I had to point this out when my conservative friend used this "argument" that I was only restricted to where the gov't "allows" me to go if I ride public transit...lost a few brain cells that day
@@charged-protonWalkable cities don't only provide viable transit through trains. You could walk, bike, take heavy or light rail, drive your own car, ride the bus, etc. The point is you have options that increase your mobility and decrease your dependence on one type of infrastructure, especially one that has to be constantly funded and planned out by the government.
@@charged-proton As opposed to all of the other modes of transportation that don't require you to be registered, licensed, insured, and permitted by the government to use. Or that which you can be compulsorily forbidden from using. Automobility is the only mode of transportation where you can be stopped in the middle of your transit for the slightest infraction, of which there are myriad laws aimed at programming and punishing your behavior. And it is the only mode of transportation wherein people routinely justify and normalize preventable interactions between the public and the police -- and the only mode of transportation with which people are regularly executed extrajudicially by officers of the state.
@@charged-proton The point is to show how the "15 minute cities are prisons" doesn't make any sense since it can also be applied to car infrastructure.
Living in Phoenix my definition of "Freedom" is not sitting in traffic. I'm not going to lie, I like cars, but sitting in traffic completely defeats the purpose of enjoying driving. Building car centric cities only benefits cars (a little bit and even that's a stretch). Building transit oriented and pedestrian friendly cities benefits everybody including cars (by a lot).
That's the irony car centric design though. Without any other transport options, when people want to enjoy a drive, it's messed up by everyone else having to drive to get a quart / liter of milk.
@@GhostOnTheHalfShell Car centric cities only give us one option to move around. 15 Minute cities or transit oriented cities gives us more options and that's actual freedom.
@@garcjr I have a car but haven't driven it in years. The grocery (one of them) is around the corner with several more an enjoyable walk away. The hardware store is also an enjoyable walk away. I live right near parks and the like, food. etc. I feel so very jailed. 😅
I have acquaintances who claim they won’t shop downtown or anywhere that doesn’t have free parking within a few dozen yards of where they want to go. Funny thing is, the commercial vacancy rate is considerably 😮higher in most shopping centers surrounded by acres of parking than the downtown vacancy rate.
another point that can be made is that most car oriented suburban development have only one way in or out, making it extremely easy to control who goes in or out for an authoritarian government; urban neighborhoods on the other hand are much more permeable, and many apartment complexes even have more than one way in or out
I don't get the argument about some vague "authoritarian government controlling its people". If a developed, democratic nation will get an authoritarian government that wants to control its people, it won't matter if you live in a 15 minute city or not. Unless you go off the grid and live in the countryside, you'll be on the radar. The point of 15 minute cities is that they are nice and livable places, not a good way to hide from the government.
That's a pretty big part of why governments in the 20th century encouraged the growth of urban sprawl, they were all scared of popular uprisings and dense cities are basically impossible to control if they go into open revolt. This is because the dense layout makes it easy to set up blockades and ambushes and anyone who lives there will have a massive advantage from local knowledge, allowing them to easily outmaneuver government units. At the same time it will always be practically impossible to achieve numerical superiority because there are so many people and if you do concentrate your forces they'll be in large unwieldy groups unfit for urban combat. There's a reason why urban combat is considered the most difficult type of combat by all armies around the world. By comparison suburban neighborhoods are extremely easy to control, the open layout gives government forces a huge advantage since they have access to air support and recon assets, making undetected movement and thus any kind of surprise attack impossible. There isn't even any vegetation to hide behind like you might find in a rural area. The low density also makes it easy for government forces to cordon off an area and achieve local numerical superioty and thus slowly work their way through an area to pacify it. Plus the car dependent layout obviously favors the heavy armored vehicles the government can bring to bear.
It's literally IMPOSSIBLE to get out of town without paying for some sort of vehicle (car, bus, plane, train). It's illegal to go on the highway on foot or bike (it's legal by horse, but cops don't know the law and will unlawfully arrest you anyway 😒), and trying to get between towns on back/rural/country-roads with their 80kph+ speed-limits where people drive 120kph is dangerous enough if you're willing to walk in the ditch beside the road, let alone risking your life to bike in the road. 🤦
This isn’t conspiracy, it’s car dependency at work. Most people can’t conceive having everything they need within 15 minutes of where they live so they truly believe it’s constricting. I’m sure the big automakers aren’t complaining about this…
@@willblack8575 The idea of 15 minute cities specifically refers to walking, biking, and transit. Most cities in the US have very bad urban sprawl, where you will likely not reach any destination within 15 minutes of exiting your house, unless you live very close to the center.
Let’s not forget highways bulldozing whole neighbourhoods and serving as, effectively, government build walls to effectively divide cities into zones that would be easy to control.
Check out Charlotte North Carolina, I grew up around there. It has the lowest upward mobility rate of any major city in the US. They doing exactly what you are taking about right up to 1990’s….
Regardless of if we have cars the highway system would need to exist as the purpose of them was specifically for the government to move supplies and military personnel efficiently.
I swear half the people who are "scared of the gov't restricting where you go" don't think twice that they have to drive on gov't built roads, or regularly have to use TOLL ROADS. Roads that you literally have to pay to use, and are tracked by license plate in doing so
In the US toll roads are specilized roads used for long distance travel. For instance, the NJ Turnpike. You can literally go 90 mph and not be ticketed even though the posted speed is 65. You actually get six lanes that are divided by 2 and rest stops in about every county.
You would get a lot of drivers off the road if the licensing exams were much harder than they currently were. I understand if the average person living in Phoenix, AZ never left to go to the mountains but if their dmv told them to practice on skidpads to pass their driving exam a lot of people would fail that part of the exam.
There is a BIG difference between driving on an open road and commuting in a city/metro area. Driving on the open road can be soothing and relaxing while commuting in traffic to go somewhere less than 2 miles is stressful
3500 pounds to transport one 140 pound person. Average speed 25mph. Parked for 96.4% of its lifetime. 4.3 years inside a vehicle per lifetime, (about the same as the average person spends eating). Average cost of owning a vehicle in Canada: 12,000 dollars per year. Efficiency is clearly one of our greatest attributes.
While this comment and this channel is mostly centered on Canada, I can assure you as an American that that 3500lb waste of a truck bed in hauling at least 250lbs in the driver's seat. 140lbs is highly generous of you regarding our weights for either side of the border.
Imagine advocating for more freedom of construction options, and _removal_ of laws that force you to build sprawling suburban areas, being "government control and restriction".
i can imagine it, because it's astroturf. there's always been a number of the populace who has advocated for the freedom to oppress people, who have had followers who have no idea they are also affected by that oppression.
I wish people were more in favor of loosening zoning laws and minimum parking requirements. Many of the 15-minute city proposals include car membranes or outright vehicle prohibitions. Rather than give people more options, they go the unfortunately typical route of just making car travel harder, rather than making everything else easier.
@@Schlabbeflicker Well one of the differences is that for example shops are brought closed to homes. Walkable distance. Which means there is not going to be square miles of parking around that shop, which will be smaller (but there will be more of them).
I once wrote out a reply on Reddit to a comment regarding gun control. My post took on a centrist, compromise stance. I advocated for both freedom to bear arms, but alongside that an opt-in "safe operator" registration program where people could get certified and licensed as safe firearm users by attending safety classes and regular marksmanship practice and maintaining clean criminal records, earning a stipend in the process. In other words, you can get paid to be licensed, but it's not a mandatory requirement because the 2nd Amendment would still apply. *Literally* the best of both worlds, encouraging safety, but also allowing an armed populace as intended. And what happened? _One_ person replied accusing me of being anti-gun and this being some clever "first step" in a long-term ploy to eventually strip people of their 2A Rights. Basically, start by getting people on board with an "optional" program, let it run for a while so people get attached to it, and then make the move to make it mandatory when people are willing to defend it. And he basically rattled on how much of a hard-core gun-nut he was and how "real 2A supporters" would never go for an idea like this and they know I'm some gubermint plant and whatnot. Meanwhile, alongside debating _that_ loony toon, in _another_ reply thread to this *very same proposal,* someone accused *me* of being the _gun nut!_ They claimed I wanted to proliferate guns everywhere and supported totally uncontrolled and unmitigated gun violence and child murder in schools and whatnot. _Total opposite reactions_ to my single post on a compromise on gun control regarding how each side viewed me and my opinions regarding guns, gun violence, and gun ownership rights.
@@Schlabbeflicker The reason they have to do this is because cars require and demand so much space that they close off and restrict what else can be done.
One thing I wish you guys mentioned was the INSANELY OBVIOUS fact that literally just all of the roads that you drive on are controlled by the government. Like you quite literally cannot drive from one place to another unless the government has paved a road for you to get there. Walking somewhere is absolutely more freeing as there needs to be much less government involvement to provide the infrastructure for you to walk somewhere.
As a truck driver, I underhand what you just said more than most people. Truck drivers have more encounters with law enforcement than most people. We're also the most regulated as well. When I park at a truck stop, the first thing that I look for is nearby bike/ pedestrian infrastructure. This way, I can get out of my truck and cycle into the nearest town. I'm never really free until I get away from my truck.
My grandpa worked in northern Canada as a conservation officer. Once they built a trail about 30 miles through the bush to connect a remote work camp to the nearest settlement. It did the trick for several weeks, until some government reps came up from Winnipeg and tore a strip off the crew for building an "illegal road". They were told they couldn't use the road until the Department of Infrastructure rebuilt it to modern highway standards. It ended up looking nearly identical to the old trail, but cost hundreds of thousands more.
@JakobHill If you would like to know the most expensive and inefficient way to accomplish something just get the government to do it. The nine scariest words in the English language are " I'm from the government, and I'm here to help. "
Not to mention that a lack of transport options in car dependent areas means that children are brought up in an environment where they are dependent on others to move around. This engenders a lack of independence in children and teenagers. When they grow up and move away from home they are unable to adapt to their environment as easily as others. One example of this is a kid of one of my friends who grew up dependent on her parents to get to school, parties, activities and later work. She moved to college and soon realized she’d never learnt how to cycle. The college is in Amsterdam! Why would we do this to our kids? Bring them up in an environment so devoid of individual freedom that they never learn a basic life skill.
It's sadly just a pipe dream in many parts of Canada. We used to trust kids to go to school or sports practice on their own, not anymore it's considered too dangerous. We used to expect kids to move out on their own, not anymore due to the high cost of living.
@@noseboop4354 I have to disagree with the first part. The moral panic of the 90s convinced parents that there was a pedophile on every corner, waiting to snatch your child the second they left the house without a parent. The truth is that the vast majority of child "abductions" turn out to be custody disputes that spiraled out of control. Of course this isn't Japan and you can't just let a 6-year-old ride the bus, but there's no reason why a responsible 10-year-old can't be trusted to use common sense to stay out of trouble. It's the 21st century; your children are much safer outside than they are online.
I grew up in a Canadian suburb and there wasn't really any convenience stores around where I could get a snack or beverage for myself. My experience was my parents doing pretty much every single purchase for me, because it required getting into a car first. When I went to university and had my own money, I remember for a while, being unreasonably anxious when I was checking out anywhere. Cashiers scared me because I wasn't used to approaching strangers. Obviously this isn't something to cry about, but it's among the many small ways that living in a car dependent area stunts the growth of children.
@@jamesphillips2285Correct, but we should cater to the best possible living in cities. Currently, the “feature” of car dependency in most suburbs is forced upon by law through parking minimums, R1 single family house zoning, front yard setbacks, among the few to list.
some urbanists were send death treats and over this conspiracy. Living 15 minutes away from work, I never paid attention to the gas prices until someone next to me complained.
Planners kind of deserve the hate they get tbh. We could have better urbanism by getting rid of urban planning, there is a reason why we call Suburbs plans, but dont use that term for towns or cities.
You dont even know what the word "conspiracy" means. You use it as of it means the same as conspiracy theory. A conspiracy theory is NOT a conspiracy. A conspiracy theory is a theory about a possible conspiracy
It's not a conspiracy, it's a risk we could lose precious freedoms along the way. But that'll never happen because all gov'ts hold paramount basic rights and freedoms, right?... dream on.
I was thinking the same thing you pointed out with regards to data collection in cars, when my sister got her new car. Her explanation as to why she bought a gas car was because she was worried that an electric car might “spy” on her. Dude they all have the same computers and capacity to monitor you, just electric cars do it slightly cleaner
IIRC Louis Rossmann made a video about an e-bike issue where a bankrupt company turned most e-bikes useless and how that isn't an inherent issue of e-bikes but rather that of modern propriataryism with an analogy to cars on how petrol cars would have suffered from the same issue as e-cars if they were more recently popularised.
I would say electric vehicles are dirtier because lithium is very polluting and toxic and is actually worse for the environment than gasoline vehicles. Hybrid vehicles are actually better than all gasoline and all electrics vehicles combined.
I saw a long discussion on a picture of Kowloon Walled City over how that's what people mean when they mean "walkable cities". WHO HAS EVER, EVER, EVER ADVOCATED FOR THAT? That's like claiming that traffic engineers want to entirely bury the Serengeti, Yellowstone, and the Okavango in asphalt, it's so patently absurd that I genuinely don't understand how anyone could ever think that. The missing middle is apparently housing with density between 2 000/km2 and 2 000 000/km2
Kowloon isn't what anybody WANTS, it's what you get with overpopulation, you get that, or Bladerunner or Fifth Element or Dredd or other mega-structures where people spend their entire lives in a single enormous mega-skyscraper-tower-blocks. Again, nobody wants it, it's just a consequence of having too gd mf many humans. 😒 Look at how all the urbanists keep talking about "high density housing" being a solution. Yeah, we all want to live in concrete sardine-tins in the sky. 🤦
tbh Kowloon Walled City does seem like a really interesting place and it's kinda sad to me that it was demolished. but yeah not a good model for cities of course.
It's extra funny because KWC is an example of the opposite of government control. It was basically ungoverned. So I really don't think these folks understand what they want.
I don't know if it counts as a small town or not but I lived in Southern Illinois in a town that had about 16,000 population. As a kid I could walk or ride my bike to school, to the store, anywhere I wanted to go. You could get from one side of town to the other in about 15 minutes on a bike. We had pretty much everything we needed in town, but if we wanted something more we could order it from the Sears catalog or J C Penney catalog or drive about an hour to the nearest mall. Not quite as convenient as Amazon but worked for us.
Purely by accident, I've discovered I live in a fifteen minute city, and the craziest thing is, I can leave any time I want. I have _three_ supermarkets within a fifteen minute bike ride. Closer than any of those I have two corner stores and a fresh food market. Not that it's relevant to me, but there is a public school nearby, and two private religious ones (all of which closer than any of those supermarkets). Between the two corner stores there's a street of shops, including a bakery, a laundromat, a post office, a couple of cafes, and a whole bunch of other stuff I never cared enough about to pay attention. Right outside my door I have a tram line, and I'm a fifteen minute walk from a train station, and a five minute walk from a bus stop. My job is now a five minute bike ride away. I just got lucky that a place I applied to online just happened to be around the corner from me. The only bad thing about my current address is it's basically at the intersection of two stroads...
I have more than a dozen of supermarkets within a 15-meter walking radius, lol. One-way, around 1.5km radius. Dunno how many cafes, small stores, bakeries, etc. Post office in my building, post-sanction ex-McDonalds across the road, two mid-sized malls, several public schools. All of that also fully accessible by cars. God I love living in Russia and not having this silly issues of car vs walkability, the commies built the cities for both.
@@jcal258 Are you trying to make a point? It seems like you think you've scored big and I've been totally destroyed, but I literally don't understand what you're getting at. My previous commute was 12 km each direction, about a 30 minute ride for me, or 40 minutes by car thanks to the route and the traffic (the bike path was pretty much a straight line south-east, the car route was east then south). Of course my circumstances will change. I'd certainly _like_ it to be the norm that the things we all need are within a short distance of where we live so we can all be assured of wasting less time traveling, because I've lived the hour plus each way commute life before, and it's not great. I don't see how people can _stomach_ the idea of getting into their car each morning for an hour long drive to work, but I guess that's "freedom" for you. As for my _current_ circumstances, I've lived without a bike, with a much more distant job before, and I could do it again. Public transport is a pain in the ass but it's workable. If my bike had two flats tomorrow, I'd call in, say I'd be a bit late, and just walk to work because it's not that far. I'm 35 years old, I've never owned a car, and I've always made do. Even when I lived in a small town that only had a handful of hourly bus routes. I just planned accordingly. I explored a bit on foot and found all kinds of shops that people generally drive past in my local area. I'm not saying nobody needs a car, but if anybody thinks they can't get literally anywhere without one, then they probably live on a farm that even the nearest small town thinks is pretty remote, because, in my varied life, in an age before e-bikes, before I was even old enough to have a driver's license, I lived on a farm for a time. If I needed to go into town, I just got on my pushbike. It's really not that hard, even when you're not in an urban environment. You just work with the tools you've got.
