I’m not like super pro car or anything but your argument in my experience doesn’t really hold up. I work at a farm and we have a lot of elderly folks come in and shop by themselves. They drive themselves and shop themselves but I doubt they could do that with a walker and if they didn’t have a car I doubt they’d be finding a different way to come out here.
Rural life is a whole different beast from urban. I won’t ever make the argument that rural living people shouldn’t have cars. So yeah, plus one for that argument.
Rural life definitely, but I’m in suburbia hahaha. I just can’t imagine public transportation being able to replace what a car can do for elderly people
If the individual is so bad off they can’t manage to get on a (more robust than we currently have) form of public transit, I really question if they should be driving. The simple fact of life is that at a certain point, maintaining complete independence isn’t a reality. This isn’t a bad thing, we should be moving towards embracing building the systems we need for people to get help at that stage of life.
These people have no problem driving or taking care of themselves, I’m sure plenty shouldn’t be driving, but doing something like shopping and then walking your groceries back home simply isn’t an option for a lot of people even if public transportation was more robust. Sure, past a certain point everyone loses independence, but there are plenty that don’t need to that you are advocating should
Friends. Family. Building facilities. Government programs.
The simple fact is that at some point, people just can’t be completely independent. It’s the nature of growing old. This is only really a problem because we have such a strict independence culture, where if you can’t do for yourself, you may as well just die, society doesn’t have time for you.
If we recontextualize this, and see growing old and more feeble not as some personal failing and instead as the symbol of a long life, if we start looking out for those around us, and if we start building up the facilities we need to allow people to gracefully enter elder-hood without stigma, we’d all be a bit better off.
I didn’t say it had to be an individual who needed to help. It could be any number of programs, services, or even yeah, individuals.
I mentioned mixed use buildings in another part of this thread, something like an apartment complex with a bodega-like grocery on the first floor or directly attached. What about moving more towards that kind of building? There are a ton of solutions that don’t require cars.
In what world is a disabled person able to board a car on their own but not a bus or train? And in what world are those busses and trains not staffed with people to help? Are we talking self-driving busses and cars with wheelchair driving options as a standard?
Edit: Seems the response is for the disabled person to: JuSt SpEnD mOrE mOnEy ; but we couldn’t possibly be bothered to spend more on public transit to make it more accessible.
At least in my country, bus drivers that need to help people in the wheelchair to get up on the bus are already at the edge of their patience. Don’t even talk about helping them stuff seven bags of groceries as well. That’s why unfortunately, taxis are still a necessity
I think the best solution, if we can redesign our cities, is to incorporate more mixed use buildings, or at least more mixed zoning. Why even have to have a bus if your building has a connected grocery and 3 other small shops on the same block.
These issues only really exist because everything is SO spread out. We have strict zoning regulations that mean having a grocery in a residential area is at best a challenge, and realistically impossible. This means we have to go further for the most mundane daily tasks, and this means we need more robust transportation, including cars.
ETA:rereading this it looks like I’m making an argument for no cars, buses or anything. I’m absolutely pro expanding public transportation, merely stating that if things were slightly different, you could eliminate the bus entirely from this situation specifically
I would imagine they’re at the edge of their patience because each delay causes them to be a bit behind on a tight schedule. A couple of answers to that would be 1. More busses, so the schedules can be looser and 2. Fewer cars so that traffic is smoother.
Sure this applies for suburban or rural life. Everyone has the space to have a car there. In a city, which is what my entire argument stems around (you can see elsewhere in this thread where I state I wouldn’t ever dream of taking cars from rural people), it’s more like “the car is in the parking garage connected to the apartments. And the bus stop is just in front of the apartments, maybe down on the corner”
How do disabled people who can’t drive get their groceries?
About 2 seconds of critical thinking leads you to this magical solution called “someone helps them” in both cases.
