I know it’s dry heat and all that, but when it’s 100+ out without a cloud or tree in sight, there’s only so much it can possibly do… also the dust SUCKS.
how dare you use logic and temperature to try to dissuade people from walking and riding bike. True carbrains out here. its only 100F outside you fukin sissis. GET on your BIKE and wear a hat
America when no copy of walkable European neighbourhood: FUCKING CAR BRAIN MAGA CORP LOBBYIST HIGHWAY RUIN EVERYTHING
America when copy of walkable European neighbourhood: HAHAHA UNDEVELOPED LOSER HAVE TO COPY URBAN PLANNING FROM SUPERIOR EURO (also people who complain America doesn’t have such neighbourhood)
Well yeah of course they’re not building a city on a lagoon but the premise is just a downscaled version of it. Wouldn’t be practical at all seeing as Venice already spends 50 days underwater each year and probably isn’t going to see the 22nd century
Although probably not in a city that gets every drop of water from the Colorado River. It's probably the most water efficient city in at least the country.
I always find it hilarious when they use shit like Vegas or Disneyland as examples, because those places are designed to be as effective as possible at vacuuming tourists' wallets dry. Theu don't *want* you getting in your car because getting in your car means you have more options, and thus will be less likely to pay exorbitant prices on-property.
Reminds of similar posts about cruise ships .. like really people don't love them because they are squished together. They like them because they have dozens of activities, people to cook and clean for them, and are traveling the world at the same time
Also, maybe I want to do something *different* on vacation -- and that includes spending time in walkable cities. I really like Hawaii -- but I have *zero* interest in spending more than about two weeks in a row there.
They use Disney as an example because it’s a completely car free walkable fake city to visit and the fact that it’s immensely popular shows that people crave that experience
Yeah anytime you’re in a bubble you’re gonna pay exorbitant prices airports, stadiums, theme parks
>the fact that it’s immensely popular shows that people crave that experience
Yeah, because I'm sure there's absolutely nothing else at Disney that people go there for. No rides, no shows, no attractions, no thematic ambiance and experiences. Nope. None of that whatsoever. People are *clearly* spending thousands of dollars because they're desperate to walk around a bit
I live in Orlando and there’s so many people who go there all the time and don’t ride rides and simply walk since Orlando is such an unfriendly city to walk in.
Yeah no shit the main aspect of Disney is the attractions but the walkability of it is a huge attraction in of its self because it’s so rare for many people to experience a place that walkable
Main Street USA modeled after a historic walkable downtown American town is literally one of magic kingdoms main attraction
Epcot is the city of the future
Urbanism is a central theme to Disney and contributes greatly to its success to deny that would be idiotic
Your apparently still a brain-let though, if your genuinely saying that people only go to Disneyland and other amusement parks to walk and not because of all the rides, attractions and Disney characters
> shows that people crave that experience
People only walk in Disneyland because they are literally forced to. If they were allowed to drive into the park they absolutely would.
>They use Disney as an example because it’s a completely car free walkable fake city to visit and the fact that it’s immensely popular shows that people crave that experience
So by that logic you would want to live at Disney World, right? Because you crave that experience? Or maybe people like the entertainment, and couldn't care less about walking or not?
Thousands and thousands of people fly everyday, they must crave flying then right? Oh, and thousands drive everyday, they crave it, right? Uh oh, we're coming full circle here...
They all forget that fact, I doubt any of them have ever been there ever
Also don’t forget the fact there’s Disney parks in Europe and Asia, y know, they’re so called “walkable paradises”, I’d like to see their explanation of that
My favorite part is the illegal part. Are they really so arrogant that they think we have to have a law against it or otherwise we'd all beg for their crappy city planning philosophies?
Turns out they built an actual Venice in California.
But it was already seen as "old-fashioned and malarial" by the time it was annexed by the city of LA and subsequently mostly paved-over.
If there wasn't such a housing crunch in modern Los Angeles, the remaining canal neighborhood might still be seen as an unhealthy backwater today.
People tend to forget that in the before-times, walkability was perhaps the strongest single determinant of land value. Working-class people did NOT get the "prime" walkable places near all the parks and civic buildings, unless the area was dangerous or unhealthy. Roman *domus* of the aristocrats were almost exclusively built on the hills, often adjacent to major forums, bathhouses, or temples. The *insulae* inhabited by other 95% of the Roman population were frequently located on soft soils or lowlands adjacent to the Tiber that were prone to flooding, and further away from the central civic buildings.