@@jcal258 and your circumstances won't change, ever! You'll always be at that job and will always have a car, surely? But that's tomorrow's problem I'm sure. Do...do you see the problem here? Its not _their_ situation that's tenuous, its yours. I don't know about you, but if my car broke down tomorrow and I was out a job I would be fucked. I could get groceries on foot because I thankfully live close enough to walk there, but my ability to get to work (or get a job) would be hamstrung. That grocery store that's within walking distance is also _expensive_ so I would be essentially throwing away money just because I couldn't get to a cheaper market, which makes it harder to save up for a replacement vehicle or afford ride-sharing services. Anything that I can't buy at that supermarket would be off the table until I could scare up the money for a car. And replacing a car? 10,000USD, minimum. Replacing a bike? 400USD. Replacing an e-bike? 2,000USD. If you lose access to your bike, it is far easier to replace then a car _and_ you don't have to worry about gas prices shanking you when you're already hurting for money. This is not the own you think it is. Living in a walkable environment is far more stable then living in a car dependent one. Because if you live in a car dependent city the car is your only option, but if you live in a walkable city...I don't know how to tell you this, but you do realize that you can still _drive_ in walkable cities, right? And yeah, if OP gets a job elsewhere that doesn't accommodate for their lifestyle that would be a problem...maybe that's a problem we should address!
This is an amazing observation! The irony is so funny, too. Never thought about it, but cars absolutely involve more government control than cycling, walking, or even public transit.
At least by nature. You're forgetting that cops are corrupt af and the law is aiding and abetting their crimes to harass innocent people no matter their mode of transportation. Crooked cops will absolutely "detain" (read assault, arrest, and rob) people on bikes and on foot. That said, the law gives cops more authority to do that to people in cars than not in cars, cops can pull over anyone in a car and demand ID and interrogate them much easier, it's a much lower bar for harassment.
Cycling is inherently more distance-limited and requires that infrastructure still be built out. Almost all cycling routes that aren't off-road parks use public ROW. Walking still requires public ROW but at least doesn't require additional infrastructure. Public transit doesn't require the same amount of personal information as a vehicle, but I would ABSOLUTELY disagree that it's more "free" than a personal vehicle. You can only travel on the schedules set by the transit agencies, and your options on where to live and work are heavily affected by how and where the transit agency decides to provide transit service. Governments around the world deliberately shutter or redirect transit to avoid allowing protests to form; it is naturally much harder to do with roads because more manpower is needed to install checkpoints across every possible route.
Cars involve more government control in some ways but also involve way more personal freedom in others. Walking and biking are extremely slow and taking the train forces you to follow the a schedule.
Only at the level of the crowd. The government can control where we drive by building roads there not not. But the government, currently, has ZERO control over when and where I, personally, as an individual, am allowed to drive, compared to other citizens. They can block a road, but they cannot stop me and let everyone else through. Not without great effort anyway.
By your own logic, it could be interpreted that we should be campaigning for fewer government controls over cars as a means to increse our basic rights and freedoms...I prefer to simply fight for our rights and freedoms by not restricting our ability to own a car.
THANK YOU for addressing this! People who should know better need to get up to speed on this issue. Most people aren't conspiracy theorists, but the '15-minute city conspiracy' anchors the conversation, so the whole idea of good urbanism begins to FEEL controversial, sowing doubt and poisoning the conversation. That's the real conspiracy.
Well, to me it looks like idiocracy coming to live in front of my eyes. The logic jump from designing a city where you can do your normal activities from a 15 minute walk from your house if you choose to do so to a dystopian quartering where you are forced to live there goes beyond merely stupid and is frankly retarded. And the saddest part is that the more car dependent a city is, the easiest is going to be for the government to implement that exact kind of policies by adding tolls and taxing traffic.
@@Sasha-zw9ssCan you kindly point me to such theories? Because the only context in which a 15 minute city has ever been mentioned is in urbanist terms. The closest to that I can think of are similar concepts that have been implemented in communist countries before... and by any metric have been successful. Nothing like the walled nonsense the conspiracy theorists seem to fear: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_planning_in_communist_countries
except it's no conspiracy theory, it's what they're really wanting. Locking everyone in a 15 minute walking radius from their assigned place of residence, not allowed outside that radius (or maybe with a special permit granted for favoured underlings). THAT is the exact plans, and yes I've read them.
You guys put out amazing content. Like many, I was hooked into this world by Not Just Bikes and StrongTowns, but now feel like I’ve “graduated” to content like yours. Keep up the great work!
You missed the bit about car centrism requiring that, in order to participate in society, you must expend a relatively large sum of money on a steadily depreciating "asset" that comes with significant ongoing costs (fuel, insurance, maintenance, sick body kits).
In fairness I think this point has been well established and should be obvious to anyone who thinks about it for more than eight seconds, but it is still a good point to consider.
quite a few models are going up in value. every car i have got in my 15 years driving far has gone up in value and im being addicted to collecting them (range rover classic, bmw 635csi, peugeot 505 turbo, audi a4 b6, saab 900 classic, i usually spend around $500-2000). People want to be seen to be spending money and living a luxurious life and want something new, shiny and unreliable. When they complain about the cost and the new engines and transmissions they are just trying to boast that you could never afford a new Range Rover, Bentley Bentayga or whatever because the maintenance so enjoy the bus with the other poors. Its like a designer outfit or something. Its all imaginary you pay to dress what you want to pay its the same for cars.
@@marccurzon A few niche exceptions don't really disprove the fact that 99.9% of cars only depreciate in value. And even those exceptions you listed have all gone down in value compared to when they were brand new, which is what we're talking about.
The human capacity to resist change of any kind is infinite. The 15-minute conspiracy is just a symptom of that mindset. In order to resist change a person will accept ANY reasoning, no matter how far fetched, to "build a case" against said change. In that context, the mechanics of any conspiracy theory will make sense to an outside observer while the followers will become absolute believers. It's both bizarre and fascinating to see.
They block major roads in my city with barrier. Without making public transit better or safer. 15 min city complains are not CT you idiot. It's local people just say Phuck the government and their constant forcing new rules on us. Also look who is pushing these 15 mins cities, they are not the best at convincing people. All they do is name call, and shame tho who don't agree. Call it a conspiracy theory all you want. You will never make people accept bullying them into stop doing something like driving their car to places in their own city. People like you don't want to build trust with the locals. You want to force them to do what you say.
It’s not like car ownership is some long term cultural phenomenon. Go back a couple of generations and individual car ownership was quite rare in a lot of places. I live in a Nordic country and most apartment blocks built before the 1970s have virtually non-existent parking facilities. Meanwhile because of snow clearance machines our footpaths are normally over 2m wide, perfect for walking AND cycling.
@@Whatshisname346 Car ownership is definitely a long-term cultural phenomenon here in the United States. The only place in the U.S. where the majority of residents don't own a car is the Manhattan portion of New York City. I grew up in Los Angeles and began driving alone at age 16. Since then I've ridden a bus (I'm currently in my 50s) perhaps ten times! One has to go back to the 1920s to find an apartment building here that doesn't have off-street parking.
@@Whatshisname346 That's also an important phenomenon though, people tend to just assume that the way they grew up is the way things have always been and are blind to how much things have changed. That's why you see conservatives advocating for the “traditional nuclear family” even though that concept only really emerged after WWII and was itself something of a rebellion against multi-generational households where the younger generation felt controlled. There's nothing traditional about it but humans of course don't have a sixth sense for tradition since we can't just sense what the world was like before we were born, we have to learn about it, so the kind of people who are uninterested in learning will just assume that their own experiences are universal.
Exactly. I will never understand people who say cars give them freedom. I suppose in some ways they CAN, but only when you have the CHOICE to drive vs. other forms of transport. If you can't choose, it's not freedom.
The freedom you get is not necessary financial, but the freedom of time. I had to take public transit from South Fremont to Daly City. It took me almost 2 hours to get home from a friends place after dropping off another friends car whereas it only took me 40 minutes by car to get from door to door. That meant I had to sacrifice what I had planned that day to just take transit.
@@she3eshyeah but not everyone wants or needs to do those things though, That's the entire point, people should have more options than just a car, in what way have they implied that cars should be taken out entirely?
But I still want the choice to drive a car. I want the choice to shop for specialized foods or merchandise not available in my 15 minute zone. There is no end of things someone might want that are not available close by or are cheaper somewhere else. Especially for hobbyists and collectors. I collect vintage stereo gear and believe me I often have to travel good distances to find rare gems and definitely require a car as much of it is delicate and heavy. Everyone has their own reasons for travelling outside their zones. Some of us just need a change of scenery or of the people we see.
I am on the autism spectrum and I can't handle the stress of driving. Unless I live in a walkable city or a city with good public transit, I can't go anywhere or do anything without asking somebody for a ride. I have no freedom in car centric places.
@crowmob-yo6ry I grew up in a distant suburb of Boston and hated it. My street didn't even have a sidewalk. I then moved to San Antonio when I was 24 and while it wasn't the best, having the ability to take the bus gave me a level of independence I didn't have in Massachusetts. And now... I'm stuck in the suburbs again. Norman, OK. Hate it here.
I’m on the spectrum too but I manage to work it out thur social programs and such. I have to help my mom/go to doc appointments so that pushes me to drive. Biking gives me exact opposite tho. It feels nice not giving the next generation of kids a reason to not go outside/asthma. It actually started to shift to where younger kids and even parents are advocating for bike lanes. USA but people are still hesitant/getting angry. :(
Autistic and I drive quite slowly unless I am on the Divided Highway, stroads scare me. I live in a small walkable town and I don't need Transit to get to my daily needs. Transit is neat but not necessary to make a great place
I'm moving to a 15-minute city next week. I have a coworker that cannot comprehend the idea of grocery shopping without a car. The moment I mentioned I would be living car-free, she just kept asking "How do you get to XXXXXXXX without a car?" I don't know how this is in countries outside of the US, but some Americans do not travel and live in a bubble. What's worse is they have no critical thinking skills to even imagine a life that is different than their own. It immediately is communism-this and communism-that. There is almost no way to hold a conversation with them.
@@micosstar well, let's just say it was not a service available to the masses when socialism was a thing in my country. Now it's literally free from some chains like SPAR.
@@ForOne814 Maybe for large items and even then that is still probably a no with my bike cargo trailer. I do all my shopping locally on foot or on bike though. I rarely use delivery services unless it's something my town doesn't offer and extremely large that I wouldn't be able to bring on a bus as a bus is how I'll be getting around to the larger cities. Delivery services are fine. I have nothing against them, but I prefer to not pay those fees if I can just go it myself.
As a native of Los Angeles I would argue that many there see their car/s as a combination of first, second, and third places. Eating lunch alone in a parking lot while texting friends is seen as perfectly normal. Add a couple of work e-mails and life is "good."
@@willblack8575everywhere could be considered a third place then, you have to organise to meet people in your car. Whereas say in a cafe you don’t have to organise to meet neighbours, friends or strangers/ locals. Third places I think are just places that are for the community to use and meet each other etc. so I wouldn’t include a car in that category
@@pradlee You're meeting people online which is the newish "physicality 2.0." I wouldn't be surprised if in ten years, cars offered holographic projection onto the dashboard or windscreen/windshield when making a call home or to the office.
It's ironic suburbanites who don't live in the downtown area, call cites prisons, when suburbs more closely resemble prisons, and are built close to actual prisons. The car is a rolling prison, an fiscal prison for whoever owns one, and locks out people from society who does not own a car, so if we are to be free, we must be liberated from car-dependency.
I live in San Francisco and spend the winter times in Tahoe. I find SF to be a prison than Tahoe ever will be. The cramped streets make me feel as though I am walking actual prison halls. Coupled with how many of the buildings have gates before the actual front door is dystopian. The shops need garage doors to protect the shop fronts. Get outside of the city and none of these things exist. To say that suburbia is an actual prison means that you never lived in both conditions.
@@DenastusI can only be fascinated by how the antisocial mind works. Like I hate most people too, but it’s comforting and exhilarating to live in a densely populated area that has life, so I can only imagine the psychotic thoughts floating around up there.
This video is probably one of the best and most concise arguments I’ve heard advocating for diversifying transportation away from just cars. Another point I will add though is that car dependency makes children under the age of 16 (age when you can legally drive) extremely isolated and completely reliant on others for transport by car.
Also true if you're older than 16 but can't drive because of health issues or if you can't afford a vehicle. If you don't have someone to drive you in a very car-centric area, you end up walking round trips of an hour or 2 hours travel time to do the simplest things. Or multihour trips via unreliable buses etc. It's exhausting and takes forever, and there's a lot of stuff you simply don't do because it's not worth it.
Even past 16, for most it will depend on if you're able to use the family car or someone else has something more important they need it for, and typically money to refill the gas tank for what was used. My family had a second car that could be handed down through each sibling, but for a year the oldest had it away at university so the rest of us worked with one car and some often inconvenient carpooling schedules. The car was passed to me for my last year of high school, once my older siblings had each purchased their own cars. When I was in university and paying for the insurance myself, the car was costing at least 50% to 75% of what I was making working part time during the school year. With fuel prices now (and the cost even for an old used car), I don't think I would be able to afford a car in the same circumstances today (and I was lucky to still be living at home, so I didn't have any basic living expenses yet)
YES to ending car dependency in cities. A big NO to mandatory digital ID and constant surveillance. Current WEF plans for 15 minute cities CLAIM to be about ending car dependency but are REALLY about controlling the population. The World Economic Forum is a global terrorist organization. All members should be treated as terrorists and permanently removed from society. Any plan pushed by this TERRORIST organization should be opposed on first principles. If they REALLY want to generate pleasant carfree cities then how about trying it WITHOUT all the digital control mechanisms? Nope, that's not REALLY what WEF wants. The WEF's version of 15 minute cities are a STALKING HORSE for WEF's plan to enslave all those whom it does not murder.
That's a feature, not a bug. The Venn diagram of “People afraid of ‘government overreach’” and “People who seek to control their children's mobility, social circles and ideology” is a circle.
I'll tell you whats horrendous in my last job when I was at Uni a year back for a local small planning 'placemaking' business in the UK, we started encountering a politician, and local councillor here and there slowly voicing the conspiracy theories of 15 min and blocking actual change, projects, discussion, stakeholder engagements, this started to be really scary as online in the UK there is a real sense of this within the fringe parts of these communities and the national government has slightly backed it, the prime minister trying to illegally stop local LTNs (low traffic neighbourhoods), illegally because the national gov has not that power but devolved it to local government, so ironically gov overreach attempted to stop the conspiracy of gov overreach. Worst yet is then the scrapping of HS2 with 1/3 of its funding diverted solely to car infrastructure, and the propaganda proposal by national gov called "Plan for Drivers" which the first line states passive aggressively "There’s nothing wrong with driving" and whilst it is electioneering it is just validating those that did not voice the conspiracy theories within elected roles to speak up.
what we actual *won* a seat...... are you sure you counted right .... like really are you sure they have not lost a ballet box something..... well bugger me sideways we should be this nationally..... afterall is definitionally was not local elections issue right ? lol
Nothing wrong with driving? Man, that is motorists coping! Driving has a ton of problems, all stemming from the tragedy of the commons. For example, we all share the road and use it freely, so we get congestion, and we all share the air and use it freely, so we get air pollution, and we all share the same energy infrastructure for electric cars.
A lot of the opposition to ULEZ is gobshites who think cleaner air is a form of dictatorship plus because the Mayor of London isn’t a pasty gentile he is an obvious target for hate. Then there is the idiocy of the opposition to new speed limit laws in both the UK and ROI. 30 km/h is perfectly fast enough for built up areas.
Labour should at minimum build the HS2 Euston station in full, and from there restart the expansion from Birmingham to Manchester/Leeds once people experience for themselves the convenience of trains. People complained a lot about Crossrail/Elizabeth line's cost overruns, but now people appreciate the fact that it has been built, and no one cares about the costs anymore because they see the convenience it has brought.
My Dad has suffered a medical problem and can no longer drive. My Mum could never drive. They live over 100 miles away from me in a rural village. Fortunately my Dad is able to cycle to get out of the house and visit shops! It may be 25 minutes for a 70 year old but he is enabled! 15 minute cities are the way forward!
and another thing: sprawling, low density suburbs where nobody know's their neighbour and there's no public spaces is exactly what an authoritarian government would want. revolutionary activities happen in the dense, interconnected urban spaces.
My theory as to why those creepy, unsettling “family annihilator” incidents happen in suburbs is because it’s just such an unnatural way of existing as social animals that it causes certain people to go insane. Or maybe those types of weirdos are attracted to inhuman living conditions like cul de sacs. Either way I’m probably onto something. Yeah, cities have gang violence issues, but there’s rarely any Chris Watts type incidents.