I’m not like super pro car or anything but your argument in my experience doesn’t really hold up. I work at a farm and we have a lot of elderly folks come in and shop by themselves. They drive themselves and shop themselves but I doubt they could do that with a walker and if they didn’t have a car I doubt they’d be finding a different way to come out here.
Rural life is a whole different beast from urban. I won’t ever make the argument that rural living people shouldn’t have cars. So yeah, plus one for that argument.
Rural life definitely, but I’m in suburbia hahaha. I just can’t imagine public transportation being able to replace what a car can do for elderly people
If the individual is so bad off they can’t manage to get on a (more robust than we currently have) form of public transit, I really question if they should be driving. The simple fact of life is that at a certain point, maintaining complete independence isn’t a reality. This isn’t a bad thing, we should be moving towards embracing building the systems we need for people to get help at that stage of life.
These people have no problem driving or taking care of themselves, I’m sure plenty shouldn’t be driving, but doing something like shopping and then walking your groceries back home simply isn’t an option for a lot of people even if public transportation was more robust. Sure, past a certain point everyone loses independence, but there are plenty that don’t need to that you are advocating should
Friends. Family. Building facilities. Government programs.
The simple fact is that at some point, people just can’t be completely independent. It’s the nature of growing old. This is only really a problem because we have such a strict independence culture, where if you can’t do for yourself, you may as well just die, society doesn’t have time for you.
If we recontextualize this, and see growing old and more feeble not as some personal failing and instead as the symbol of a long life, if we start looking out for those around us, and if we start building up the facilities we need to allow people to gracefully enter elder-hood without stigma, we’d all be a bit better off.
“Someone”, duh!
And that just shows a lack of empathy or life experience.
You can’t always get help so you need to be able to get where you want to go on your own, and that means disabled people need cars.
I didn’t say it had to be an individual who needed to help. It could be any number of programs, services, or even yeah, individuals.
I mentioned mixed use buildings in another part of this thread, something like an apartment complex with a bodega-like grocery on the first floor or directly attached. What about moving more towards that kind of building? There are a ton of solutions that don’t require cars.
In what world is a disabled person able to board a car on their own but not a bus or train? And in what world are those busses and trains not staffed with people to help? Are we talking self-driving busses and cars with wheelchair driving options as a standard?
Edit: Seems the response is for the disabled person to: JuSt SpEnD mOrE mOnEy ; but we couldn’t possibly be bothered to spend more on public transit to make it more accessible.
At least in my country, bus drivers that need to help people in the wheelchair to get up on the bus are already at the edge of their patience. Don’t even talk about helping them stuff seven bags of groceries as well. That’s why unfortunately, taxis are still a necessity
I think the best solution, if we can redesign our cities, is to incorporate more mixed use buildings, or at least more mixed zoning. Why even have to have a bus if your building has a connected grocery and 3 other small shops on the same block.
These issues only really exist because everything is SO spread out. We have strict zoning regulations that mean having a grocery in a residential area is at best a challenge, and realistically impossible. This means we have to go further for the most mundane daily tasks, and this means we need more robust transportation, including cars.
ETA:rereading this it looks like I’m making an argument for no cars, buses or anything. I’m absolutely pro expanding public transportation, merely stating that if things were slightly different, you could eliminate the bus entirely from this situation specifically
I would imagine they’re at the edge of their patience because each delay causes them to be a bit behind on a tight schedule. A couple of answers to that would be 1. More busses, so the schedules can be looser and 2. Fewer cars so that traffic is smoother.
The car is in their driveway, where is the bus?
If we want piblic transport, and I certainly do, we need better aguments than this one.
Sure this applies for suburban or rural life. Everyone has the space to have a car there. In a city, which is what my entire argument stems around (you can see elsewhere in this thread where I state I wouldn’t ever dream of taking cars from rural people), it’s more like “the car is in the parking garage connected to the apartments. And the bus stop is just in front of the apartments, maybe down on the corner”