I can walk to shops, theater and cinema.
— Karen Saum, Belfast Maine"

Posted by: Joe the Plumber at May 13, 2009 1:43 PM

If smart growth is so smart, why does it make housing so expensive? Why is living somewhere that requires you demand others subsidize your transportation ethical, let alone smart?

Posted by: Bob Smith at May 13, 2009 2:16 PM

Joe: I live in a community where I can walk to the store, theaters, etc, so therefore I can relate to your post. But when it's 100 degrees and humid out, pouring rain, or snowing and 20 degrees -- walking is not so much fun.

Posted by: MST at May 13, 2009 2:20 PM

Joe, I'm an evil old gun-totin' redneck conservative here...

...and my truck hasn't moved since September, 2007. I walk everywhere. By choice. I figure I've saved about $6k at least since I went to foot. What makes you think we're 'afraid' of it?

The key here is that I do so by choice. For the moment, that's how it is here and elsewhere, but I think we all know where this is headed. Remember when leftists said "all we want is a law that says at least 50% of restaurant seating must be non-smoking"? Now if you fire up a butt anywhere within the city limits of Davis, CA (other than your own home or car, but those are next), it's a $200 fine.

Posted by: hiram at May 13, 2009 2:38 PM

I lived for years in places where the public transportation was very good... and in those places, going car-free is an option. I agree with hiram and the others that the key is doing this "by choice".


But we need to remember that there is a VERY large part of the US that is so rural that walking everywhere is NOT an option. Much of that land is sparsely populated because WATER is scarce and as such it is not suitable for high density development.

There is also a goodly amount of land in agriculture, even if in places where it rains a lot or is irrigated, where the cost of putting in good public transit would be prohibitive. I currently live in rural Virginia (outside of Smithfield) where the nearest grocery store is 15 miles away, and my job is 35 miles away. Sure, I could live "walking distance" to work, if I was willing to live in a slum.

And Joe the Plumber, as far as your quite from that lady who lived in Belfast, ME. I'm guessing she probably walks everywhere because she doesn't have a job... not too many jobs there in Belfast. I lived in Belfast for about 6 months once, and had to hitchhike to work... not exactly fun... because I did not have a car and the nearest job I could find (Camden, ME) was way too far away. Of course the Greyhound came thro 3 x a day (one of those came thro at 1:30AM, that's been cut), but none of those times would have allowed me to keep my job. I moved from Belfast to Lincolnville Beach, which was closer to the job... but far worse when it came to laundry or getting food (16 miles away and still only the 3
x a day). Anyone try hauling a week's worth of groceries on a bus with a baby or a couple of little kids lately? Practical - NOT!

Posted by: Ex-bat at May 13, 2009 3:01 PM

I lived in Maine for a while, they had a saying:

"If you want to go to hell fast, go to Belfast"

I also had the inside scoop on a local planning board of an extremely small, very conservative town. What I learned was that even basic town planning is extremely political, often hostile, full of expensive lawsuits, and basically just as dirty and convoluted as national politics, even amongst people with a shared conservative ideology.

Posted by: Brandon at May 13, 2009 4:14 PM

JOE;
Come to Clearwater Florida where the suburbs are spread over dozens of square miles. I work 13 miles form home and have to cross THREE major highways, my biuke is not an option at six in the morning or three in the afternoon. Many people drive to Tampa for work and some even farther.

BRANDON;
Did you forget to answer my question about the aledged "right to murder"? One of your buddys said I don't deserve an answer, but I think it's very important to know where you got this insane idea.

Posted by: KHarn at May 13, 2009 5:00 PM

I went to college without a car, in Atlanta, Georgia. Groceries without a car is a pain. Want to buy extra because something is on sale? Forget it. Had to watch what time it was to make sure I was home before dark, because there was no way I wanted to be out and about at night. Getting around was even more fun when I broke my foot and was on crutches. Getting a car was one of the best days of my life. Freedom from mass transit and inhaling diesel bus fumes and sitting next to people who hadn't showered in a week!! Freedom to go where I wanted when I wanted safely! A car IS freedom. Why do they think senior citizens fight so hard to keep driving long after they shouldn't?

Posted by: Nancy at May 13, 2009 5:50 PM

KHarn I'm not sure what you're referring too, I did write about the freedom to murder but did intend to mean that it was a freedom one should have. Perhaps I used the term 'right' instead of freedom and caused confusion.

Posted by: Brandon at May 13, 2009 6:41 PM

STAMP OUT DEEP ECOLOGY SMASH ENVIROMENTALISM ITS EVIL AND PAGAN

Posted by: Flu-Bird at May 13, 2009 9:55 PM

"KHarn I'm not sure what you're referring too, I did write about the freedom to murder but did intend to mean that it was a freedom one should have. Perhaps I used the term 'right' instead of freedom and caused confusion.
"Posted by: Brandon at May 13, 2009 6:41 PM"

Now you're saying "freedom to murder" and I still challenge that. If you are not willing to defend your statements, or explain them, or even admit that you used the wrong term, you are NOT a man and NOT WORTH associating with.

Posted by: KHarn at May 14, 2009 3:27 PM

They'll have to bury me in my GM Suburban. This is a crock of crap..."See The USA in Your Chevrolet" was the slogan I grew up hearing. Dina Shore.

Posted by: Sylvia at May 14, 2009 7:20 PM

KHarn there was a thread which I don't even remember the title too where my point was that regulations do not simply take away freedom but take one kind of freedom to give another. I may not have used very good examples to illustrate the point.

I'll try to further explain the example.

Imagine first that there are no laws at all. Everyone is then free to do what they want, and they are even free to kill people in this hypothetical scenario. But then if you made a law outlawing murder, people would no longer have the freedom to kill each other, thus they would have less freedom. But in return, they would be more free to live - yes it's kind of sloppy, but the main point is that regulation is not just there to take your freedom but is intended to give something back in return.

Posted by: Brandon at May 14, 2009 7:58 PM

At 74, I remember as a child taking a bus downtown with my mother, shopping along Main Street, taking a bus home. As a young adult, I had the convenience of buying fresh fruit and vegetables, locally grown, from a horse drawn wagon coming down my street once a week. In Fall, women gathered in the community factory to can locally grown produce.

No mention of dogs and cats living together?

And she pines for horse-drawn wagons coming down her street? Seriously, that’s what she yearns for? Don’t they have their own little pollution problem?

She’s obviously gone soft in the head, babbling about locally-grown (in Maine? What did they do between November and May?) “fresh fruit and vegetables.” It sounds so idyllic...she could move to any Third World country and relive her childhood, should we seriously wish to do so.

But I invite her take a stroll through downtown Compton any lovely summer evening

Posted by: Jay Guevara at May 15, 2009 1:23 PM