People fear change to the point where basic rationality tends to fly out the window. When car dependency is all you know, getting somewhere without a car feels very daunting, and perhaps even impossible at times. When the last car I owned broke down for the final time, I had a lot of those same fears. How was I going to live? How was I to bring home groceries? How was I going to get to the laundromat? These problems seemed really existential at the time. And then, I started walking. What else was I to do? I didn't have the cash to drop down on yet another rusted out shitbox right away. I then realized that the places I needed to go, weren't really all that far, and I was feeling better from the increased exercise I was getting. Still, I'll admit that it was a challenge in that small town, where there was no public transit, and the winters could be brutal, but I actually felt free. Free from the financial burden of car ownership, especially. So yeah, I get the "15 Minute City" conspiracy theories, but I understand them for what they are - the fear of change. And I would've had the exact same fears had I not learned how to live without a car. Finally, if I really feel a need to use a car, and go to where public transit fears to tread, I can just rent one, and be glad that I don't have to live with it when I'm done. Nowadays, I have crappy public transit, but it exists, and I can use it. I can have groceries delivered if I want, and I have options if I want to go out and pick up a few things for myself. To extend my range, I have a folding e-scooter, and I can just carry that on and off the bus. On nice, carefree days, I get around on my e-bike. There's plenty of places I can go where I just don't need a car, or where driving and finding a parking spot would just be too inconvenient, or costly. I don't even need a car to cross the US / Canada border, and I certainly didn't need a car to go to Niagara Falls.
@@Joesolo13 They're full of it. A modern car has more than a dozen networked computers in it. Most of those are very specialised in what they're programmed to do and what they interact with, but it's the handful that the user directly interacts with that are riddled with Service As A Software Substitute garbage.
@@Roxor128 It is all about banning the car; just like they did when they used to ban native Americans from riding their horses on their reservations based on the lie that is was to protect their horses from some made-up illness. when in reality it was keep them under control.
In Montreal, happy it is more a 5 minute city. People are kinda weird. It is about cars,and they see it asa threat on their freedom, however it is the opposite.
I got from a relatively cozy and quiet (by North American standards) residential area to a dollarstore in a busy street (off Décarie) by walking through a park for 5-10 minutes. Back home, I have to spend TWO HOURS to drive across town to go to the grocery store just to get lettuce (well, there is a "premium/luxury" grocery-store across the street, but I'm not paying $8 for a head of iceberg lettuce). 😒
This whole conspiracy shows how effective the car lobby propaganda has been. Some people can't possibly imagine a world in which you don't need a car to get around.
It’s total fantasy. In theory it probably works, but when has anything that’s come from communist central planning ever been a good thing? Government approved shops and quotas sounds nightmarish
@hyndscs I also grew up in Europe, though I no longer live there. As you said, most cities and towns, even villages would already fit the definition of 15-minute cities. Now to your other points, I would like to hear about examples of this. My family in Europe drives a lot by a car and I never heard about any of the things you mentioned.
I think it's less that and more the reaction to certain measures that were proposed. People on the right don't like being 'forced' to do things, at least openly. Social and design pressure is perfectly fine. If it was just an urban redesign we wouldn't have seen the backlash. The problem sparked in the UK where the installation of new traffic cams to prevent through traffic on certain residential streets was thrown into the mix of measures being proposed to create more walkable cities. This being the UK you could, of course, pay for a temporary permit to ignore those rules. This is a relatively onerous and annoying way to calm traffic rather than actually redesigning the roads properly, but it would be cheaper on the local government and generate revenue from scalping unsuspecting motorists. This proposal though led to the conspiracy mills talking about how you would be locked into these local cities where you would then have to pay to leave and would be remotely monitored and controlled so as not to increase your carbon footprint. An obvious exaggeration, but a concern you could see arising if everyone is mentioning 15-minute cities, and one of the big ways a large English-speaking nation is doing it is by installing traffic cams and ticketing motorists who turn down a street at the wrong time of day. I'm reasonably certain we would not see these large international backlashes if someone owned the 15-minute cities concept and advertised it as one primarily of environmental design rather than a scheme to generate ticketing revenue.
I live in what could be termed a "15 Minute City", in London (England), I chose to live there thirty years back as I could find almost everything I needed a short walk away, Shops, Supermarkets, Pubs, Restaurants etc. etc. plus a busy railway station and numerous bus routes. I've never owned a car and I've never really "needed" one. Most of London, and other major British cities, are like this and people actually WANT to live in them, which is reflected in the property prices.
If I could live in London, I'd live in a box to have the opportunity! Okay, maybe a waterproof box! It's one of my favorite cities... I have lived carfree in Seattle for nearly 7 years. I don't plan on leaving any time soon, but if I do, I think I can only live in cities where I can be carfree... I love it so much!
I think the biggest issues is that any of these particular things most of the original conspiracy theorists probably don't have an issue with. After watching the video tried looking up some of the conspiracies, and the biggest issues I heard was about the World Economic Forum, some Oxford plan about segmenting cities into districts which you can't cross borders more than 100 times a day, etc. And I think the biggest issue is that the good parts gets mixed with the bad parts which may or may not be true depending on who you ask and what plans for any particular "15 minute city" is being drawn up independently. Being less car dependent, and having walkways where people in the community can go through and socialize in is great. Being forced to with no alternatives is totalitarianism, and if you are convinced that people are forcing a 0 car life style on you then whether or not you are speaking the truth it'll sound like a dog whistle for totalitarianism towards the conspiracy theorists.
The mistake is in assuming that these people are actually logical. They aren't. They are expressing an anti-urban (and often classist and racist) tribal identity. But the video makes some great points. Suburban, single-family zoned neighborhoods connected by freeways are about as socially engineered as you can get, and they are designed to exclude people. But I suspect that's what people like about them.
Suburbia is a product of planning, and we don't need more planning to fix the problem. Without planning, suburbia will become suburban towns like how it used to be.
How is the 15-minute city not the epitome of tribal identity. If you don't have everything 15-minutes away from where you life then tough luck. That is like saying at school that you don't belong on a certain floor at school because you have your home-room at a different floor.
Yes, you're right. Having to walk upstairs for a different class is EXACTLY the same thing as having to drive 2 miles to buy a gallon of milk. How silly of me. @@Denastus
One thing this video doesn't touch on is people who cannot drive are effectively already trapped in their own designated zones. Learning to drive is a privilege. You are extremely fortunate if you had someone in your life willing to lend you the resources to do it. Not all high schools have allocated funds to driver's ed, and not all parents bother to teach their kids how to drive. Some parents purposely forbid their children from learning how to drive as a form of abuse and control. I was lucky enough to have my father willing to give me an old car, teach me to drive at 14, and to pass my driver's ed test early through my high school's driver's ed course. If I didn't know how to drive I would not have been able to work, go off to college, or generally establish an independent adult life. I've made online friends in their 20s, who I have known since were were teenagers, whose parents never bothered to teach them how to drive and whose schools did not offer driver's ed. A few have been housebound for years completely unemployed. A couple of them have unstable employment because they cannot reliably get to work. Cars feel like freedom because our infrastructure is so god awful that that is the life you get without owning one.
I remember asking my dad years ago how people can be hateful and prejudice towards others or other ideas. What he said has always sticked out to me: “What leads people to be hateful and prejudice is not anger, its fear.”
I invited my friend on a trip to Denver that I paid for the hotel, the flights and one of the basis points he rejected on was me not wanting a rental car as that was the first issue they brought up. I got from the airport to downtown for free as public transit was 100% free during july 2022. These sorts of people are hyper delusional.
The problem isn't the original concept, which is to structure towns and cities in such a way that the majority of what you need is within a 15 or 20 minute walk, cycle or bus ride. Just about everyone is on board with this, and most British urban areas are indeed "15-20 minute cities". What really got this conspiracy started was Oxford City Council's utterly backward implementation of the concept. Instead of thinking about planning amenities to be closer to where people live, or investing a penny into building cycle paths or improving public transport in any meaningful way, in true British local government fashion they reached straight for the moneymaking stick approach by devising a scheme that would fine people for driving between suburban areas without taking a long and pointless detour. They've failed to consider that people don't usually drive out of choice, they drive because the alternative doesn't exist or is impractical. But there's nothing been done to provide those alternatives. Unfortunately this particular piece of bureaucratic ass-hattery has now tainted the entire concept world wide and fuelled the conspiracies.
Well said. Oxford council's approach is pretty typical of the attitude of British councils and the British government - everything is done arse backwards and with revenue in mind. Most sane people have no opposition to well planned towns or cities with amenities within walking distance and in my experience this is in fact how most older towns and cities are already in the UK. When "new towns" came along, it was quite obvious they were designed with cars in mind (looking at you, Milton Keynes) and that kind of car-centric design remained popular until very recently.
There is a reason why I occasionally bring up low-traffic neighbourhoods when someone talks about the danger of 15-minute cities (both are conflated with each other by them).
Absolutely. People should be calling out the insane conspiracy theories that pop up around the 15 minute city idea, but we need to recognize that planners have limitations and governments are often incapable or compromised in their ability to implement effective reforms. Urbanist communities constantly discuss the negative consequences of urban planning in the recent past, but seem oddly blind when peope are sceptical that new proposals will actually achieve what they intend.
@@izzieb Yep. When you actually talk to a "conspiracy theorist", most of the time it turns out you're not talking to some basement dweller, but an ordinary person (often older and less mobile) who actually just wants better buses and are annoyed by these proposals because they already find driving stressful and expensive. Filters and LTNs appear as extortion methods from an extractive organisation, since they penalise something that was previously perfectly legal, yet the money is often used to compensate for waste in local government budgets rather than invested in something that benefits the people they should be representing.
The 15 min city scare is insane. However, the local govt MUST keep the mass transit options safe and the operators of mass transit must enforce social norms of respectful behavior. Without those, the people who can opt out to a car will.
In order to keep mass transit safe there would have to be a zero tolerance policy to any kind of crime that may happen on them. Increase police presence if you want transit to be safe. Just designing the roadways for transit won't solve the problem when people are actually taking said transit services commit crimes on board them.
as someone who modifies my car, i cannot and will not remove my car. however it would be nice to have the option to do this, save some miles and such. Though especially where i live, it isn't exactly anything i expect to happen in any rapid fashion. Texas is pretty against the idea of even considering Public transportation and riding a bicycle around my area is asking for a hospital trip. same for walking. (plus i work 30 minutes from home).
There’s a surprising amount of overlap between car people and urbanists, we don’t have to be enemies. It’s interesting to see how sites like Jalopnik are posting about why car-centric development needs to end and Doug Demuro was active on the Not Just Bikes subreddit before it was locked
@@Joe-vm6ds We don't enjoy sitting in traffic anymore than the next guy, and the more people who shouldn't be driving get off the roads, the less likely it is that someone damages their $1,200 carbon fibre front splitter.
Also do not forget that people are forcefully evicted from their homes to make room for more and wider highways, and that roads are heavily subsidised by the general tax payer.
I moved back from a suburb in the U.S. to a city in the Netherlands a couple of years ago. The weather takes getting used to, but getting around is wonderful. I'm in a city of about 100,000, and I can walk or cycle everywhere in 15 minutes or less. My car stays in the garage for weeks on end, I only get it out when I want to go somewhere outside the city. It's pretty great!
You're clearly doing pretty well in life if you can afford to live in an expensive country like the Netherlands and own a car and a garage to park it in. But for most of us in the US, moving to a denser/walkable area generally means having to give up on car ownership in order to afford the higher housing costs. Which means being limited to places withing walking/cycling distances, or putting up with limited routes/schedules and the hazards of crime and violence on public transit.
@@Zalis116 That's because US government control prohibits building more walkable cities, so the supply is fixed in the face of rising demand. And a large reason for that control and social engineering is to keep things convenient for cars.
@@Zalis116Cool thought process, I will analyze your words; this is a public forum after all (delete your comment if you do not want your words to be analyzed). My reason is to analyze how people think, in this case, analyzing how fallacies are crafted. Have a great day! - mico (: a man part of gen z, age 18 :)
This is a GREAT response video to the utter nonsensical conspiracy theory that a 15-minute city is somehow equivalent to prison-cities/concentration camps that I've seen people say they are. Making cities more walkable and bikeable is NOT the government telling you that you cannot own a car and that you cannot leave without paying a fine. But I'm so glad you went a step further to point out how there is way more "government control" with vehicle ownership than there is for walking and biking. Unfortunately, most people who believe in a conspiracy theory like this are a lost cause, unable to understand rational thinking once they've plunged into the deep end.
If people understood how expensive cars really are... given that it spends most of it's life as a paperweight vs putting that money into bills, travel, mortgage, hobbies, retirement. New cars in the US are averaging out at more than $40K! That's just the purchase price and doesn't account for gas, maintenance, insurance.
I remember first coming across this conspiracy with one of my friends sharing on FB. Which prompted me to do some research. The map they often show is Canterbury, England an example of those 15 minite style prison/Hunger Games district. But the only thing they do is just make you pay to come into Downtown cause thry don't have space for parking. Huh....reminds me of every complaint from residents in Edmonton. They all hate downtown cause no parking and it cost $3.50 for 2 hours on the street. They always demand more spaces and it to be free.
That's the "15 minute cities" conspiracy in a nutshell: Cities plan to implement low traffic neighbourhoods i.e. car travel reduction by zones and blocking throughfares and 15 minute cities i.e. increase nearby amenities -> Cities plan to implement 15 minute cities i.e. car travel reduction by zones and blocking throughfares -> Cities plan to implement 15 minute cities i.e. travel reduction by zones -> Cities plan to implement 15 minute cities i.e. imprisonment.
@@compdude100 Your argument is based on the false primise that these "cities" are for the well being and comfort of ordinart people, which is not true. This all about implementing international climate change policy, of which these "cities" are but the tip of the iceburg. You can not see the whole picture if you only study one jigsaw piece at a time.
@@kathleenpearson-dh9od ??? How does this relate to what I said in my comment? All I talked about was cost of parking. Perhaps you intended to reply to someone else?
Car dependent cities are closer to prison cities, 15 minute cities are the opposite specially with mixed zoning and allowing kids to be outside and commute by themselves, it gives freedom and teaches them self reliance and independence. Imagine being younger than 16 and not being reliant on a adult to drive you somewhere, to be able to walk, cycle or use public transport by yourself or with friends to go to your sports activities, to the cinema, to stores all without the need for someone to take you there and babysit you. That's one of the main reason according to studies that kids in the Netherlands are among the happiest kids in the world.
If an actual prisoner can walk from his/her prison cell to the commissary, to the chow hall, and to the gym in 15 minutes than the 15-minute city is the prison.
Driving a car is NOT freedom. We are forced into going by car everywhere that a road allows us to go. Besides, if you want to go somewhere with the freedom of choosing which path to take, even if said path is no path, then the only possible way is to walk. You have to drive ON THE ROAD, or you get fined. This isn't freedom of travel, because we only travel by roads.
In the early 1990s, I lived in Warsaw, Poland. I could reach anywhere in the country by train and to any village by local or regional bus. There was a lot of freedom in that.
I'm basically as libertarian as they come, and I've found the "15 minute city" conspiracies very dumb. Our highways are entirely dependent on federal funding, we're actually way more reliant on a centralized federal government with cars as our only mode of transport. Did you know that there's no federal law that bans gambling, prostitution, or makes the drinking age 21? Technically, a state can act against these laws, but if they do, the federal government threatens to cut their highway funding.
@@laurencefraser that is the funny part, car centric infrastructure means you need so many miles of road that it becomes impossible to maintain them properly, which is why countries like the netherlands or germany are a delight to travel through-the roads they do have are amazing. Then I get back to belgium and… eh.
Call it Work/Play/Live or mixed use and it suddenly becomes desirable, expensive, and most who would want to live there can't afford it, and it is exactly the same thing as a 15 min city.
Nothing says freedom like having to spend thousands of dollars every year on gasoline, insurance, and maintenance, just so you can use your vehicle that you already spent thousands of dollars buying, just as long as the state has deemed you worthy to operate this vehicle, all so you can go to work and get groceries.
Literally a poor persons mentality. Cars offer you way more freedom if you aren’t broke. Private jets have some of the highest barriers to entry, billionaires are buying them because it does the exact opposite of restrict their freedom.
@@nemdance bruh, poor people have to get around somehow too. Let me guess, they should just pull themselves up by their bootstraps so that the cost of owning a car isn't a problem? All while having their bootstraps pulled back down by the weight of all the money they have to waste on a car just to buy groceries and go to work? Literally, you are describing part of the problem! Cars _should_ be a luxury good, just like private jets. The problem is right now you more or less need one just to get to work or buy groceries. That's why we're sitting here talking about 15-minute cities, because we want cities where you can fulfill your basic needs without ever stepping foot in a car, just like you can fulfill all your basic needs _now_ without ever stepping foot in a private jet. More choices == more freedom.
@@nemdance They absolutely restrict freedom for anyone who can't afford it or doesn't want to drive. These people are also the ones who have the least freedom and economic means in society in the first place. Why do you want to kick down those who are already kicked down?
I feel the car bring a symbol of freedom seems to be a byproduct of bad transit. I live in a canadian city with poor transit and generally rely on bicycle transportation in the city. I hear many people advocating driving. When i go to cities with better transit it generally occurs less
Even in Vancouver, someone was slapping 15 minute conspiracy stickers on road signs (I saw a few around Point Grey and Kitsilano 🤷). In particular, traffic filtering infrastructure gets certain people to rage, even though it's more commonly installed in busy areas that are well served by transit and where cycling is more common.
