top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 107 points 2 years ago (6 children)

You forgot the homeless people, forced to live under that interchange because you know, america, freedom etc...

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • load more comments (5 replies)
    [–] 46 points 2 years ago* (2 children)

    Duh, moron, the future is you just live in the car.

    You cant legally park it anywhere near anything useful for survival, and gas is expensive and so is car insurance.

    But thats fine because cars and car companies have more rights than people! Or something...

    What I am saying is anyone who walks to the grocery store /deserves/ to get run over.

    Natural Selection mannnnn!

    inhales

    Alright, feelin good, got beer in the glove compartment, time to film my magnum opus:

    DeathRace 2024.

    YEEEEEHAAAWWW!!!

    immediately peels out, doesnt see other driver blowing a red light until too late, swerves to avoid and crashes into the weed dispensary, paralyzing himself from the legs down and killing 4 others

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    In many cities, people are literally living in cars that don't run, in public parking spaces, because it's the only enclosed place they can afford to live in.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago

    Yep, and that is almost always illegal, and such people almost always end up having the car towed, having to pay for the car being towed, losing all their possessions and then becoming homeless.

    Its just a matter of time until enough people report it and the police get around to it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 34 points 2 years ago* (27 children)

    This isn't a great argument. There is so much open undeveloped space in the US that could be used to house people. This interchange isn't taking space away from anyone. There are lots of good reasons to reduce cars, but this isn't one of them.

  • source
  • hideshow 29 child comments
  • load more comments (25 replies)
    [–] 19 points 2 years ago*

    Yeah, but you can't get to the other side of Siena in 20 seconds? Efficiency isn't pretty.

    /S (big a for big sarcasm)

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    @eya This is such a weird way to compare countries anyway, Italy has giant interchanges too: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.929109,12.7359436,1733m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 12 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Ah Houston, not a whole lot to like about living here.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 9 points 2 years ago

    bUt wE hAve EnoUGh sPaCE!

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago (8 children)

    Even better: Leaving that land undeveloped and natural, instead of cramming humans or cars on it

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Humans need land to live on. Constructng densely reduces the land needed for humans, leaving more undeveloped land.

    Reducing human population is beyond the scope of urban planning.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (5 replies)
    [–] 8 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Well damn start building apartments in the empty parts. Its not that difficult to understand.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›