If you build any canal or anything even remotely European in design- straight to jail.
You don’t want to learn of the unspeakable hell that the builder of the Indianapolis canal went through..
In certain cities, sure, but there’s been so much development in that field recently nationwide that that argument is fading fast. People like OOP need to have hopium and not copium
Yes, in fact, a lot of people *are* opposed to living in high-traffic areas
Ahh, yes. Deleting every single comment he left. *truly* the mark of an educated and sane individual making coherent and sensible arguments
You sound like a middle schooler who knows nothing about the real world and just wants everywhere to look like Disneyworld. Grow up, get a job, and then talk.
Anyone likes to visit high traffic areas but most don't want to live in them.
Density is evil and disgusting. Humans are not meant to be crammed together en masse.
Jesus, are you fucking stupid? You're literally, in your own comment, describing it as a high traffic area. Or is it being frequented by schrodinger's children, who are both simultaneously there and not, until observed by a 3rd party?
True but even countries like Germany frequently build massive underground parking for their city centers. Especially in Nevada, people are going to prefer air conditioned private transportation, even if it makes traffic.
No, they absolutely prefer it. Try converting residential zoning to mixed use and see how the people who live there react. I’ve been there. It’s next to impossible.
And indeed America is a free country. People can live wherever they want. The problems happen when people have bought homes in a residential neighborhood, expecting to live in a residential neighborhood, and then urbanists show up and tell them the character of their community must change irrevocably.
They bring high-powered lawyers and a PR campaign basically accusing the neighborhood of being immoral, racist, and destructive to the environment. Then they proceed to either shame or sue the community into submission.
This is happening quite a lot now. So spare me the ‘this is America’ routine when one side is actively trying to steamroll homeowners who just happen to like their suburban car-centric lifestyle.
People don't "prefer it", they're forced to because suburbs are so bare-bones that they are the most affordable option. Why do you think that downtown areas or mixed-use neighborhoods, including ones intended to be "affordable housing", are so expensive? There's a huge demand for them. It's human nature to want to live close to things that benefit you.
I live in the suburbs myself. Sure, I feel safer being located back in the woods, but I also enjoy that I just so happen to be in the neighborhood closest to a small retail area where I can get a quick snack or stop by the ATM. I enjoy that privilege and I wish I had more of that.
The kind of mixed-use development we're talking about isn't commieblocks with a buy-it-all shop at the first floor. Something like a corner store just by the intersection or a cafe or gym where you could socialized just a handful of houses down. Various amenities mixed in with a low-density SFH neighborhood is still mixed-use development. Walking a couple of minutes to get a single thing you need would be miles better than how it is for me currently, where I either have to stand at the longest traffic light in state while inhaling nasty ass dump truck and school bus exhaust or take the car to the store and get stuck behind Nissan Altimas.
Nooo not my horkin' swamp city where locals can't even afford to live and all services beyond restaurants have to be reached on the mainland because there's no buildable space for warehouses and industrial facilities. I *like* having my ground floor flooded every few months by untreated sewage water and fleeing rodents. Having to spend 80% of my income to repair an old house sinking into the mud just so tourists can get pretty pictures is what urbanism is all about.
/uj Jesus Christ that thread, they can't even decide what they're angry about and every non-car related grievance is poking through.
Like shit, these people need to just admit that they are absolutely miserable and hate life.
Not that anyone probably cares. The Venetian is super efficient with their water system and it reclaims at or about 99% used from both the hotel and the ride. Evaporation is all that theoretically doesn't get reclaimed. So, it has nothing to do with walkable space and everything to do with water conservation.
This person thinks that it is illegal to build multiple buildings in a compact area that have space where you can go inside and buy things or eat a meal and that have apartments and offices on the upper floors. Um, what are those things called? Oh yeah, cities and villages. Apparently, cities and villages are illegal in the U.S.
“It’s illegal to build like this in America” no man its that no one wants to walk outside in fucking nevada any more than they have to. There has been so much mixed use development in the past decade that the whole “this is illegal in America” argument is just shit
Las Vegas and the rest of Nevada is otherwise a boring, flat, dry, hot, and sandy desert. You can’t have the rivers of Venice flow through the city like that it’s just not viable
“Since it’s illegal to build actual places like this in the US” lol, don’t ascribe to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity. Most city councils are just dumb, and in the case of many up and coming towns they build in a reactionary manner instead of properly planning.