The idea being in your own personal bubble of pseudo privacy, hurling through at fast speeds, is better than having to walk/bike and physically be active, or wait for the bus to come; which leads to another fallacy where traffic kills more of your time than a scheduled public transit.
i lost my license and found out very quickly what living in a prison city actually feels like. you realize quite quickly that you can't walk anywhere because you atr deep in the suburns and soon the realization that you can't leave your street at all because you don't have a car or bike lanes or even a bus, and you begin spending massive amounts of money on uber just to get your groceries.
Stuff close enough to walk to in 15 minutes where you did not have the freaking pollution of cars, noise and air, life with car payment, insurance and gas bill rolled back into the budget? OMG that's like heaven. There are lyfts and buses. There is NO prison. A bus ticket for a MONTH is cheaper than ONE tank of gas. Nothing has to make sense for people to follow along because they have LOST the ability to reason on their own. Cars are also dangerous. No one said peep when 47 THOUSAND people died in car crashes a year but when 319 people died in the gulf war they were all insane. OMFG. Get your head out of your bungholes people.
Don't worry, the North American Big-Auto-brainwashed mentality is spreading and infesting other countries too, especially the UK… (Have you seen Faultline's videos about cars in the UK?)
@@haruhisuzumiya6650 I notice that the overwheiming number of "projects" around the world that I believe are eroding our rights and freedoms are a result of the blank check of climate legislation.
As someone who had lived in what was considered a 15 min neighborhood my whole life before moving to a 15 min city and then a small medium ish village in the middle of nowhere, by choice I admit it, it is so crazy to me. As much as I love having a yard for my partner to garden in and the tranquillity, I lost so much freedom. If my car break down I cant go to work, litteraly I cant. And I cant access medical services and other services most times of the day. Gas is also very pricey in europe so this means I try to limit driving too much on the week-end. So in the end I'm a bit stuck at home most week-end and evenings. I made the choice to move so it's fine for now, but still. As someone who grew up with so much freedom mobility wise, it's crazy to me how people dont realize that the real prison is car dependancy.
*I LIVE IN A 15 MINUTE CITY - ITS AMAZING* never lived anywhere as freeing in my life - I don't need a car that saves me about €10k a year. The Bus is €0.75 a day no matter how many busses you get - it's a flat rate. Everything I need for daily life is within 400m of my apartment - I'm off to the city centre tomorrow for a toner cartridge, its only unusual things like that I have to go to the centre for.
Sensible video, which overlooks one obvious point: the tremendous financial cost of owning and operating a car. To pay for one of these vehicles, you give up a lot of financial freedom.
@@logitech4873 Not really. There is a fleeting reference to "financial freedom" in the introduction, but the point is not developed at all. The main gist of the video is to focus on government regulations pertaining to driving and car ownership. I believe the financial aspect deserves much more emphasis. Many people who buy vehicles are in servitude to their payment plans. Opponents of "15 minute prisons" are actually proponents of corporate hegemony.
I watched a video made by a lady who was in a car with her friend and they were going somewhere. They were stopped at a certain point by a law officer who told her she couldn’t drive past that point and they had put up concrete barriers across the street except for a few feet on the other side. She went ballistic because she had no idea and it had happened over night. She left and took another route only to find out that she couldn’t drive passed a certain point that way as well. This was in Cancer. She was crying and saying that it could not be done because Canada is a free country. I personally don’t trust our government! It might start out one way but then you wake up one morning and decide to go somewhere only to find that the streets have barricades across them and you can’t go where you wanted to because it’s more distant than you and your children can walk
You're making a great argument, but people who write this kind of comments do not care about facts. They are guided by emotions and intuition. Not necessarily a bad thing, just easily exploitable by malevolent actors.
Yes they are guided by ignorance and emotion, but at the very least many of them shut up when they get these kind of arguments back at them. And that is god because then there is less of them spreading this to other people and less of them screaming at politicians.
@@michaeloreilly657yeah if you are a useless manchild who can't figure out how to get around without your car. Like listen to them for 1 sec and thats their entire position.
@@she3esh Winter gear exists! Also, lots of cities have indoor pathways... and buses and trams/trains/subways also provide transit without getting snowed on!
i don't know any 15minute advocate that doesn't also heavily emphasize trams, buses, metros, and even suburban and regional rail. a 15 minute city isn't a prison where you're confined, its a whole city plaza where you can get to most places, even far away places with more options, making the whole thing accessible at your whims. 15min accessible city. not 15min restricted city.
These people are going to lose their car as they become Senior citizens. Then what? Make their kids spend 5k a month on housing them in retirement facilities?
I’ve stopped trying to convince those that see the world differently. I live in a very walkable area, yet with immediate access to my car. I use about one tank of gas a month. I will often go for days without using my car. I love having this option and have made very conscious life decisions to be able to do this. I walk to a 2.5 mile long rail trail and will often run into friends and neighbors, sometimes stopping to catch up. Happy, joyous and free regarding my choice!
The least free I've ever felt was in a car driving through a checkpoint in Arizona. There's nothing quite as dehumanizing as watching some 25-year-old jackboot ask your 96-year-old WW2-vet grandfather if he's an American citizen.
I'm from a small city (really more like a town) in northern Mexico. Absolutely anything I want to do is within a 15 minute drive or 30 mins tops. Last week I had to go to CDMX (Mexico City) for a job interview, i was going insane inside the taxi, how the traffic was extremely congested we could never go faster than 20km/h ( ≈ 15mph), and how it took me more than one hour to get to the interview. 90% of the sidewalks were around 1 meter (≈ 3.3 ft) wide, and the whole thing is full of valleys, the city sinks more each year and still becomes more car dependant each year. There is public transportation, but I didnt had time to figure out the route I needed to take
I live in a small town in the Netherlands, which is by the way almost 850 years old. I can bike, and walk, to the supermarkets, schools, medical center, churches, cafes and restaurants and it does not take me more than 5-10 minutes to get there! So that is a government conspiracy! 😂😂 And this conspiracy was started by the Bishop of Utrecht in 1176, when he officially incorperated my little town. Wow! I already suspected that the guy was anti-car! Oh wait, most of the aforementioned places can also reached by car......
A weird conspiracy theorist I know lives in Darlinghurst, New South Wales. One of the densest neighbourhoods in Australia and has never gotten his license, he rants about "15 minute cities" all the time, largely because he's on board with all the rest of the nonsense about microchips in vaccines and all that nonsense.
The bird not existing is a fake conspiracy theory, it's something people say for the "meme" or the joke to pretend they are in a fun conspiracy theory.
Driving electric means I charge at home, never pay a preimum even at public chargers, but I am confined to GOVERMENT CONTROL. E bikes are the REAL FREEDOM.
It's even more surprising that people still hold steadfast faith in the government and so called experts when they have been lying to our faces since forever!! All the while people never wanna see past the bullshit and rather keep it "conspiracy free"... These things turn out true rather often tho.. It's kinda scary... Funny thing is: "conspiracy theorists fundamentally don't understand things" means they don't stand under the bullshit that is raining down on everyone else! xD
Cops spend so much of their time looking for traffic violations, that you are far more likely to end up having a negative interaction with a cop while driving than any other time. It's pretty uncommon that I see a cop on public transit.
My brother has a disability (poor eyesight) which means he will never be able to drive and has to either walk or take public transport, fortunately we do not live in the USA. Do people like him just not matter to these conspiracy theorists?
To be honest: I wouldn't be surprise if these "Anti-15 minute city folks" also overlap with the "Flat Earther" crowd. Considering their constant disregard of facts and logic.
Because it’s a conspiracy theory. Much like ones about the earth being flat, the sky being purple or the government/corporations controlling people, conspiracies don’t need much deep logic to be effective. People will believe them because they feel “enlightened” by believing them
and remember how much chaos the collapse of that philidelphia highway caused. there are bottlenecks everywhere it would not be hard to shut things down if the government really wanted
Let's not forget the truly enormous volume of government subsidies and government-built infrastructure (highways, arterial stroads, municipal parking structures, etc) that motorists get handed on a silver platter at (in most cases) no cost! If there is ever a cost, such as a road toll, parking fee, or gas tax, it's often more or less trivial and they almost always freak the hell out! And car users have the absolute *gall* to accept all of that without question, only to turn around and flame mass transit services - services that need much less infrastructure to move much more people much more sustainably and which its riders pay a fee to use - whenever they're "not being profitable." The level of hypocrisy there is absurd! You're absolutely right that "15-minute city" conspiracy theorists are fundamentally disconnected from the reality of life in a non-car-centric community. I'd bet my life that 99.9% of them are stubborn, classist suburbanites who haven't so much as laid eyes on a walkable place - other than maybe Disney World, cruise ships, lifestyle centers, or a college campus - in decades (if ever), and love their suburban lifestyles because it keeps them away from all of those icky poor people. I would know. My early Gen X parents (born 1970 and 1969 (IIRC) respectively) don't openly ascribe to those conspiracy theories, though I wouldn't think it impossible that they secretly do. That being said, my mom (who's an international trade lawyer) refuses to use the Washington DC metro - despite working in the city and living in its suburbs - because it's "scuzzy" (direct quote from her). Granted, that reluctance to use it may partly be because there's not a station that's super convenient for us, but she's also directly called it "scuzzy" on at least one occasion. Meanwhile, my dad (who was high up in the sales department of a private security firm for 25 years) thinks that every urban place he hasn't personally witnessed being obviously otherwise is a crime-infested hellscape. He also refers to visibly poor or otherwise unkempt people as "shady drifters" and gets visibly agitated if there's one within eyeshot, so that's... pleasant to think about. I also wouldn't be surprised if the whole thing is in large part an astroturfing scheme by the oil and automotive industries. It would certainly be in their best financial interests if people railed against urban design that doesn't need cars, and I find it a bit suspicious how quickly those theories became mainstream...
I live in Salt Lake City, and they have recently announced that they are going to build mixed use developments and all my friends and family LOST THEIR MINDS saying that it’s all about “control” meanwhile since we live in a valley we have some of the highest asthma rates in the US because the smog gets trapped everyday due to the car dependency
I visited SLC and thought the public transit was pretty good. Within the city its good but try to take transit to Snowbird then public transit starts to get bad.
It's the general inability of (especially uneducated) people to apply systemic analysis instead of individual analysis. People can imagine the freedom cars grant for the individual in a vacuum, while not being able to fathom all the various freedoms they lose from cars as a societal system of infrastructure. In simpler terms, when they hear the topic of transportation discussed, they imagine themselves in a car, instead of imagining everyone else in a car.
Man, I've watched this vid 3x and you completely shutdown the 'leftist commie agenda' argument with facts. Not only that you made me suspect the conspiracy crowd. Clearly you've done your homework. I'm hooked on you guys.
Struggling to get my driver's license is exactly the reason why I gave up on it and started riding my bike everywhere. Between failing the first driver's test and my parents not taking me to retake the test, I decided it just wasn't worth it and at the time I remember being frustrated about it but now I see it was probably one of the best decisions I ever made
@chaseherrington how is me not having to waste time and money doing something that I never wanted to do in the first place and don't have to do sad? Even sadder replying to a random comment that I forgot about from a few months. Car defenders are cringe
As you guys rightly point out, don’t expect these nut jobs to accept your rational counterargument to their conspiracy theories. Some people are beyond help. Let them mindlessly sit in traffic, and focus on where we can make a positive difference.
Packing into the train is way shittier than sitting in a luxury car smoking a blunt. All of you just haven’t experienced luxuries and are trying to make us all suffer.
Cars have amazing marketing departments, and 70 years of propaganda stating how awesome they are and if you don't drive something awesome it's the reason you're not getting enough sex. Cars are financial anchors for most people. City Nerd did a great breakdown of the cost of car ownership when compared to income quin-tiles and showed that unless you're making over $150k a year a car does not make financial sense. That is also just for one car not the two that most families have. We became a one car household and used the $11k+ saved to take an awesome vacation, and still have money left over to replace our fridge, and still have money left over to put into savings. Cars may have at one time been symbols of freedom but these days they just keep you poor. The only thing that guarantees freedom in a capitalist society is money and cars are holes in the ground you throw your money into.
What a great video! There's a lot of urbanist content on TH-cam, much of it talking circles around the same idea. This is fresh content, engaging with ideas--even ones the creators think are ridiculous--in a respectful but incisive way that makes it *shareable* outside of the relatively narrow confines of digital spaces. Well done!
The thing is, 15-minute cities, even if they are the thing the conspiracy theorists say they are, still aren't mandatory. You don't have to live there. And cars do surveil you, but most of them still work after you disable the modems.
Nothing says "personal freedom" like only being able to live, work, shop, learn, and vacation where the government lays down roads. lol
I had to point this out when my conservative friend used this "argument" that I was only restricted to where the gov't "allows" me to go if I ride public transit...lost a few brain cells that day
As opposed to... train tracks that spawn out of thin air?
@@charged-protonWalkable cities don't only provide viable transit through trains. You could walk, bike, take heavy or light rail, drive your own car, ride the bus, etc. The point is you have options that increase your mobility and decrease your dependence on one type of infrastructure, especially one that has to be constantly funded and planned out by the government.
@@charged-proton As opposed to all of the other modes of transportation that don't require you to be registered, licensed, insured, and permitted by the government to use. Or that which you can be compulsorily forbidden from using. Automobility is the only mode of transportation where you can be stopped in the middle of your transit for the slightest infraction, of which there are myriad laws aimed at programming and punishing your behavior. And it is the only mode of transportation wherein people routinely justify and normalize preventable interactions between the public and the police -- and the only mode of transportation with which people are regularly executed extrajudicially by officers of the state.
@@charged-proton The point is to show how the "15 minute cities are prisons" doesn't make any sense since it can also be applied to car infrastructure.
Living in Phoenix my definition of "Freedom" is not sitting in traffic. I'm not going to lie, I like cars, but sitting in traffic completely defeats the purpose of enjoying driving.
Building car centric cities only benefits cars (a little bit and even that's a stretch). Building transit oriented and pedestrian friendly cities benefits everybody including cars (by a lot).
That's the irony car centric design though. Without any other transport options, when people want to enjoy a drive, it's messed up by everyone else having to drive to get a quart / liter of milk.
@@GhostOnTheHalfShell Car centric cities only give us one option to move around. 15 Minute cities or transit oriented cities gives us more options and that's actual freedom.
@@garcjr I have a car but haven't driven it in years. The grocery (one of them) is around the corner with several more an enjoyable walk away. The hardware store is also an enjoyable walk away. I live right near parks and the like, food. etc. I feel so very jailed. 😅
The best part about city traffic is being able to walk faster than it. Lol.
I have acquaintances who claim they won’t shop downtown or anywhere that doesn’t have free parking within a few dozen yards of where they want to go.
Funny thing is, the commercial vacancy rate is considerably 😮higher in most shopping centers surrounded by acres of parking than the downtown vacancy rate.
another point that can be made is that most car oriented suburban development have only one way in or out, making it extremely easy to control who goes in or out for an authoritarian government; urban neighborhoods on the other hand are much more permeable, and many apartment complexes even have more than one way in or out
@@willblack8575that is why crime-infested suburbs may be more dangerous than crime-infested cities
I don't get the argument about some vague "authoritarian government controlling its people". If a developed, democratic nation will get an authoritarian government that wants to control its people, it won't matter if you live in a 15 minute city or not. Unless you go off the grid and live in the countryside, you'll be on the radar. The point of 15 minute cities is that they are nice and livable places, not a good way to hide from the government.
That's a pretty big part of why governments in the 20th century encouraged the growth of urban sprawl, they were all scared of popular uprisings and dense cities are basically impossible to control if they go into open revolt. This is because the dense layout makes it easy to set up blockades and ambushes and anyone who lives there will have a massive advantage from local knowledge, allowing them to easily outmaneuver government units. At the same time it will always be practically impossible to achieve numerical superiority because there are so many people and if you do concentrate your forces they'll be in large unwieldy groups unfit for urban combat. There's a reason why urban combat is considered the most difficult type of combat by all armies around the world.
By comparison suburban neighborhoods are extremely easy to control, the open layout gives government forces a huge advantage since they have access to air support and recon assets, making undetected movement and thus any kind of surprise attack impossible. There isn't even any vegetation to hide behind like you might find in a rural area. The low density also makes it easy for government forces to cordon off an area and achieve local numerical superioty and thus slowly work their way through an area to pacify it. Plus the car dependent layout obviously favors the heavy armored vehicles the government can bring to bear.
That is not an issue for these so-called libertarians. In their mind, law enforcement exists only to oppress dark-skinned folk in the cities.
It's literally IMPOSSIBLE to get out of town without paying for some sort of vehicle (car, bus, plane, train). It's illegal to go on the highway on foot or bike (it's legal by horse, but cops don't know the law and will unlawfully arrest you anyway 😒), and trying to get between towns on back/rural/country-roads with their 80kph+ speed-limits where people drive 120kph is dangerous enough if you're willing to walk in the ditch beside the road, let alone risking your life to bike in the road. 🤦
This isn’t conspiracy, it’s car dependency at work. Most people can’t conceive having everything they need within 15 minutes of where they live so they truly believe it’s constricting. I’m sure the big automakers aren’t complaining about this…
@@willblack8575most of North America basically unless you live in a ghetto or an overpriced downtown apartment
@@willblack8575 San Jose, CA?
