Imagine wandering down your local high street on a Summer's evening and being able to find diverse market stalls, alfresco eats, as well as live music.
There is no discussion that can be had here, at all, anyone capable of any form of rational thought can see this is either comical or insanely dangerous .
They are born in echo chambers where there is no diversity just reinforcement which frankly I should thank you for reinforcement the echo chamber. Could never have been proven more.
The podcast premise is born in false equivalence of Australian cities to the NY and other utter massive cities. That’s straight out of the gate. I stopped there.
“Failing to provide a good argument “
There is NO argument to be had here, but hey I will keep it simple, people die when roads are closed. It is blatantly obvious why it’s bad for Australia and this ideology perpetuates a very dangerous delusion. But hey rule ban dissent away.
It is, for obvious username colour. You can see where this group devolves this discussion into, outside this thread from “ban cars in cities” to: “ban cars outright”. It perpetuates an ideology born for very high density and very high populations with functional, accessible, affordable, public transport. A fictional triad in Australia & really fictional to cities “in whole”. As a result it spreads the ideology that removing transportation isn’t dangerous which it very much is why city planners have heart attacks closing roads. The net effect of removing “cars”: people die.
“Are you arguing that you have been unfairly targeted?” No, it was a borderline response. However very intentional as the alternative is proven where any “discussion” degrades to in the other thread with OP as I noted above would happen. OP has no interest having any discussions on the merits of closing one street for a market as does this podcast. It’s disingenuous to achieve one outcome: ban all cars.
It’s far simpler than that. Where is it in place, why and how right now (ignoring effectiveness). None apply to Australia, we will never have both the population or geographical size/density required for our cities to implement this in any meaningful manner within the next generation
There is no discussion that can be had here, at all, anyone capable of any form of rational thought can see this is either comical or insanely dangerous .
They are born in echo chambers where there is no diversity just reinforcement which frankly I should thank you for reinforcement the echo chamber. Could never have been proven more.
deleted by creator
The podcast premise is born in false equivalence of Australian cities to the NY and other utter massive cities. That’s straight out of the gate. I stopped there.
“Failing to provide a good argument “
There is NO argument to be had here, but hey I will keep it simple, people die when roads are closed. It is blatantly obvious why it’s bad for Australia and this ideology perpetuates a very dangerous delusion. But hey rule ban dissent away.
lol what a lazy troll. No they don’t. Fewer people die when you take away one of the biggest killers.
And please don’t come back at me with the obvious troll response here. You and I already both know how much of a blatant straw man it is.
Thanks for proving my point, dangerously delusional
Cars kill hundreds of people every year.
Pedestrians and cyclists kill zero.
Pretty simple maths, for anyone who graduated from primary school.
nice straw man, even more dangerous ideology
If you can’t face facts man, you should probably stop arguing with people who use them. You’re just making yourself look a numpty.
Zagorath “Facts”: “road closures have zero impact on the lives of people”
Cool story straw man
deleted by creator
It is, for obvious username colour. You can see where this group devolves this discussion into, outside this thread from “ban cars in cities” to: “ban cars outright”. It perpetuates an ideology born for very high density and very high populations with functional, accessible, affordable, public transport. A fictional triad in Australia & really fictional to cities “in whole”. As a result it spreads the ideology that removing transportation isn’t dangerous which it very much is why city planners have heart attacks closing roads. The net effect of removing “cars”: people die.
deleted by creator
“Are you arguing that you have been unfairly targeted?” No, it was a borderline response. However very intentional as the alternative is proven where any “discussion” degrades to in the other thread with OP as I noted above would happen. OP has no interest having any discussions on the merits of closing one street for a market as does this podcast. It’s disingenuous to achieve one outcome: ban all cars.
deleted by creator
It’s far simpler than that. Where is it in place, why and how right now (ignoring effectiveness). None apply to Australia, we will never have both the population or geographical size/density required for our cities to implement this in any meaningful manner within the next generation