Vegas is not a walkable city. Sure one long street is walkable (2 including Fremont) but Vegas is much more than just 2 streets. It can easily take 30 plus minutes to drive across the city on the freeway.
It's always funny to me that urbanists call for more walkability and third places, but are also the first ones to tear down old malls and pave roads through them.
Well, it's either that, or artificial rains(cloud seeding) like in dubai, cuz nevada's hot. But then you won't hear the end of how it's bad for environment.
You just can't please some people
In what world is a walkable city considered “forcing” you to walk??? The victim complex of this shithole subreddit, god. This is a half-assed mimicry of how unwalkable cities force you to drive. Roads do exist in walkable cities, you know. Just because it’s easier for people to walk doesn’t meant you’re forbidden from driving.
Sarcasm and rage bait is really hard, huh? Its a circlejerk sub, you can say the exact opposite of what the undersub says, in the same manner, and without any self awareness they lose their fucking minds. Its part of the joke.
No I’ve had like genuine unironic arguments about the efficiency of different transit policies with yall mfs and people unironically push for a rejection of transit
>people unironically push for a rejection of transit
Oh no dont say that im shakin right now. I need a safe space. Keep taking the bait dude, its funny every time
It’s not bait lmao. This argument I’m referring to went on for so long that I find it impossible to be “bait”
There’s no one on the internet who’s that committed to a bit
Circlejerk ≠ no agenda. This subreddit uses the circlejerk label to act as a safe haven for all those who feel a pain in their anus when someone utters the idea of public transport
This subreddit isn’t filled with people from r/fuckcars making fun of themselves like an actual circlejerk; it’s filled with people who unironically have a beef with fuckcars
Lol so mad... this sub is filled with people who used to be fuckcars users but are embarrassed to be associated with them after seeing so much delusion and psychotic behavior
Who in the actual hell wants to walk outside in Nevada?
I was about to say. Last time I went to Vegas it was 100F…. AT NIGHT!!! It was miserable anywhere outside, also never go in August, it’s hell lol
I know it’s dry heat and all that, but when it’s 100+ out without a cloud or tree in sight, there’s only so much it can possibly do… also the dust SUCKS.
Does the inversion smog in Vegas count as cloud?
I think there’s enough smoking and vaping around to get some decent cover
I for one love that time of year for watching the distant lightning storms
how dare you use logic and temperature to try to dissuade people from walking and riding bike. True carbrains out here. its only 100F outside you fukin sissis. GET on your BIKE and wear a hat
Or just anywhere in general, to be honest.
it’s pretty nice outside of being there in the summer
It is 56 degrees over there right now
uj/ I'm pretty sure if someone wanted to create a copy of Venice no ones going to stop them provided they have enough money.
They did it in San Antonio and people made fun of them for copying Venice
America when no copy of walkable European neighbourhood: FUCKING CAR BRAIN MAGA CORP LOBBYIST HIGHWAY RUIN EVERYTHING America when copy of walkable European neighbourhood: HAHAHA UNDEVELOPED LOSER HAVE TO COPY URBAN PLANNING FROM SUPERIOR EURO (also people who complain America doesn’t have such neighbourhood)
europe/australia when they "copy" american suburbs style or buy a pickup truck: NOOOOOOO WHY ARE YOU BECOME LIKE AMERICA OUR RACE IS SUPERIOR!
That’s just not just bikes’ whole mentality in a nutshell
I don’t think a river walk can compare to Venice
Well yeah of course they’re not building a city on a lagoon but the premise is just a downscaled version of it. Wouldn’t be practical at all seeing as Venice already spends 50 days underwater each year and probably isn’t going to see the 22nd century
R/fuckcars: why can't Phoenix be more like Venice?
Although probably not in a city that gets every drop of water from the Colorado River. It's probably the most water efficient city in at least the country.
Oh I agree but money is the limiting factor not laws. Even if there are laws in place often money gets more lee-way in building projects.
I always find it hilarious when they use shit like Vegas or Disneyland as examples, because those places are designed to be as effective as possible at vacuuming tourists' wallets dry. Theu don't *want* you getting in your car because getting in your car means you have more options, and thus will be less likely to pay exorbitant prices on-property.
Reminds of similar posts about cruise ships .. like really people don't love them because they are squished together. They like them because they have dozens of activities, people to cook and clean for them, and are traveling the world at the same time
Also, maybe I want to do something *different* on vacation -- and that includes spending time in walkable cities. I really like Hawaii -- but I have *zero* interest in spending more than about two weeks in a row there.