@@willblack8575USA, Canada
@@willblack8575car centric cities, where you have to drive for 30 minutes just to get to a grocery store
@@willblack8575 The idea of 15 minute cities specifically refers to walking, biking, and transit. Most cities in the US have very bad urban sprawl, where you will likely not reach any destination within 15 minutes of exiting your house, unless you live very close to the center.
Let’s not forget highways bulldozing whole neighbourhoods and serving as, effectively, government build walls to effectively divide cities into zones that would be easy to control.
also how strangely those neighborhoods always turned out to be minorities instead of white folk.
Ok, youtube says there’s a reply, but then there’s nothing here when I click… spam that got deleted?
Check out Charlotte North Carolina, I grew up around there. It has the lowest upward mobility rate of any major city in the US. They doing exactly what you are taking about right up to 1990’s….
Regardless of if we have cars the highway system would need to exist as the purpose of them was specifically for the government to move supplies and military personnel efficiently.
@@mikeyman1974Which just reinforces my point as to why conspiracy theorists should be upset about them?
I swear half the people who are "scared of the gov't restricting where you go" don't think twice that they have to drive on gov't built roads, or regularly have to use TOLL ROADS. Roads that you literally have to pay to use, and are tracked by license plate in doing so
I guess you live in the east coast. Here in the west coast we have highways that don't have toll roads.
In the US toll roads are specilized roads used for long distance travel. For instance, the NJ Turnpike. You can literally go 90 mph and not be ticketed even though the posted speed is 65. You actually get six lanes that are divided by 2 and rest stops in about every county.
I'm a car nut, and I think one advantage of walkable cities with decent mass transit is that it should get a lot of bad drivers off the road.
I know some people who are TERRIFIED of driving and are super bad on the road. They really don’t want to but don’t have a choice
You would get a lot of drivers off the road if the licensing exams were much harder than they currently were. I understand if the average person living in Phoenix, AZ never left to go to the mountains but if their dmv told them to practice on skidpads to pass their driving exam a lot of people would fail that part of the exam.
Seriously. Cars would be a more enthusiast thing to an extent. Much less people that need one.
Same, I hate cyclists so I hope more cities will implement good biking infrastructures to keep them off the roads lol
There is a BIG difference between driving on an open road and commuting in a city/metro area. Driving on the open road can be soothing and relaxing while commuting in traffic to go somewhere less than 2 miles is stressful
3500 pounds to transport one 140 pound person. Average speed 25mph. Parked for 96.4% of its lifetime. 4.3 years inside a vehicle per lifetime, (about the same as the average person spends eating). Average cost of owning a vehicle in Canada: 12,000 dollars per year. Efficiency is clearly one of our greatest attributes.
@@adanufgail Not to mention how many empty cars will be clogging the roads between trips.
One day I realized my commute average 28 MPH.
Ebikes go almost that fast...
@@Sythemn
And you can get exercise in as well.
While this comment and this channel is mostly centered on Canada, I can assure you as an American that that 3500lb waste of a truck bed in hauling at least 250lbs in the driver's seat. 140lbs is highly generous of you regarding our weights for either side of the border.
@@SythemnYep, can verify with having an ebike of my own, the 20-30 mph average is due to primary waiting at stop lights
Imagine advocating for more freedom of construction options, and _removal_ of laws that force you to build sprawling suburban areas, being "government control and restriction".
i can imagine it, because it's astroturf. there's always been a number of the populace who has advocated for the freedom to oppress people, who have had followers who have no idea they are also affected by that oppression.
I wish people were more in favor of loosening zoning laws and minimum parking requirements. Many of the 15-minute city proposals include car membranes or outright vehicle prohibitions. Rather than give people more options, they go the unfortunately typical route of just making car travel harder, rather than making everything else easier.
@@Schlabbeflicker Well one of the differences is that for example shops are brought closed to homes. Walkable distance. Which means there is not going to be square miles of parking around that shop, which will be smaller (but there will be more of them).
I once wrote out a reply on Reddit to a comment regarding gun control. My post took on a centrist, compromise stance. I advocated for both freedom to bear arms, but alongside that an opt-in "safe operator" registration program where people could get certified and licensed as safe firearm users by attending safety classes and regular marksmanship practice and maintaining clean criminal records, earning a stipend in the process. In other words, you can get paid to be licensed, but it's not a mandatory requirement because the 2nd Amendment would still apply. *Literally* the best of both worlds, encouraging safety, but also allowing an armed populace as intended.
And what happened? _One_ person replied accusing me of being anti-gun and this being some clever "first step" in a long-term ploy to eventually strip people of their 2A Rights. Basically, start by getting people on board with an "optional" program, let it run for a while so people get attached to it, and then make the move to make it mandatory when people are willing to defend it. And he basically rattled on how much of a hard-core gun-nut he was and how "real 2A supporters" would never go for an idea like this and they know I'm some gubermint plant and whatnot.
Meanwhile, alongside debating _that_ loony toon, in _another_ reply thread to this *very same proposal,* someone accused *me* of being the _gun nut!_ They claimed I wanted to proliferate guns everywhere and supported totally uncontrolled and unmitigated gun violence and child murder in schools and whatnot. _Total opposite reactions_ to my single post on a compromise on gun control regarding how each side viewed me and my opinions regarding guns, gun violence, and gun ownership rights.
@@Schlabbeflicker The reason they have to do this is because cars require and demand so much space that they close off and restrict what else can be done.
One thing I wish you guys mentioned was the INSANELY OBVIOUS fact that literally just all of the roads that you drive on are controlled by the government. Like you quite literally cannot drive from one place to another unless the government has paved a road for you to get there. Walking somewhere is absolutely more freeing as there needs to be much less government involvement to provide the infrastructure for you to walk somewhere.
Not only that, but in any large city there are cameras everywhere, and the tags on your car provide a lot of metadata on your movements.
As a truck driver, I underhand what you just said more than most people. Truck drivers have more encounters with law enforcement than most people. We're also the most regulated as well. When I park at a truck stop, the first thing that I look for is nearby bike/ pedestrian infrastructure. This way, I can get out of my truck and cycle into the nearest town. I'm never really free until I get away from my truck.
My grandpa worked in northern Canada as a conservation officer. Once they built a trail about 30 miles through the bush to connect a remote work camp to the nearest settlement. It did the trick for several weeks, until some government reps came up from Winnipeg and tore a strip off the crew for building an "illegal road". They were told they couldn't use the road until the Department of Infrastructure rebuilt it to modern highway standards. It ended up looking nearly identical to the old trail, but cost hundreds of thousands more.
@@JakobHillwhat! That is some bull shit right here.
@JakobHill If you would like to know the most expensive and inefficient way to accomplish something just get the government to do it.
The nine scariest words in the English language are " I'm from the government, and I'm here to help. "
Not to mention that a lack of transport options in car dependent areas means that children are brought up in an environment where they are dependent on others to move around. This engenders a lack of independence in children and teenagers. When they grow up and move away from home they are unable to adapt to their environment as easily as others.
One example of this is a kid of one of my friends who grew up dependent on her parents to get to school, parties, activities and later work. She moved to college and soon realized she’d never learnt how to cycle. The college is in Amsterdam!
Why would we do this to our kids? Bring them up in an environment so devoid of individual freedom that they never learn a basic life skill.
It's sadly just a pipe dream in many parts of Canada. We used to trust kids to go to school or sports practice on their own, not anymore it's considered too dangerous. We used to expect kids to move out on their own, not anymore due to the high cost of living.
@@noseboop4354 I have to disagree with the first part. The moral panic of the 90s convinced parents that there was a pedophile on every corner, waiting to snatch your child the second they left the house without a parent. The truth is that the vast majority of child "abductions" turn out to be custody disputes that spiraled out of control. Of course this isn't Japan and you can't just let a 6-year-old ride the bus, but there's no reason why a responsible 10-year-old can't be trusted to use common sense to stay out of trouble. It's the 21st century; your children are much safer outside than they are online.
I grew up in a Canadian suburb and there wasn't really any convenience stores around where I could get a snack or beverage for myself. My experience was my parents doing pretty much every single purchase for me, because it required getting into a car first. When I went to university and had my own money, I remember for a while, being unreasonably anxious when I was checking out anywhere. Cashiers scared me because I wasn't used to approaching strangers.
Obviously this isn't something to cry about, but it's among the many small ways that living in a car dependent area stunts the growth of children.
Some people consider that a feature, not a bug.
@@jamesphillips2285Correct, but we should cater to the best possible living in cities.
Currently, the “feature” of car dependency in most suburbs is forced upon by law through parking minimums, R1 single family house zoning, front yard setbacks, among the few to list.
some urbanists were send death treats and over this conspiracy. Living 15 minutes away from work, I never paid attention to the gas prices until someone next to me complained.
Planners kind of deserve the hate they get tbh. We could have better urbanism by getting rid of urban planning, there is a reason why we call Suburbs plans, but dont use that term for towns or cities.
@@linuxman7777yup, “planned developments” seem to apparent when building suburbs but not on cities or rural towns
You dont even know what the word "conspiracy" means.
You use it as of it means the same as conspiracy theory.
A conspiracy theory is NOT a conspiracy.
A conspiracy theory is a theory about a possible conspiracy
It's not a conspiracy, it's a risk we could lose precious freedoms along the way. But that'll never happen because all gov'ts hold paramount basic rights and freedoms, right?... dream on.
I was thinking the same thing you pointed out with regards to data collection in cars, when my sister got her new car. Her explanation as to why she bought a gas car was because she was worried that an electric car might “spy” on her. Dude they all have the same computers and capacity to monitor you, just electric cars do it slightly cleaner
Exactly what I thought. After all, the same infotainment, the same ABS.
I also wouldn't be surprised if someone has figured out how to jailbreak a Tesla.
@@hedgehog3180 And Tesla promptly sued them into oblivion…
IIRC Louis Rossmann made a video about an e-bike issue where a bankrupt company turned most e-bikes useless and how that isn't an inherent issue of e-bikes but rather that of modern propriataryism with an analogy to cars on how petrol cars would have suffered from the same issue as e-cars if they were more recently popularised.
I would say electric vehicles are dirtier because lithium is very polluting and toxic and is actually worse for the environment than gasoline vehicles. Hybrid vehicles are actually better than all gasoline and all electrics vehicles combined.
I saw a long discussion on a picture of Kowloon Walled City over how that's what people mean when they mean "walkable cities". WHO HAS EVER, EVER, EVER ADVOCATED FOR THAT? That's like claiming that traffic engineers want to entirely bury the Serengeti, Yellowstone, and the Okavango in asphalt, it's so patently absurd that I genuinely don't understand how anyone could ever think that. The missing middle is apparently housing with density between 2 000/km2 and 2 000 000/km2
Kowloon isn't what anybody WANTS, it's what you get with overpopulation, you get that, or Bladerunner or Fifth Element or Dredd or other mega-structures where people spend their entire lives in a single enormous mega-skyscraper-tower-blocks. Again, nobody wants it, it's just a consequence of having too gd mf many humans. 😒 Look at how all the urbanists keep talking about "high density housing" being a solution. Yeah, we all want to live in concrete sardine-tins in the sky. 🤦
tbh Kowloon Walled City does seem like a really interesting place and it's kinda sad to me that it was demolished. but yeah not a good model for cities of course.
It's extra funny because KWC is an example of the opposite of government control. It was basically ungoverned. So I really don't think these folks understand what they want.
I don't know if it counts as a small town or not but I lived in Southern Illinois in a town that had about 16,000 population. As a kid I could walk or ride my bike to school, to the store, anywhere I wanted to go. You could get from one side of town to the other in about 15 minutes on a bike. We had pretty much everything we needed in town, but if we wanted something more we could order it from the Sears catalog or J C Penney catalog or drive about an hour to the nearest mall. Not quite as convenient as Amazon but worked for us.
It was governed by triads
Purely by accident, I've discovered I live in a fifteen minute city, and the craziest thing is, I can leave any time I want. I have _three_ supermarkets within a fifteen minute bike ride. Closer than any of those I have two corner stores and a fresh food market. Not that it's relevant to me, but there is a public school nearby, and two private religious ones (all of which closer than any of those supermarkets). Between the two corner stores there's a street of shops, including a bakery, a laundromat, a post office, a couple of cafes, and a whole bunch of other stuff I never cared enough about to pay attention. Right outside my door I have a tram line, and I'm a fifteen minute walk from a train station, and a five minute walk from a bus stop. My job is now a five minute bike ride away. I just got lucky that a place I applied to online just happened to be around the corner from me.
The only bad thing about my current address is it's basically at the intersection of two stroads...
I have more than a dozen of supermarkets within a 15-meter walking radius, lol. One-way, around 1.5km radius. Dunno how many cafes, small stores, bakeries, etc. Post office in my building, post-sanction ex-McDonalds across the road, two mid-sized malls, several public schools. All of that also fully accessible by cars. God I love living in Russia and not having this silly issues of car vs walkability, the commies built the cities for both.
@@ForOne814nice work, cities of russia!
Your circumstances won’t change, ever! You’ll always be at that job and will always have a bike, surely? But that’s tomorrow’s problem I’m sure.
@@jcal258 Are you trying to make a point? It seems like you think you've scored big and I've been totally destroyed, but I literally don't understand what you're getting at.
My previous commute was 12 km each direction, about a 30 minute ride for me, or 40 minutes by car thanks to the route and the traffic (the bike path was pretty much a straight line south-east, the car route was east then south). Of course my circumstances will change. I'd certainly _like_ it to be the norm that the things we all need are within a short distance of where we live so we can all be assured of wasting less time traveling, because I've lived the hour plus each way commute life before, and it's not great. I don't see how people can _stomach_ the idea of getting into their car each morning for an hour long drive to work, but I guess that's "freedom" for you.
As for my _current_ circumstances, I've lived without a bike, with a much more distant job before, and I could do it again. Public transport is a pain in the ass but it's workable. If my bike had two flats tomorrow, I'd call in, say I'd be a bit late, and just walk to work because it's not that far.
I'm 35 years old, I've never owned a car, and I've always made do. Even when I lived in a small town that only had a handful of hourly bus routes. I just planned accordingly. I explored a bit on foot and found all kinds of shops that people generally drive past in my local area. I'm not saying nobody needs a car, but if anybody thinks they can't get literally anywhere without one, then they probably live on a farm that even the nearest small town thinks is pretty remote, because, in my varied life, in an age before e-bikes, before I was even old enough to have a driver's license, I lived on a farm for a time. If I needed to go into town, I just got on my pushbike. It's really not that hard, even when you're not in an urban environment. You just work with the tools you've got.
@@jcal258 and your circumstances won't change, ever! You'll always be at that job and will always have a car, surely? But that's tomorrow's problem I'm sure.
Do...do you see the problem here? Its not _their_ situation that's tenuous, its yours. I don't know about you, but if my car broke down tomorrow and I was out a job I would be fucked. I could get groceries on foot because I thankfully live close enough to walk there, but my ability to get to work (or get a job) would be hamstrung. That grocery store that's within walking distance is also _expensive_ so I would be essentially throwing away money just because I couldn't get to a cheaper market, which makes it harder to save up for a replacement vehicle or afford ride-sharing services. Anything that I can't buy at that supermarket would be off the table until I could scare up the money for a car. And replacing a car? 10,000USD, minimum. Replacing a bike? 400USD. Replacing an e-bike? 2,000USD. If you lose access to your bike, it is far easier to replace then a car _and_ you don't have to worry about gas prices shanking you when you're already hurting for money.
This is not the own you think it is. Living in a walkable environment is far more stable then living in a car dependent one. Because if you live in a car dependent city the car is your only option, but if you live in a walkable city...I don't know how to tell you this, but you do realize that you can still _drive_ in walkable cities, right? And yeah, if OP gets a job elsewhere that doesn't accommodate for their lifestyle that would be a problem...maybe that's a problem we should address!
This is an amazing observation! The irony is so funny, too. Never thought about it, but cars absolutely involve more government control than cycling, walking, or even public transit.
At least by nature. You're forgetting that cops are corrupt af and the law is aiding and abetting their crimes to harass innocent people no matter their mode of transportation. Crooked cops will absolutely "detain" (read assault, arrest, and rob) people on bikes and on foot. That said, the law gives cops more authority to do that to people in cars than not in cars, cops can pull over anyone in a car and demand ID and interrogate them much easier, it's a much lower bar for harassment.
Cycling is inherently more distance-limited and requires that infrastructure still be built out. Almost all cycling routes that aren't off-road parks use public ROW. Walking still requires public ROW but at least doesn't require additional infrastructure.
Public transit doesn't require the same amount of personal information as a vehicle, but I would ABSOLUTELY disagree that it's more "free" than a personal vehicle. You can only travel on the schedules set by the transit agencies, and your options on where to live and work are heavily affected by how and where the transit agency decides to provide transit service. Governments around the world deliberately shutter or redirect transit to avoid allowing protests to form; it is naturally much harder to do with roads because more manpower is needed to install checkpoints across every possible route.
