Comment

daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

You lack imagination. Plenty of ways to not kill people without having to recede to Palaeolithic levels of life quality.

source

Sort:hotnew top

Genius@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
Yeah, I’m actually subtly manipulating you. See, you were acting like there’s no way to live rurally but to use cars, so I explained that people can live in rural areas without cars in a way you can’t argue with. But the trick is, I lowballed you to set your expectations low. Now I can explain that the United States was basically built by railroads, and that trains are faster than donkeys. Furthermore, rail technology has advanced massively in the last 100 years, to the point that you genuinely could live rurally without a car and still enjoy those urban conveniences you love, like out of season fruit. It won’t be as convenient as the car, but I’m sure now you’ve realised it would still be a far better quality of life than has ever been possible for your ancestors. And now it’ll look really selfish if you say you’re still not satisfied with that and you want to poison the sky and kill people for even more convenience.

source
- daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
  I live in Europe (Spain for reference). I think my country is the second one in the world in ultraspeed train network only behind china (or it used to).
  
  People in rural areas still needs cars. In fact people in rural areas doesn’t even use trains for the most part. Buses work better. Still, living there without a car is a big drop in life quality.
  
  We fund trains with public money to make them cheaper. Some trains are even FREE to the public, free as in you can hop in without paying. Still people don’t use trains in rural areas unless they have not access to a car. Because it’s imposible to have a network with enough frequency and travel time to match people expectations on transport.
  
  source