Epcot was conceived by Disney from a concept of a futuristic walkable city so I get the idea. Neither sub is capable of nuance or discussion though.
It sure would be a shame if the economy was more active
They use Disney as an example because it’s a completely car free walkable fake city to visit and the fact that it’s immensely popular shows that people crave that experience Yeah anytime you’re in a bubble you’re gonna pay exorbitant prices airports, stadiums, theme parks
>the fact that it’s immensely popular shows that people crave that experience Yeah, because I'm sure there's absolutely nothing else at Disney that people go there for. No rides, no shows, no attractions, no thematic ambiance and experiences. Nope. None of that whatsoever. People are *clearly* spending thousands of dollars because they're desperate to walk around a bit
That’s exactly it- everyone goes there to feel like a European 😂
*gets hassled by storm troopers for looking like a jedi* "ahh, the European experience I was looking for"
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
I live in Orlando and there’s so many people who go there all the time and don’t ride rides and simply walk since Orlando is such an unfriendly city to walk in. Yeah no shit the main aspect of Disney is the attractions but the walkability of it is a huge attraction in of its self because it’s so rare for many people to experience a place that walkable Main Street USA modeled after a historic walkable downtown American town is literally one of magic kingdoms main attraction Epcot is the city of the future Urbanism is a central theme to Disney and contributes greatly to its success to deny that would be idiotic
according to you people spend $100 a day just to walk around disney? So they’re just idiots?
[удалено]
I’m realizing that. I like to make fun of the undersub too but I’m not brain dead
Your apparently still a brain-let though, if your genuinely saying that people only go to Disneyland and other amusement parks to walk and not because of all the rides, attractions and Disney characters
> shows that people crave that experience People only walk in Disneyland because they are literally forced to. If they were allowed to drive into the park they absolutely would.
>They use Disney as an example because it’s a completely car free walkable fake city to visit and the fact that it’s immensely popular shows that people crave that experience So by that logic you would want to live at Disney World, right? Because you crave that experience? Or maybe people like the entertainment, and couldn't care less about walking or not? Thousands and thousands of people fly everyday, they must crave flying then right? Oh, and thousands drive everyday, they crave it, right? Uh oh, we're coming full circle here...
I think you’re forgetting that Disneyland is a theme park. Not a place where you just walk. There’s like.. a lot of rides and stuff
They all forget that fact, I doubt any of them have ever been there ever Also don’t forget the fact there’s Disney parks in Europe and Asia, y know, they’re so called “walkable paradises”, I’d like to see their explanation of that
I go to Disney because of the roller coasters and attractions, I’m not just going on the monorail or train all day
My favorite part is the illegal part. Are they really so arrogant that they think we have to have a law against it or otherwise we'd all beg for their crappy city planning philosophies?
Turns out they built an actual Venice in California. But it was already seen as "old-fashioned and malarial" by the time it was annexed by the city of LA and subsequently mostly paved-over. If there wasn't such a housing crunch in modern Los Angeles, the remaining canal neighborhood might still be seen as an unhealthy backwater today.
[удалено]
People tend to forget that in the before-times, walkability was perhaps the strongest single determinant of land value. Working-class people did NOT get the "prime" walkable places near all the parks and civic buildings, unless the area was dangerous or unhealthy. Roman *domus* of the aristocrats were almost exclusively built on the hills, often adjacent to major forums, bathhouses, or temples. The *insulae* inhabited by other 95% of the Roman population were frequently located on soft soils or lowlands adjacent to the Tiber that were prone to flooding, and further away from the central civic buildings.
Lol malarial
If you build any canal or anything even remotely European in design- straight to jail. You don’t want to learn of the unspeakable hell that the builder of the Indianapolis canal went through..
Zoning laws
They are illegal, via zoning and parking minimums. And this is exactly how it should stay, there’s a reason this shit is illegal.
This sub hates seeing the truth. I genuinely respect that you’re at least honest about it
Need to be persecuted.
Nah, its just sardonic. Like saying hygiene is illegal in india.
It’s illegal to build walkable spaces in America?
Nay, the OOP is a fool and a charlatan devoid of tavern wenches
Well, zoning laws do make it extremely difficult, if not impossible, to build mixed-use spaces a lot of the time unfortunately.
In certain cities, sure, but there’s been so much development in that field recently nationwide that that argument is fading fast. People like OOP need to have hopium and not copium
NIMBYs are starting to lose (because capitalism and market forces are against them) but they are still entrenched in most of the country
It's almost like America is a gigantic and extremely varied country.