Cars involve more government control in some ways but also involve way more personal freedom in others. Walking and biking are extremely slow and taking the train forces you to follow the a schedule.
Only at the level of the crowd. The government can control where we drive by building roads there not not. But the government, currently, has ZERO control over when and where I, personally, as an individual, am allowed to drive, compared to other citizens. They can block a road, but they cannot stop me and let everyone else through. Not without great effort anyway.
By your own logic, it could be interpreted that we should be campaigning for fewer government controls over cars as a means to increse our basic rights and freedoms...I prefer to simply fight for our rights and freedoms by not restricting our ability to own a car.
THANK YOU for addressing this! People who should know better need to get up to speed on this issue.
Most people aren't conspiracy theorists, but the '15-minute city conspiracy' anchors the conversation, so the whole idea of good urbanism begins to FEEL controversial, sowing doubt and poisoning the conversation. That's the real conspiracy.
Well, to me it looks like idiocracy coming to live in front of my eyes. The logic jump from designing a city where you can do your normal activities from a 15 minute walk from your house if you choose to do so to a dystopian quartering where you are forced to live there goes beyond merely stupid and is frankly retarded.
And the saddest part is that the more car dependent a city is, the easiest is going to be for the government to implement that exact kind of policies by adding tolls and taxing traffic.
amen! @@Imman1s
@@Imman1s I assumed the misconception all stemmed from that one dystopian idea that was proposed under this name.
@@Sasha-zw9ssCan you kindly point me to such theories? Because the only context in which a 15 minute city has ever been mentioned is in urbanist terms.
The closest to that I can think of are similar concepts that have been implemented in communist countries before... and by any metric have been successful. Nothing like the walled nonsense the conspiracy theorists seem to fear:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_planning_in_communist_countries
except it's no conspiracy theory, it's what they're really wanting.
Locking everyone in a 15 minute walking radius from their assigned place of residence, not allowed outside that radius (or maybe with a special permit granted for favoured underlings).
THAT is the exact plans, and yes I've read them.
You guys put out amazing content. Like many, I was hooked into this world by Not Just Bikes and StrongTowns, but now feel like I’ve “graduated” to content like yours. Keep up the great work!
donation comments baby!
You missed the bit about car centrism requiring that, in order to participate in society, you must expend a relatively large sum of money on a steadily depreciating "asset" that comes with significant ongoing costs (fuel, insurance, maintenance, sick body kits).
In fairness I think this point has been well established and should be obvious to anyone who thinks about it for more than eight seconds, but it is still a good point to consider.
high upfront cost, significant ongoing costs, **and** huge liabilities
@@alexrogers777and giving money to your government every year for registration
quite a few models are going up in value. every car i have got in my 15 years driving far has gone up in value and im being addicted to collecting them (range rover classic, bmw 635csi, peugeot 505 turbo, audi a4 b6, saab 900 classic, i usually spend around $500-2000). People want to be seen to be spending money and living a luxurious life and want something new, shiny and unreliable. When they complain about the cost and the new engines and transmissions they are just trying to boast that you could never afford a new Range Rover, Bentley Bentayga or whatever because the maintenance so enjoy the bus with the other poors. Its like a designer outfit or something. Its all imaginary you pay to dress what you want to pay its the same for cars.
@@marccurzon A few niche exceptions don't really disprove the fact that 99.9% of cars only depreciate in value. And even those exceptions you listed have all gone down in value compared to when they were brand new, which is what we're talking about.
The human capacity to resist change of any kind is infinite. The 15-minute conspiracy is just a symptom of that mindset. In order to resist change a person will accept ANY reasoning, no matter how far fetched, to "build a case" against said change. In that context, the mechanics of any conspiracy theory will make sense to an outside observer while the followers will become absolute believers. It's both bizarre and fascinating to see.
They block major roads in my city with barrier. Without making public transit better or safer. 15 min city complains are not CT you idiot. It's local people just say Phuck the government and their constant forcing new rules on us. Also look who is pushing these 15 mins cities, they are not the best at convincing people. All they do is name call, and shame tho who don't agree.
Call it a conspiracy theory all you want. You will never make people accept bullying them into stop doing something like driving their car to places in their own city. People like you don't want to build trust with the locals. You want to force them to do what you say.
It’s not like car ownership is some long term cultural phenomenon. Go back a couple of generations and individual car ownership was quite rare in a lot of places. I live in a Nordic country and most apartment blocks built before the 1970s have virtually non-existent parking facilities. Meanwhile because of snow clearance machines our footpaths are normally over 2m wide, perfect for walking AND cycling.
@@Whatshisname346 Car ownership is definitely a long-term cultural phenomenon here in the United States. The only place in the U.S. where the majority of residents don't own a car is the Manhattan portion of New York City. I grew up in Los Angeles and began driving alone at age 16. Since then I've ridden a bus (I'm currently in my 50s) perhaps ten times! One has to go back to the 1920s to find an apartment building here that doesn't have off-street parking.
@@Whatshisname346 That's also an important phenomenon though, people tend to just assume that the way they grew up is the way things have always been and are blind to how much things have changed. That's why you see conservatives advocating for the “traditional nuclear family” even though that concept only really emerged after WWII and was itself something of a rebellion against multi-generational households where the younger generation felt controlled. There's nothing traditional about it but humans of course don't have a sixth sense for tradition since we can't just sense what the world was like before we were born, we have to learn about it, so the kind of people who are uninterested in learning will just assume that their own experiences are universal.
@@hedgehog3180 Many learn history from John Wayne and The Little House on the Prairie.
Exactly. I will never understand people who say cars give them freedom. I suppose in some ways they CAN, but only when you have the CHOICE to drive vs. other forms of transport. If you can't choose, it's not freedom.
The freedom you get is not necessary financial, but the freedom of time. I had to take public transit from South Fremont to Daly City. It took me almost 2 hours to get home from a friends place after dropping off another friends car whereas it only took me 40 minutes by car to get from door to door. That meant I had to sacrifice what I had planned that day to just take transit.
I can't carry 200KG of tools on a bus to go to a job, I can't go camping by train, I can't visit rural relatives by tram
@@she3eshyeah but not everyone wants or needs to do those things though,
That's the entire point, people should have more options than just a car, in what way have they implied that cars should be taken out entirely?
But I still want the choice to drive a car. I want the choice to shop for specialized foods or merchandise not available in my 15 minute zone. There is no end of things someone might want that are not available close by or are cheaper somewhere else. Especially for hobbyists and collectors. I collect vintage stereo gear and believe me I often have to travel good distances to find rare gems and definitely require a car as much of it is delicate and heavy. Everyone has their own reasons for travelling outside their zones. Some of us just need a change of scenery or of the people we see.
I am on the autism spectrum and I can't handle the stress of driving. Unless I live in a walkable city or a city with good public transit, I can't go anywhere or do anything without asking somebody for a ride. I have no freedom in car centric places.
@crowmob-yo6ry I grew up in a distant suburb of Boston and hated it. My street didn't even have a sidewalk. I then moved to San Antonio when I was 24 and while it wasn't the best, having the ability to take the bus gave me a level of independence I didn't have in Massachusetts. And now... I'm stuck in the suburbs again. Norman, OK. Hate it here.
@@jamiecinder9412 metrowest boston moment 😭i'm with u fam
I’m on the spectrum too but I manage to work it out thur social programs and such. I have to help my mom/go to doc appointments so that pushes me to drive. Biking gives me exact opposite tho. It feels nice not giving the next generation of kids a reason to not go outside/asthma. It actually started to shift to where younger kids and even parents are advocating for bike lanes. USA but people are still hesitant/getting angry. :(
@@samranda do you consider Gardner to be Metrowest? It's waaaaay to the west of 495.
Autistic and I drive quite slowly unless I am on the Divided Highway, stroads scare me. I live in a small walkable town and I don't need Transit to get to my daily needs. Transit is neat but not necessary to make a great place
I like how you turn turn the tables on the conspiracy theory by saying we already have it in ways they were not thinking.
That is because we have let the government take advantage of us bit by bit! Time to stop government over reach! Now!
I'm moving to a 15-minute city next week. I have a coworker that cannot comprehend the idea of grocery shopping without a car. The moment I mentioned I would be living car-free, she just kept asking "How do you get to XXXXXXXX without a car?" I don't know how this is in countries outside of the US, but some Americans do not travel and live in a bubble. What's worse is they have no critical thinking skills to even imagine a life that is different than their own. It immediately is communism-this and communism-that. There is almost no way to hold a conversation with them.
There is NO way to hold a conversation, I just have to call bull$#!t and walk away.
How to get something when you don't have a car:
1. Order it online.
2. Someone with a car delivers it to your doorstep.
I love capitalism.
@@ForOne814Kind of cool that you can order food and it will be delivered to your home, sweet reminder.
As for capitalism, eh…
@@micosstar well, let's just say it was not a service available to the masses when socialism was a thing in my country. Now it's literally free from some chains like SPAR.
@@ForOne814 Maybe for large items and even then that is still probably a no with my bike cargo trailer. I do all my shopping locally on foot or on bike though. I rarely use delivery services unless it's something my town doesn't offer and extremely large that I wouldn't be able to bring on a bus as a bus is how I'll be getting around to the larger cities. Delivery services are fine. I have nothing against them, but I prefer to not pay those fees if I can just go it myself.
I saw on a Reddit post recently that people consider their car their third place
As a native of Los Angeles I would argue that many there see their car/s as a combination of first, second, and third places. Eating lunch alone in a parking lot while texting friends is seen as perfectly normal. Add a couple of work e-mails and life is "good."
lol it's not a third place, who are you going to meet there??
@@willblack8575everywhere could be considered a third place then, you have to organise to meet people in your car. Whereas say in a cafe you don’t have to organise to meet neighbours, friends or strangers/ locals. Third places I think are just places that are for the community to use and meet each other etc. so I wouldn’t include a car in that category
Don’t forget the zoning restrictions and high housing prices. Then you also sleep in the car. You end up doing part time Uber. So it’s home and work…
@@pradlee You're meeting people online which is the newish "physicality 2.0." I wouldn't be surprised if in ten years, cars offered holographic projection onto the dashboard or windscreen/windshield when making a call home or to the office.
It's ironic suburbanites who don't live in the downtown area, call cites prisons, when suburbs more closely resemble prisons, and are built close to actual prisons. The car is a rolling prison, an fiscal prison for whoever owns one, and locks out people from society who does not own a car, so if we are to be free, we must be liberated from car-dependency.
They'll just retort with some BS that it's the "price/cost of freedom"
@@AssBlassterAt least we know how the suburbanites’ minds work.
I live in San Francisco and spend the winter times in Tahoe. I find SF to be a prison than Tahoe ever will be. The cramped streets make me feel as though I am walking actual prison halls. Coupled with how many of the buildings have gates before the actual front door is dystopian. The shops need garage doors to protect the shop fronts. Get outside of the city and none of these things exist. To say that suburbia is an actual prison means that you never lived in both conditions.
@@DenastusI can only be fascinated by how the antisocial mind works. Like I hate most people too, but it’s comforting and exhilarating to live in a densely populated area that has life, so I can only imagine the psychotic thoughts floating around up there.
@@micosstar "Work."
This video is probably one of the best and most concise arguments I’ve heard advocating for diversifying transportation away from just cars. Another point I will add though is that car dependency makes children under the age of 16 (age when you can legally drive) extremely isolated and completely reliant on others for transport by car.
Also true if you're older than 16 but can't drive because of health issues or if you can't afford a vehicle. If you don't have someone to drive you in a very car-centric area, you end up walking round trips of an hour or 2 hours travel time to do the simplest things. Or multihour trips via unreliable buses etc. It's exhausting and takes forever, and there's a lot of stuff you simply don't do because it's not worth it.
Which is probably why so many people associate the ability to drive with freedom. You get that license and suddenly the whole world opens up to you.
Even past 16, for most it will depend on if you're able to use the family car or someone else has something more important they need it for, and typically money to refill the gas tank for what was used.
My family had a second car that could be handed down through each sibling, but for a year the oldest had it away at university so the rest of us worked with one car and some often inconvenient carpooling schedules.
The car was passed to me for my last year of high school, once my older siblings had each purchased their own cars. When I was in university and paying for the insurance myself, the car was costing at least 50% to 75% of what I was making working part time during the school year. With fuel prices now (and the cost even for an old used car), I don't think I would be able to afford a car in the same circumstances today (and I was lucky to still be living at home, so I didn't have any basic living expenses yet)
YES to ending car dependency in cities. A big NO to mandatory digital ID and constant surveillance. Current WEF plans for 15 minute cities CLAIM to be about ending car dependency but are REALLY about controlling the population.
The World Economic Forum is a global terrorist organization. All members should be treated as terrorists and permanently removed from society. Any plan pushed by this TERRORIST organization should be opposed on first principles.
If they REALLY want to generate pleasant carfree cities then how about trying it WITHOUT all the digital control mechanisms? Nope, that's not REALLY what WEF wants. The WEF's version of 15 minute cities are a STALKING HORSE for WEF's plan to enslave all those whom it does not murder.
That's a feature, not a bug. The Venn diagram of “People afraid of ‘government overreach’” and “People who seek to control their children's mobility, social circles and ideology” is a circle.
I'll tell you whats horrendous in my last job when I was at Uni a year back for a local small planning 'placemaking' business in the UK, we started encountering a politician, and local councillor here and there slowly voicing the conspiracy theories of 15 min and blocking actual change, projects, discussion, stakeholder engagements, this started to be really scary as online in the UK there is a real sense of this within the fringe parts of these communities and the national government has slightly backed it, the prime minister trying to illegally stop local LTNs (low traffic neighbourhoods), illegally because the national gov has not that power but devolved it to local government, so ironically gov overreach attempted to stop the conspiracy of gov overreach. Worst yet is then the scrapping of HS2 with 1/3 of its funding diverted solely to car infrastructure, and the propaganda proposal by national gov called "Plan for Drivers" which the first line states passive aggressively "There’s nothing wrong with driving" and whilst it is electioneering it is just validating those that did not voice the conspiracy theories within elected roles to speak up.
what we actual *won* a seat...... are you sure you counted right .... like really are you sure they have not lost a ballet box something..... well bugger me sideways we should be this nationally..... afterall is definitionally was not local elections issue right ? lol
They all got bribed by Shell and BP.
Nothing wrong with driving?
Man, that is motorists coping! Driving has a ton of problems, all stemming from the tragedy of the commons. For example, we all share the road and use it freely, so we get congestion, and we all share the air and use it freely, so we get air pollution, and we all share the same energy infrastructure for electric cars.
A lot of the opposition to ULEZ is gobshites who think cleaner air is a form of dictatorship plus because the Mayor of London isn’t a pasty gentile he is an obvious target for hate.
Then there is the idiocy of the opposition to new speed limit laws in both the UK and ROI. 30 km/h is perfectly fast enough for built up areas.
Labour should at minimum build the HS2 Euston station in full, and from there restart the expansion from Birmingham to Manchester/Leeds once people experience for themselves the convenience of trains. People complained a lot about Crossrail/Elizabeth line's cost overruns, but now people appreciate the fact that it has been built, and no one cares about the costs anymore because they see the convenience it has brought.
My Dad has suffered a medical problem and can no longer drive. My Mum could never drive. They live over 100 miles away from me in a rural village.
Fortunately my Dad is able to cycle to get out of the house and visit shops! It may be 25 minutes for a 70 year old but he is enabled!
15 minute cities are the way forward!
and another thing: sprawling, low density suburbs where nobody know's their neighbour and there's no public spaces is exactly what an authoritarian government would want. revolutionary activities happen in the dense, interconnected urban spaces.
My theory as to why those creepy, unsettling “family annihilator” incidents happen in suburbs is because it’s just such an unnatural way of existing as social animals that it causes certain people to go insane. Or maybe those types of weirdos are attracted to inhuman living conditions like cul de sacs. Either way I’m probably onto something. Yeah, cities have gang violence issues, but there’s rarely any Chris Watts type incidents.
The Government insists that I pay taxes on my car, and I have to pay these even if I hardly drive it! How dystopian!
People fear change to the point where basic rationality tends to fly out the window. When car dependency is all you know, getting somewhere without a car feels very daunting, and perhaps even impossible at times.
When the last car I owned broke down for the final time, I had a lot of those same fears. How was I going to live? How was I to bring home groceries? How was I going to get to the laundromat? These problems seemed really existential at the time. And then, I started walking. What else was I to do? I didn't have the cash to drop down on yet another rusted out shitbox right away. I then realized that the places I needed to go, weren't really all that far, and I was feeling better from the increased exercise I was getting. Still, I'll admit that it was a challenge in that small town, where there was no public transit, and the winters could be brutal, but I actually felt free. Free from the financial burden of car ownership, especially. So yeah, I get the "15 Minute City" conspiracy theories, but I understand them for what they are - the fear of change. And I would've had the exact same fears had I not learned how to live without a car. Finally, if I really feel a need to use a car, and go to where public transit fears to tread, I can just rent one, and be glad that I don't have to live with it when I'm done.
