I’m getting a lot of ‘but my car is more convenient’ arguments lately, and I’m struggling to convey why that doesn’t make sense.

Specifically how to explain to people that: Sure, if you are able to drive, and can afford it, and your city is designed to, and subsidizes making it easy to drive and park, then it’s convenient. But if everyone does it then it quickly becomes a tragedy of the commons situation.

I thought of one analogy that is: It would be ‘more convenient’ if I just threw my trash out the window, but if we all started doing that then we’d quickly end up in a mess.

But I feel like that doesn’t quite get at the essence of it. Any other ideas?

  • hedidwot@lemmynsfw.comEnglish
    4·
    7 months ago

    Ok OP

    Try this.

    Explain to me why my car is not more convenient.

    I think the issue is that context and circumstances matter and you can’t argue against them.

    • Dave@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
      4·
      7 months ago

      Well that’s it, it almost always is more convenient (again, assuming you have one, it has fuel, roads are built and prioritize cars etc.), but that completely ignores all the negative externalities.

      Like: it would always be more ‘convenient’ for me to pee against a wall when I need to go, but if everyone starting pissing everywhere it would be objectively worse for everyone.

      • hedidwot@lemmynsfw.comEnglish
        1·
        7 months ago

        Good and fair answer.

        I’m kinda not anti car… But kinda am.

        It would be kinda cool to have a way to ditch at least 1 of the family cars, but fuck Australia and our backward thinking bureaucrats.

        Not only are things getting worse as far as infrastructure goes, the costs of public transport are skyrocketing too.

        No one wants to pay through the nose for a train that leaves them behind because it’s over full (a real issue at some stations on the Melbourne train line I’m on).