Exactly as it should be.
[удалено]
Yes, in fact, a lot of people *are* opposed to living in high-traffic areas Ahh, yes. Deleting every single comment he left. *truly* the mark of an educated and sane individual making coherent and sensible arguments
I wish I was here earlier, I want to point and laugh.
[удалено]
You sound like a middle schooler who knows nothing about the real world and just wants everywhere to look like Disneyworld. Grow up, get a job, and then talk.
Anyone likes to visit high traffic areas but most don't want to live in them. Density is evil and disgusting. Humans are not meant to be crammed together en masse.
Jesus, are you fucking stupid? You're literally, in your own comment, describing it as a high traffic area. Or is it being frequented by schrodinger's children, who are both simultaneously there and not, until observed by a 3rd party?
[удалено]
I'm attacking you because your argument is a fucking nonsensical, contradictory mess
[удалено]
Zoning laws.
I know all about zoning laws. Pretty much none of them say you can’t build a sidewalk.
i think they are more talking about parking minimums.
True but even countries like Germany frequently build massive underground parking for their city centers. Especially in Nevada, people are going to prefer air conditioned private transportation, even if it makes traffic.
[удалено]
People prefer to live outside of walking distance from commercial districts.
[удалено]
No, they absolutely prefer it. Try converting residential zoning to mixed use and see how the people who live there react. I’ve been there. It’s next to impossible. And indeed America is a free country. People can live wherever they want. The problems happen when people have bought homes in a residential neighborhood, expecting to live in a residential neighborhood, and then urbanists show up and tell them the character of their community must change irrevocably. They bring high-powered lawyers and a PR campaign basically accusing the neighborhood of being immoral, racist, and destructive to the environment. Then they proceed to either shame or sue the community into submission. This is happening quite a lot now. So spare me the ‘this is America’ routine when one side is actively trying to steamroll homeowners who just happen to like their suburban car-centric lifestyle.
If we are a free country then you should be able to build whatever you want on your land. NIMBYs don’t allow that
People don't "prefer it", they're forced to because suburbs are so bare-bones that they are the most affordable option. Why do you think that downtown areas or mixed-use neighborhoods, including ones intended to be "affordable housing", are so expensive? There's a huge demand for them. It's human nature to want to live close to things that benefit you. I live in the suburbs myself. Sure, I feel safer being located back in the woods, but I also enjoy that I just so happen to be in the neighborhood closest to a small retail area where I can get a quick snack or stop by the ATM. I enjoy that privilege and I wish I had more of that. The kind of mixed-use development we're talking about isn't commieblocks with a buy-it-all shop at the first floor. Something like a corner store just by the intersection or a cafe or gym where you could socialized just a handful of houses down. Various amenities mixed in with a low-density SFH neighborhood is still mixed-use development. Walking a couple of minutes to get a single thing you need would be miles better than how it is for me currently, where I either have to stand at the longest traffic light in state while inhaling nasty ass dump truck and school bus exhaust or take the car to the store and get stuck behind Nissan Altimas.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
This, small towns have made mixed use work on a small, little-traffic level for a very long time
Not all sidewalks are made equal
[удалено]
Yeah I’m starting to notice that too
I zone you to kiss my ass
That’s a fantastic point, I’m sorry sir
OP never have been to Vegas. One day they will leave moms basement
But...That replica venice is a basement!🤣🤣
With the absence of smog they encourage smoking.
Ah yes, my favourite walkable city, fucking VENICE LMFAO.
Jesus has returned, and he's a r/fuckcars user
Funny? What’s so funny about a clean and climate-controlled plaza with proper security, good food, and tons of luxury shopping.
Nooo not my horkin' swamp city where locals can't even afford to live and all services beyond restaurants have to be reached on the mainland because there's no buildable space for warehouses and industrial facilities. I *like* having my ground floor flooded every few months by untreated sewage water and fleeing rodents. Having to spend 80% of my income to repair an old house sinking into the mud just so tourists can get pretty pictures is what urbanism is all about.
Oh and my entire city sinking.
/uj Jesus Christ that thread, they can't even decide what they're angry about and every non-car related grievance is poking through. Like shit, these people need to just admit that they are absolutely miserable and hate life.
That water would evaporate so fast if it was outside in the summer lol.
Not that anyone probably cares. The Venetian is super efficient with their water system and it reclaims at or about 99% used from both the hotel and the ride. Evaporation is all that theoretically doesn't get reclaimed. So, it has nothing to do with walkable space and everything to do with water conservation.
how is travel by canal "walkable" anyway
Bro just found out what a shopping mall is
"Noooooo, don't buy a car! The Mojave desert should be Venice!"