Nowadays, I have crappy public transit, but it exists, and I can use it. I can have groceries delivered if I want, and I have options if I want to go out and pick up a few things for myself. To extend my range, I have a folding e-scooter, and I can just carry that on and off the bus. On nice, carefree days, I get around on my e-bike. There's plenty of places I can go where I just don't need a car, or where driving and finding a parking spot would just be too inconvenient, or costly. I don't even need a car to cross the US / Canada border, and I certainly didn't need a car to go to Niagara Falls.
renting cars should be more popular, this is where i believe renting makes more sense (versus renting a house because you can not get equity)
@@micosstarYou don’t understand the consequences of SaaS
@@jcal258 Cars aren't software lmao
@@Joesolo13 They're full of it. A modern car has more than a dozen networked computers in it. Most of those are very specialised in what they're programmed to do and what they interact with, but it's the handful that the user directly interacts with that are riddled with Service As A Software Substitute garbage.
@@Roxor128 It is all about banning the car; just like they did when they used to ban native Americans from riding their horses on their reservations based on the lie that is was to protect their horses from some made-up illness. when in reality it was keep them under control.
In Montreal, happy it is more a 5 minute city. People are kinda weird. It is about cars,and they see it asa threat on their freedom, however it is the opposite.
I got from a relatively cozy and quiet (by North American standards) residential area to a dollarstore in a busy street (off Décarie) by walking through a park for 5-10 minutes. Back home, I have to spend TWO HOURS to drive across town to go to the grocery store just to get lettuce (well, there is a "premium/luxury" grocery-store across the street, but I'm not paying $8 for a head of iceberg lettuce). 😒
@@I.____.....__...__ yeah I visited PEI last month. I did not like the car dependency. Completely crazy to me.
@@I.____.....__...__17 years on youtube, nice!
I know it is wild. I always thought small towns are supposed to be closer together. It seems Montreal to be more.
This whole conspiracy shows how effective the car lobby propaganda has been. Some people can't possibly imagine a world in which you don't need a car to get around.
It’s total fantasy. In theory it probably works, but when has anything that’s come from communist central planning ever been a good thing? Government approved shops and quotas sounds nightmarish
The conspiracy theory does not arise from worship of the car but mistrust of central planning.
@hyndscssource: “trust me bro”😂
@hyndscs I also grew up in Europe, though I no longer live there. As you said, most cities and towns, even villages would already fit the definition of 15-minute cities.
Now to your other points, I would like to hear about examples of this. My family in Europe drives a lot by a car and I never heard about any of the things you mentioned.
I think it's less that and more the reaction to certain measures that were proposed. People on the right don't like being 'forced' to do things, at least openly. Social and design pressure is perfectly fine. If it was just an urban redesign we wouldn't have seen the backlash. The problem sparked in the UK where the installation of new traffic cams to prevent through traffic on certain residential streets was thrown into the mix of measures being proposed to create more walkable cities. This being the UK you could, of course, pay for a temporary permit to ignore those rules. This is a relatively onerous and annoying way to calm traffic rather than actually redesigning the roads properly, but it would be cheaper on the local government and generate revenue from scalping unsuspecting motorists.
This proposal though led to the conspiracy mills talking about how you would be locked into these local cities where you would then have to pay to leave and would be remotely monitored and controlled so as not to increase your carbon footprint. An obvious exaggeration, but a concern you could see arising if everyone is mentioning 15-minute cities, and one of the big ways a large English-speaking nation is doing it is by installing traffic cams and ticketing motorists who turn down a street at the wrong time of day.
I'm reasonably certain we would not see these large international backlashes if someone owned the 15-minute cities concept and advertised it as one primarily of environmental design rather than a scheme to generate ticketing revenue.
I live in what could be termed a "15 Minute City", in London (England), I chose to live there thirty years back as I could find almost everything I needed a short walk away, Shops, Supermarkets, Pubs, Restaurants etc. etc. plus a busy railway station and numerous bus routes. I've never owned a car and I've never really "needed" one.
Most of London, and other major British cities, are like this and people actually WANT to live in them, which is reflected in the property prices.
If I could live in London, I'd live in a box to have the opportunity! Okay, maybe a waterproof box! It's one of my favorite cities... I have lived carfree in Seattle for nearly 7 years. I don't plan on leaving any time soon, but if I do, I think I can only live in cities where I can be carfree... I love it so much!
I think the biggest issues is that any of these particular things most of the original conspiracy theorists probably don't have an issue with. After watching the video tried looking up some of the conspiracies, and the biggest issues I heard was about the World Economic Forum, some Oxford plan about segmenting cities into districts which you can't cross borders more than 100 times a day, etc. And I think the biggest issue is that the good parts gets mixed with the bad parts which may or may not be true depending on who you ask and what plans for any particular "15 minute city" is being drawn up independently.
Being less car dependent, and having walkways where people in the community can go through and socialize in is great. Being forced to with no alternatives is totalitarianism, and if you are convinced that people are forcing a 0 car life style on you then whether or not you are speaking the truth it'll sound like a dog whistle for totalitarianism towards the conspiracy theorists.
The mistake is in assuming that these people are actually logical. They aren't. They are expressing an anti-urban (and often classist and racist) tribal identity. But the video makes some great points. Suburban, single-family zoned neighborhoods connected by freeways are about as socially engineered as you can get, and they are designed to exclude people. But I suspect that's what people like about them.
Suburbia is a product of planning, and we don't need more planning to fix the problem. Without planning, suburbia will become suburban towns like how it used to be.
*sigh* i guess the ‘burbs are the real villain of today’s age
How is the 15-minute city not the epitome of tribal identity. If you don't have everything 15-minutes away from where you life then tough luck. That is like saying at school that you don't belong on a certain floor at school because you have your home-room at a different floor.
Yes, you're right. Having to walk upstairs for a different class is EXACTLY the same thing as having to drive 2 miles to buy a gallon of milk. How silly of me. @@Denastus
"Stop voicing social engineering and forcing bikes on everyone", is so ironic cuz we already did that in the 60s when we forced cars on everyone.
One thing this video doesn't touch on is people who cannot drive are effectively already trapped in their own designated zones.
Learning to drive is a privilege. You are extremely fortunate if you had someone in your life willing to lend you the resources to do it. Not all high schools have allocated funds to driver's ed, and not all parents bother to teach their kids how to drive. Some parents purposely forbid their children from learning how to drive as a form of abuse and control.
I was lucky enough to have my father willing to give me an old car, teach me to drive at 14, and to pass my driver's ed test early through my high school's driver's ed course. If I didn't know how to drive I would not have been able to work, go off to college, or generally establish an independent adult life.
I've made online friends in their 20s, who I have known since were were teenagers, whose parents never bothered to teach them how to drive and whose schools did not offer driver's ed. A few have been housebound for years completely unemployed. A couple of them have unstable employment because they cannot reliably get to work.
Cars feel like freedom because our infrastructure is so god awful that that is the life you get without owning one.
These people are scared of change and let their fears run rampant.
No, most of them are just sheep who were blindly accepting the rightard conspiracy-theory about "freedom" that was drummed up during the lock-downs.
facts. conservatives are overwhelmingly just people who are afraid of change
I remember asking my dad years ago how people can be hateful and prejudice towards others or other ideas. What he said has always sticked out to me: “What leads people to be hateful and prejudice is not anger, its fear.”
@@gnnascarfan2410Oh man, fear- what a word. It carries a lot of power.
I invited my friend on a trip to Denver that I paid for the hotel, the flights and one of the basis points he rejected on was me not wanting a rental car as that was the first issue they brought up. I got from the airport to downtown for free as public transit was 100% free during july 2022. These sorts of people are hyper delusional.
The problem isn't the original concept, which is to structure towns and cities in such a way that the majority of what you need is within a 15 or 20 minute walk, cycle or bus ride. Just about everyone is on board with this, and most British urban areas are indeed "15-20 minute cities".
What really got this conspiracy started was Oxford City Council's utterly backward implementation of the concept. Instead of thinking about planning amenities to be closer to where people live, or investing a penny into building cycle paths or improving public transport in any meaningful way, in true British local government fashion they reached straight for the moneymaking stick approach by devising a scheme that would fine people for driving between suburban areas without taking a long and pointless detour. They've failed to consider that people don't usually drive out of choice, they drive because the alternative doesn't exist or is impractical. But there's nothing been done to provide those alternatives.
Unfortunately this particular piece of bureaucratic ass-hattery has now tainted the entire concept world wide and fuelled the conspiracies.
I agree
Well said. Oxford council's approach is pretty typical of the attitude of British councils and the British government - everything is done arse backwards and with revenue in mind.
Most sane people have no opposition to well planned towns or cities with amenities within walking distance and in my experience this is in fact how most older towns and cities are already in the UK. When "new towns" came along, it was quite obvious they were designed with cars in mind (looking at you, Milton Keynes) and that kind of car-centric design remained popular until very recently.
There is a reason why I occasionally bring up low-traffic neighbourhoods when someone talks about the danger of 15-minute cities (both are conflated with each other by them).
Absolutely. People should be calling out the insane conspiracy theories that pop up around the 15 minute city idea, but we need to recognize that planners have limitations and governments are often incapable or compromised in their ability to implement effective reforms. Urbanist communities constantly discuss the negative consequences of urban planning in the recent past, but seem oddly blind when peope are sceptical that new proposals will actually achieve what they intend.
@@izzieb Yep. When you actually talk to a "conspiracy theorist", most of the time it turns out you're not talking to some basement dweller, but an ordinary person (often older and less mobile) who actually just wants better buses and are annoyed by these proposals because they already find driving stressful and expensive. Filters and LTNs appear as extortion methods from an extractive organisation, since they penalise something that was previously perfectly legal, yet the money is often used to compensate for waste in local government budgets rather than invested in something that benefits the people they should be representing.
The 15 min city scare is insane. However, the local govt MUST keep the mass transit options safe and the operators of mass transit must enforce social norms of respectful behavior. Without those, the people who can opt out to a car will.
In order to keep mass transit safe there would have to be a zero tolerance policy to any kind of crime that may happen on them. Increase police presence if you want transit to be safe. Just designing the roadways for transit won't solve the problem when people are actually taking said transit services commit crimes on board them.
as someone who modifies my car, i cannot and will not remove my car. however it would be nice to have the option to do this, save some miles and such. Though especially where i live, it isn't exactly anything i expect to happen in any rapid fashion. Texas is pretty against the idea of even considering Public transportation and riding a bicycle around my area is asking for a hospital trip. same for walking. (plus i work 30 minutes from home).
There’s a surprising amount of overlap between car people and urbanists, we don’t have to be enemies. It’s interesting to see how sites like Jalopnik are posting about why car-centric development needs to end and Doug Demuro was active on the Not Just Bikes subreddit before it was locked
@@Joe-vm6ds We don't enjoy sitting in traffic anymore than the next guy, and the more people who shouldn't be driving get off the roads, the less likely it is that someone damages their $1,200 carbon fibre front splitter.
Also do not forget that people are forcefully evicted from their homes to make room for more and wider highways, and that roads are heavily subsidised by the general tax payer.
I moved back from a suburb in the U.S. to a city in the Netherlands a couple of years ago. The weather takes getting used to, but getting around is wonderful. I'm in a city of about 100,000, and I can walk or cycle everywhere in 15 minutes or less. My car stays in the garage for weeks on end, I only get it out when I want to go somewhere outside the city. It's pretty great!
You're clearly doing pretty well in life if you can afford to live in an expensive country like the Netherlands and own a car and a garage to park it in. But for most of us in the US, moving to a denser/walkable area generally means having to give up on car ownership in order to afford the higher housing costs. Which means being limited to places withing walking/cycling distances, or putting up with limited routes/schedules and the hazards of crime and violence on public transit.
@@Zalis116 My main reason for moving back to the Netherlands is that life is actually a lot *less* expensive here than in the U.S.
@@Zalis116 That's because US government control prohibits building more walkable cities, so the supply is fixed in the face of rising demand.
And a large reason for that control and social engineering is to keep things convenient for cars.
@@Zalis116Cool thought process, I will analyze your words; this is a public forum after all (delete your comment if you do not want your words to be analyzed). My reason is to analyze how people think, in this case, analyzing how fallacies are crafted.
Have a great day!
- mico (: a man part of gen z, age 18 :)
This is a GREAT response video to the utter nonsensical conspiracy theory that a 15-minute city is somehow equivalent to prison-cities/concentration camps that I've seen people say they are. Making cities more walkable and bikeable is NOT the government telling you that you cannot own a car and that you cannot leave without paying a fine. But I'm so glad you went a step further to point out how there is way more "government control" with vehicle ownership than there is for walking and biking.
Unfortunately, most people who believe in a conspiracy theory like this are a lost cause, unable to understand rational thinking once they've plunged into the deep end.
If people understood how expensive cars really are... given that it spends most of it's life as a paperweight vs putting that money into bills, travel, mortgage, hobbies, retirement. New cars in the US are averaging out at more than $40K! That's just the purchase price and doesn't account for gas, maintenance, insurance.
I remember first coming across this conspiracy with one of my friends sharing on FB.
Which prompted me to do some research.
The map they often show is Canterbury, England an example of those 15 minite style prison/Hunger Games district.
But the only thing they do is just make you pay to come into Downtown cause thry don't have space for parking.
Huh....reminds me of every complaint from residents in Edmonton. They all hate downtown cause no parking and it cost $3.50 for 2 hours on the street. They always demand more spaces and it to be free.
That's the "15 minute cities" conspiracy in a nutshell: Cities plan to implement low traffic neighbourhoods i.e. car travel reduction by zones and blocking throughfares and 15 minute cities i.e. increase nearby amenities -> Cities plan to implement 15 minute cities i.e. car travel reduction by zones and blocking throughfares -> Cities plan to implement 15 minute cities i.e. travel reduction by zones -> Cities plan to implement 15 minute cities i.e. imprisonment.
What?!?! People consider $3.50 to be expensive parking? That's peanuts in downtown Seattle!
@@compdude100 Your argument is based on the false primise that these "cities" are for the well being and comfort of ordinart people, which is not true. This all about implementing international climate change policy, of which these "cities" are but the tip of the iceburg. You can not see the whole picture if you only study one jigsaw piece at a time.
@@kathleenpearson-dh9od ???
How does this relate to what I said in my comment? All I talked about was cost of parking. Perhaps you intended to reply to someone else?
Car dependent cities are closer to prison cities, 15 minute cities are the opposite specially with mixed zoning and allowing kids to be outside and commute by themselves, it gives freedom and teaches them self reliance and independence. Imagine being younger than 16 and not being reliant on a adult to drive you somewhere, to be able to walk, cycle or use public transport by yourself or with friends to go to your sports activities, to the cinema, to stores all without the need for someone to take you there and babysit you. That's one of the main reason according to studies that kids in the Netherlands are among the happiest kids in the world.
If an actual prisoner can walk from his/her prison cell to the commissary, to the chow hall, and to the gym in 15 minutes than the 15-minute city is the prison.
Driving a car is NOT freedom. We are forced into going by car everywhere that a road allows us to go. Besides, if you want to go somewhere with the freedom of choosing which path to take, even if said path is no path, then the only possible way is to walk. You have to drive ON THE ROAD, or you get fined. This isn't freedom of travel, because we only travel by roads.
In the early 1990s, I lived in Warsaw, Poland. I could reach anywhere in the country by train and to any village by local or regional bus. There was a lot of freedom in that.
I'm basically as libertarian as they come, and I've found the "15 minute city" conspiracies very dumb. Our highways are entirely dependent on federal funding, we're actually way more reliant on a centralized federal government with cars as our only mode of transport. Did you know that there's no federal law that bans gambling, prostitution, or makes the drinking age 21? Technically, a state can act against these laws, but if they do, the federal government threatens to cut their highway funding.
doesn't help that most american cities can't actually afford to maintain their existing roads.
@@laurencefraser that is the funny part, car centric infrastructure means you need so many miles of road that it becomes impossible to maintain them properly, which is why countries like the netherlands or germany are a delight to travel through-the roads they do have are amazing. Then I get back to belgium and… eh.
Call it Work/Play/Live or mixed use and it suddenly becomes desirable, expensive, and most who would want to live there can't afford it, and it is exactly the same thing as a 15 min city.
Nothing says freedom like having to spend thousands of dollars every year on gasoline, insurance, and maintenance, just so you can use your vehicle that you already spent thousands of dollars buying, just as long as the state has deemed you worthy to operate this vehicle, all so you can go to work and get groceries.
Literally a poor persons mentality. Cars offer you way more freedom if you aren’t broke. Private jets have some of the highest barriers to entry, billionaires are buying them because it does the exact opposite of restrict their freedom.
@@nemdance bruh, poor people have to get around somehow too. Let me guess, they should just pull themselves up by their bootstraps so that the cost of owning a car isn't a problem? All while having their bootstraps pulled back down by the weight of all the money they have to waste on a car just to buy groceries and go to work? Literally, you are describing part of the problem!
