Misplaced intentions
The hybrid SUV is coming and I (and many others) find it to be a inauspicious event. Ford is touting it's Escape hybrid as the best thing since sliced bread. They boast it "combine[s] SUV capability with the outstanding fuel economy and low environmental impact of a full hybrid."
So what does that mean? More of the same unsafe handling and increased risk injury or death? And just watch that fuel economy soar, you suburban commandos, as you latch that boat trailer to the back or sit stuck in traffic while making your daily trip to the neighborhood Super Wal-Mart for toothpaste. Splendid.
Ford is so proud of their latest creation that they feel the need to show it off on the streets of New York City. Never mind that Manhattan is the last place anyone needs to be driving an urban assault vehicle.
Yes, great, let's pat ourselves on the back. We've managed to develop a technology that just prolongs the inevitable, which is the eventual failure of our oil-based economy due to overconsumption. We can stretch out this suffering that is called American Culture a little longer and continue the charade of the American Dream while our cities decay, our environment suffers, and our sense of place disappears.
I don't care how efficient automobiles become. They're still objects that encourage isolation, monotony, and consumption. They are mechanical shells into which people retreat, emerging only when they are in the confines of their garage or mall parking lot. They, through their enormous demands upon space, create a bleak, unlivable landscape of concrete and asphalt, islands of shopping surrounded by a sea of parking.
And, oh, the shopping. We've all got more shit than we know what to do with, and still we can always go out, buy more, and load our oversized automobiles with our oversized merchandise that will soon fill our oversized homes. Wonderful.
Why can't we put this ingenuity to better use and come up with novel ways to attract the suburban dweller back into the city and traditional small towns? How about coming up with mass transit systems that are attractive alternatives to private transportation? Working towards a better, different, future instead of continuing down our present road to ruin, is a bright prospect in these otherwise bleak times.
Comments
I figured I should use your comment system rather than just email you directly. Not sure if you check these though:)
I actually read an interesting rant yesterday by a guy whose friends all have web blogs and he thinks it is ruining his life. He says that it has killed casual conversation because everyone writes about all the little things going on in their lives and just assume he's read them. Not that you're doing that, but I think it's a funny thing. Anyway, back to your post.
I also think the SUV hybrid is silly, especially since I doubt it really gets very good mileage. I'm betting my RSX does as well or better with about 32 mpg. And obviously people in new york don't need them. I also think better public transportation would be great, so far as it's possible in this country. However, I think it's clear we will always need some personal automobiles of some kind, so the path to making those pollution free is important.
Of course you quickly move into your standard suburb/walmart bashing. I see you even through in boats this time. So I guess trying to get away from the hectic life of the city is not allowed right? You think life would be any less hectic if we all lived in even more densely populated areas? People DO want, and NEED, to get away from all the other people now and then.
The thing that always gets me is how you don't spend any time talking about how the average person's life would be happier or more fulfilled if they followed your philosophy. The goal should be a society that is as happy as possible. That's why we give people the choice between living in an apartment with neighbors 10 feet away in all directions, or commuting 20 minutes so they can live in a house with a yard, maybe a quiet den, and a little peace. Cities are kinda loud, ever notice that? And it's not just the cars.
Loud? Cities? Just wait until you're here, my friend. You'll see. I sleep like a baby at night.
What could be better if Jake's Way was the way? We'd all breathe cleaner air, for one thing. Large quantities of our personal income wouldn't be dedicated to keeping our fleet of automobiles tuned, gassed, and insured. Tax revenues would go towards meaningful organizations (schools! social services! culture!) instead of never-ending highway projects.
Domestic life would improve. Parents wouldn't have to play chauffeur nearly as much. Family time might become something more meaningful than hours spend behind the wheel.
Forcing people our of their cars an on to the sidewalk would be, health-wise, a huge step (pun intended) in the right direction. Doc Atkins, mercifully, would be out of business. How many overweight Europeans have you seen?
There are still big problems there though. "breathe cleaner air." This would happen if we just had cars with zero emissions, which I would love.
Parents generally play chauffer because they need to get the kids to their after-school activities right? Well in order to NOT drive there, they would not only need to carry all the equipment involved, but there would need to be soccer fields, baseball diamonds, and every other sports-related facility within a short distance of EVERY residence. So either you build a public transit system that easily accomadates four kids with arms full of hockey gear, or you build arenas every 5 miles or so. How can that work? I just don't get how the average family could live close enough together to NOT have to drive, while still keeping population density below tokyo levels.
Yes, walking is healthy, but the fact remains that we need get around somehow. We have family or friends that live farther away because they couldn't get a job close, or they like the climate better, or they're farmers. Maybe they just want a house that's not surrounded by other houses, but rather by a field.
Where is the personal choice in your way?
Give people an interesting neighborhood, dense with businesses, private residences, and parks, and there will be plenty of personal choice in ways to spend one's money, places to live, things to do, people to associate with, and things to do.
Current zoning practices, where residential, commercial, and recreational zones are disparate entities, accessible only by car, are actually more restrictive of "personal choice" than anything I could dream up. What if a family wants to settle down in a place where they can walk their kids to school, bike to the grocery store for some eggs and milk, and take in some neighborhood fun in a community park? They're not going to get that in any place that ascribes to the current mode of development, which is predilectated around a single-use, car-centric existence. Where is choice if I have to drive somewhere to do anything at all?
Any why do people need to live in a house surrounded by a field? Back in the day (when open space was a lot less scarce, by the way), parks served the very same purpose that today's low-density residential developments do, but with a far more efficient use of resources. Plus parks had the added benefit of bringing neighbors in contact with one another in a public setting, something that is sorely lacking in today’s developments.
I just can't believe that people would willingly choose the suburban way of life over one that is based around a more traditional neighborhood model. Suburbs have prospered not because they're ideal ways of living. Instead, government subsidies (through tax breaks, home ownership programs, and massive investments in infrastructure) and the lack of imagination in countless city planning departments have lead to this single-minded way of life.