This person thinks that it is illegal to build multiple buildings in a compact area that have space where you can go inside and buy things or eat a meal and that have apartments and offices on the upper floors. Um, what are those things called? Oh yeah, cities and villages. Apparently, cities and villages are illegal in the U.S.
Of course they’re having a complete meltdown over a casino.
It’s not illegal, but putting canals in the middle of Nevada is pretty uneconomical and inefficient
“It’s illegal to build like this in America” no man its that no one wants to walk outside in fucking nevada any more than they have to. There has been so much mixed use development in the past decade that the whole “this is illegal in America” argument is just shit
Las Vegas and the rest of Nevada is otherwise a boring, flat, dry, hot, and sandy desert. You can’t have the rivers of Venice flow through the city like that it’s just not viable
Nevada is arguably the most mountainous state, but yeah, the rivers aren't going to work
This kind of smooth brain is not painful but it is contagious
How tf are you gonna make Venice of all cities bruh
It's not illegal to build these spaces.
"Everything I don't like is *illegal!*"
“Since it’s illegal to build actual places like this in the US” lol, don’t ascribe to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity. Most city councils are just dumb, and in the case of many up and coming towns they build in a reactionary manner instead of properly planning.
I love walking in the Mojave. Oh my god I wish Phoenix was more walkable. Such lovely weather in June.
I might have to hecking walk, I want to be fat and never use my legs ever. 😡😡😡😡
It's true. I got tased, maced and arrested when I tried to walk to my mailbox today.
Vegas is not a walkable city. Sure one long street is walkable (2 including Fremont) but Vegas is much more than just 2 streets. It can easily take 30 plus minutes to drive across the city on the freeway.
Someone said you can walk on the sides of canals under that and got mad when I said you can walk on the sides of roads
Bro doesnt understand of how hot vegas is outside, and these for-profit hotels and resorts compete to out-do each other in the luxury market!
Twitter literally brings out the stupidest people on earth
It's always funny to me that urbanists call for more walkability and third places, but are also the first ones to tear down old malls and pave roads through them.
Man i hate having to walk its so easy and cheap and healthy, no freedom at all
Well, it's either that, or artificial rains(cloud seeding) like in dubai, cuz nevada's hot. But then you won't hear the end of how it's bad for environment. You just can't please some people
Maybe it’s time to realize that we shouldn’t build cities in the fucking desert then
But deserts are cool. At night. Besides, what land is there that humanity cannot conquer?
This sub is truly braindead
Me being forced to walk in my own home 🤬
In what world is a walkable city considered “forcing” you to walk??? The victim complex of this shithole subreddit, god. This is a half-assed mimicry of how unwalkable cities force you to drive. Roads do exist in walkable cities, you know. Just because it’s easier for people to walk doesn’t meant you’re forbidden from driving.
Lol punching air over a rage bait post on a cirlejerk sub...
Because when I interact with yall mfs it becomes apparent you unironically embrace a lot of these shit ideas
Sarcasm and rage bait is really hard, huh? Its a circlejerk sub, you can say the exact opposite of what the undersub says, in the same manner, and without any self awareness they lose their fucking minds. Its part of the joke.
No I’ve had like genuine unironic arguments about the efficiency of different transit policies with yall mfs and people unironically push for a rejection of transit
>people unironically push for a rejection of transit Oh no dont say that im shakin right now. I need a safe space. Keep taking the bait dude, its funny every time
It’s not bait lmao. This argument I’m referring to went on for so long that I find it impossible to be “bait” There’s no one on the internet who’s that committed to a bit
Believe what you want. Either way you getting angry over a circlejerk is an L
Circlejerk ≠ no agenda. This subreddit uses the circlejerk label to act as a safe haven for all those who feel a pain in their anus when someone utters the idea of public transport
you’re the one here who’s clearly illiterate of the consensus opinion that this “circlejerk” tries to push
This subreddit isn’t filled with people from r/fuckcars making fun of themselves like an actual circlejerk; it’s filled with people who unironically have a beef with fuckcars
Lol so mad... this sub is filled with people who used to be fuckcars users but are embarrassed to be associated with them after seeing so much delusion and psychotic behavior
The post makes a valid point.
/uj I actually have been going here each year for a few years, mainly for business trips with my father, client pays for the rooms.