Cars _should_ be a luxury good, just like private jets. The problem is right now you more or less need one just to get to work or buy groceries. That's why we're sitting here talking about 15-minute cities, because we want cities where you can fulfill your basic needs without ever stepping foot in a car, just like you can fulfill all your basic needs _now_ without ever stepping foot in a private jet.
More choices == more freedom.
@@SilverDragonJay ok but this persons argument was that cars restrict freedom when they do the exact opposite
@@nemdance They absolutely restrict freedom for anyone who can't afford it or doesn't want to drive. These people are also the ones who have the least freedom and economic means in society in the first place. Why do you want to kick down those who are already kicked down?
@@Slenderman63323 again with the victim mentality. I’m glad you people don’t actually go outside.
I feel the car bring a symbol of freedom seems to be a byproduct of bad transit. I live in a canadian city with poor transit and generally rely on bicycle transportation in the city. I hear many people advocating driving. When i go to cities with better transit it generally occurs less
Even in Vancouver, someone was slapping 15 minute conspiracy stickers on road signs (I saw a few around Point Grey and Kitsilano 🤷).
In particular, traffic filtering infrastructure gets certain people to rage, even though it's more commonly installed in busy areas that are well served by transit and where cycling is more common.
The idea being in your own personal bubble of pseudo privacy, hurling through at fast speeds, is better than having to walk/bike and physically be active, or wait for the bus to come; which leads to another fallacy where traffic kills more of your time than a scheduled public transit.
i lost my license and found out very quickly what living in a prison city actually feels like. you realize quite quickly that you can't walk anywhere because you atr deep in the suburns and soon the realization that you can't leave your street at all because you don't have a car or bike lanes or even a bus, and you begin spending massive amounts of money on uber just to get your groceries.
Stuff close enough to walk to in 15 minutes where you did not have the freaking pollution of cars, noise and air, life with car payment, insurance and gas bill rolled back into the budget? OMG that's like heaven. There are lyfts and buses. There is NO prison. A bus ticket for a MONTH is cheaper than ONE tank of gas. Nothing has to make sense for people to follow along because they have LOST the ability to reason on their own. Cars are also dangerous. No one said peep when 47 THOUSAND people died in car crashes a year but when 319 people died in the gulf war they were all insane. OMFG. Get your head out of your bungholes people.
I’m British and I’m happy to live in a “15 minute city”
Don't worry, the North American Big-Auto-brainwashed mentality is spreading and infesting other countries too, especially the UK… (Have you seen Faultline's videos about cars in the UK?)
Not if the Tory’s have anything to say about it!
@@VoxelDemon77*sigh*
I'm Australian and I like having public transport
@@haruhisuzumiya6650 I notice that the overwheiming number of "projects" around the world that I believe are eroding our rights and freedoms are a result of the blank check of climate legislation.
You guys just keep nailing the internal contradictions of carcentric arguments. Love it ❤
As someone who had lived in what was considered a 15 min neighborhood my whole life before moving to a 15 min city and then a small medium ish village in the middle of nowhere, by choice I admit it, it is so crazy to me. As much as I love having a yard for my partner to garden in and the tranquillity, I lost so much freedom. If my car break down I cant go to work, litteraly I cant. And I cant access medical services and other services most times of the day. Gas is also very pricey in europe so this means I try to limit driving too much on the week-end. So in the end I'm a bit stuck at home most week-end and evenings. I made the choice to move so it's fine for now, but still. As someone who grew up with so much freedom mobility wise, it's crazy to me how people dont realize that the real prison is car dependancy.
*I LIVE IN A 15 MINUTE CITY - ITS AMAZING* never lived anywhere as freeing in my life - I don't need a car that saves me about €10k a year.
The Bus is €0.75 a day no matter how many busses you get - it's a flat rate. Everything I need for daily life is within 400m of my apartment - I'm off to the city centre tomorrow for a toner cartridge, its only unusual things like that I have to go to the centre for.
Sensible video, which overlooks one obvious point: the tremendous financial cost of owning and operating a car. To pay for one of these vehicles, you give up a lot of financial freedom.
The video literally mentions that
@@logitech4873 Not really. There is a fleeting reference to "financial freedom" in the introduction, but the point is not developed at all. The main gist of the video is to focus on government regulations pertaining to driving and car ownership. I believe the financial aspect deserves much more emphasis. Many people who buy vehicles are in servitude to their payment plans. Opponents of "15 minute prisons" are actually proponents of corporate hegemony.
I watched a video made by a lady who was in a car with her friend and they were going somewhere. They were stopped at a certain point by a law officer who told her she couldn’t drive past that point and they had put up concrete barriers across the street except for a few feet on the other side. She went ballistic because she had no idea and it had happened over night. She left and took another route only to find out that she couldn’t drive passed a certain point that way as well. This was in Cancer. She was crying and saying that it could not be done because Canada is a free country. I personally don’t trust our government! It might start out one way but then you wake up one morning and decide to go somewhere only to find that the streets have barricades across them and you can’t go where you wanted to because it’s more distant than you and your children can walk
An excellent collection of widely known facts put into a context that shows the many privacy costs of car ownership. Well done!
You're making a great argument, but people who write this kind of comments do not care about facts. They are guided by emotions and intuition. Not necessarily a bad thing, just easily exploitable by malevolent actors.
Yes they are guided by ignorance and emotion, but at the very least many of them shut up when they get these kind of arguments back at them. And that is god because then there is less of them spreading this to other people and less of them screaming at politicians.
Those who love conspiracy theories should do the following search :
_Segregating by the construction of highways_
For many of them, it's not a bug, it's a feature.
The 15 minute city as a "prison" has to be one of the dumbest conspiracies that the conspiracy theorists have come up with yet.
imagine if they used their "urbane" imagination for other ideas!!
To you (and me), it's dumb.
To others, it's completely logical.
@@michaeloreilly657correct, empathy is key to understanding views
@@michaeloreilly657 "Logicaly" only by having beliefs completely divorced from reality. They're scared of an idea that no one's advocating.
@@michaeloreilly657yeah if you are a useless manchild who can't figure out how to get around without your car. Like listen to them for 1 sec and thats their entire position.
this was hilariously good. amazing work!
Thank you!
Walking, cycling, and transit is government overreach unlike government funded highways and roads
how great is walking/biking going to be when its's sub-freezing or storming most of the year
@@she3esh Winter gear exists! Also, lots of cities have indoor pathways... and buses and trams/trains/subways also provide transit without getting snowed on!
i don't know any 15minute advocate that doesn't also heavily emphasize trams, buses, metros, and even suburban and regional rail.
a 15 minute city isn't a prison where you're confined, its a whole city plaza where you can get to most places, even far away places with more options, making the whole thing accessible at your whims.
15min accessible city. not 15min restricted city.
These people are going to lose their car as they become Senior citizens. Then what? Make their kids spend 5k a month on housing them in retirement facilities?
They'll move to The Villages and drive golf carts everywhere.
@@MrBirdnoseRun away from their problems while blocking "15 minute cities" so their kids & grand kids can't fix poor urban planning?
I’ve stopped trying to convince those that see the world differently. I live in a very walkable area, yet with immediate access to my car. I use about one tank of gas a month. I will often go for days without using my car. I love having this option and have made very conscious life decisions to be able to do this. I walk to a 2.5 mile long rail trail and will often run into friends and neighbors, sometimes stopping to catch up. Happy, joyous and free regarding my choice!
The least free I've ever felt was in a car driving through a checkpoint in Arizona. There's nothing quite as dehumanizing as watching some 25-year-old jackboot ask your 96-year-old WW2-vet grandfather if he's an American citizen.
Yikes I do hope your grandfather is ok
@crowmob-yo6ryFacts!
I'm from a small city (really more like a town) in northern Mexico. Absolutely anything I want to do is within a 15 minute drive or 30 mins tops. Last week I had to go to CDMX (Mexico City) for a job interview, i was going insane inside the taxi, how the traffic was extremely congested we could never go faster than 20km/h ( ≈ 15mph), and how it took me more than one hour to get to the interview. 90% of the sidewalks were around 1 meter (≈ 3.3 ft) wide, and the whole thing is full of valleys, the city sinks more each year and still becomes more car dependant each year. There is public transportation, but I didnt had time to figure out the route I needed to take
I live in a small town in the Netherlands, which is by the way almost 850 years old. I can bike, and walk, to the supermarkets, schools, medical center, churches, cafes and restaurants and it does not take me more than 5-10 minutes to get there! So that is a government conspiracy! 😂😂 And this conspiracy was started by the Bishop of Utrecht in 1176, when he officially incorperated my little town. Wow! I already suspected that the guy was anti-car! Oh wait, most of the aforementioned places can also reached by car......
It requires a lot of mental gymnastics to advocate that walk-able neighborhood are a prison.
You haven’t read their literature. Don’t be shocked by what comes next
@@jcal258 I love it when evil geniuses put their diabolical plans in accessible reading material.
What people fail to realize is that the 15 minute city is essentially bringing back the 1950s main st lol. which is a good thing tbh
How do these people think cities functioned before cars were invented?
I would say applying a $700 monthly tax on each individual because they "need" a car (have no other options) is the real conspiracy
A weird conspiracy theorist I know lives in Darlinghurst, New South Wales. One of the densest neighbourhoods in Australia and has never gotten his license, he rants about "15 minute cities" all the time, largely because he's on board with all the rest of the nonsense about microchips in vaccines and all that nonsense.
I bet the response to informing him that he already lives in one would be amusing.
Interesting route you guys took to debunk (I guess) this conspiracy. It's really bizarre, like birds not existing.
The bird not existing is a fake conspiracy theory, it's something people say for the "meme" or the joke to pretend they are in a fun conspiracy theory.
Ok but they don’t exist
@@VickyHong1879Correct, they are reptiles. Dinosaurs, in fact..
Driving electric means I charge at home, never pay a preimum even at public chargers, but I am confined to GOVERMENT CONTROL. E bikes are the REAL FREEDOM.
Is it truly so surprising that conspiracy theorists fundamentally don't understand things?
It's even more surprising that people still hold steadfast faith in the government and so called experts when they have been lying to our faces since forever!!
All the while people never wanna see past the bullshit and rather keep it "conspiracy free"... These things turn out true rather often tho.. It's kinda scary...
Funny thing is: "conspiracy theorists fundamentally don't understand things" means they don't stand under the bullshit that is raining down on everyone else! xD
Cops spend so much of their time looking for traffic violations, that you are far more likely to end up having a negative interaction with a cop while driving than any other time. It's pretty uncommon that I see a cop on public transit.
My brother has a disability (poor eyesight) which means he will never be able to drive and has to either walk or take public transport, fortunately we do not live in the USA. Do people like him just not matter to these conspiracy theorists?
15-minute cities are not an obstacle to freedom, they are freedom.
Are people free to disagree with you ? or vote against such policies?
@@kathleenpearson-dh9odWhy wouldn't they be?
This video is dripping with logic. How can people believe the lunacy of the 15 minute conspiracies? I guess people listen to the loudest voices...
To be honest: I wouldn't be surprise if these "Anti-15 minute city folks" also overlap with the "Flat Earther" crowd. Considering their constant disregard of facts and logic.
Because it’s a conspiracy theory. Much like ones about the earth being flat, the sky being purple or the government/corporations controlling people, conspiracies don’t need much deep logic to be effective. People will believe them because they feel “enlightened” by believing them
@@TheTrailburner Definitely a lot of overlap with Sovereign Citizens, who I know already have lots of overlap with Flat Earthers.
and remember how much chaos the collapse of that philidelphia highway caused. there are bottlenecks everywhere it would not be hard to shut things down if the government really wanted
Let's not forget the truly enormous volume of government subsidies and government-built infrastructure (highways, arterial stroads, municipal parking structures, etc) that motorists get handed on a silver platter at (in most cases) no cost! If there is ever a cost, such as a road toll, parking fee, or gas tax, it's often more or less trivial and they almost always freak the hell out! And car users have the absolute *gall* to accept all of that without question, only to turn around and flame mass transit services - services that need much less infrastructure to move much more people much more sustainably and which its riders pay a fee to use - whenever they're "not being profitable." The level of hypocrisy there is absurd!
You're absolutely right that "15-minute city" conspiracy theorists are fundamentally disconnected from the reality of life in a non-car-centric community. I'd bet my life that 99.9% of them are stubborn, classist suburbanites who haven't so much as laid eyes on a walkable place - other than maybe Disney World, cruise ships, lifestyle centers, or a college campus - in decades (if ever), and love their suburban lifestyles because it keeps them away from all of those icky poor people. I would know. My early Gen X parents (born 1970 and 1969 (IIRC) respectively) don't openly ascribe to those conspiracy theories, though I wouldn't think it impossible that they secretly do. That being said, my mom (who's an international trade lawyer) refuses to use the Washington DC metro - despite working in the city and living in its suburbs - because it's "scuzzy" (direct quote from her). Granted, that reluctance to use it may partly be because there's not a station that's super convenient for us, but she's also directly called it "scuzzy" on at least one occasion. Meanwhile, my dad (who was high up in the sales department of a private security firm for 25 years) thinks that every urban place he hasn't personally witnessed being obviously otherwise is a crime-infested hellscape. He also refers to visibly poor or otherwise unkempt people as "shady drifters" and gets visibly agitated if there's one within eyeshot, so that's... pleasant to think about.
I also wouldn't be surprised if the whole thing is in large part an astroturfing scheme by the oil and automotive industries. It would certainly be in their best financial interests if people railed against urban design that doesn't need cars, and I find it a bit suspicious how quickly those theories became mainstream...
Big oil and general conservative groups literally are AstroTurfing this, just like they did with the agenda 21 conspiracy theory a decade ago
I live in Salt Lake City, and they have recently announced that they are going to build mixed use developments and all my friends and family LOST THEIR MINDS saying that it’s all about “control” meanwhile since we live in a valley we have some of the highest asthma rates in the US because the smog gets trapped everyday due to the car dependency
I visited SLC and thought the public transit was pretty good. Within the city its good but try to take transit to Snowbird then public transit starts to get bad.
"A lot of people really, deeply associate cars with personal freedom"
A lot of people have brain damage.
It's the general inability of (especially uneducated) people to apply systemic analysis instead of individual analysis. People can imagine the freedom cars grant for the individual in a vacuum, while not being able to fathom all the various freedoms they lose from cars as a societal system of infrastructure.
In simpler terms, when they hear the topic of transportation discussed, they imagine themselves in a car, instead of imagining everyone else in a car.
Leaded gasoline will do that to you :v
Man, I've watched this vid 3x and you completely shutdown the 'leftist commie agenda' argument with facts. Not only that you made me suspect the conspiracy crowd. Clearly you've done your homework. I'm hooked on you guys.
i left Calgary for Montreal and I can attest that my freedom has increased without a car
Struggling to get my driver's license is exactly the reason why I gave up on it and started riding my bike everywhere. Between failing the first driver's test and my parents not taking me to retake the test, I decided it just wasn't worth it and at the time I remember being frustrated about it but now I see it was probably one of the best decisions I ever made
That’s sad. I’m not sure that’s the brag you think it is
@chaseherrington how is me not having to waste time and money doing something that I never wanted to do in the first place and don't have to do sad? Even sadder replying to a random comment that I forgot about from a few months. Car defenders are cringe
"I wont let their government mind control techniques work on me!"
>watches television
As you guys rightly point out, don’t expect these nut jobs to accept your rational counterargument to their conspiracy theories. Some people are beyond help. Let them mindlessly sit in traffic, and focus on where we can make a positive difference.
Packing into the train is way shittier than sitting in a luxury car smoking a blunt. All of you just haven’t experienced luxuries and are trying to make us all suffer.
@@nemdance You steal cars and drive impaired, but *_they’re_* the ones making others suffer??
@@TukaihaHithlec I’m not the one driving you rere. My driver drives I smoke blunts.
Yeah, you can't reason someone out of an ideological or emotional belief.
@crowmob-yo6ryThat mindset somehow puts a blind eye to road rage and a sedentary lifestyle.
Cars have amazing marketing departments, and 70 years of propaganda stating how awesome they are and if you don't drive something awesome it's the reason you're not getting enough sex.
Cars are financial anchors for most people. City Nerd did a great breakdown of the cost of car ownership when compared to income quin-tiles and showed that unless you're making over $150k a year a car does not make financial sense. That is also just for one car not the two that most families have. We became a one car household and used the $11k+ saved to take an awesome vacation, and still have money left over to replace our fridge, and still have money left over to put into savings.
Cars may have at one time been symbols of freedom but these days they just keep you poor. The only thing that guarantees freedom in a capitalist society is money and cars are holes in the ground you throw your money into.
What a great video! There's a lot of urbanist content on TH-cam, much of it talking circles around the same idea. This is fresh content, engaging with ideas--even ones the creators think are ridiculous--in a respectful but incisive way that makes it *shareable* outside of the relatively narrow confines of digital spaces.
Well done!
The thing is, 15-minute cities, even if they are the thing the conspiracy theorists say they are, still aren't mandatory. You don't have to live there.
And cars do surveil you, but most of them still work after you disable the modems.