You're viewing a single thread.
Yeah but to be fair the Romans didn't have Hummers and F150's doing 55 down their roads.
They would have realized those were designed to go off-road and not wasted their time on the roads with them.
What makes you think Roman citizens were smarter than us?
What makes you think I was serious?
You weren’t serious when you were talking about Romans going off road in a hummer? /s
lead
We copied the Romans there. Lead water pipes are all over the place across America.
The VAST majority of road damage is shipping. Online shopping and globalized split chains are ultimately where the hate should be directed.
even the lightest car is still way heavier than a horse-drawn cart, and thus exponentially more damaging to the roads.
Shipping is just the cherry on top, making sure the roads are not just terrible but also taking absurd amounts of money to not turns into pure gravel.
Okay, good luck with convincing anyone that some road repair is worse than cleaning up billions of tons of horse shit while maintaining even close to the same quality of life.
Where do you people come up with these entirely fictional strawmen?
you do realize trains, trams, and bicycles were invented and saw widespread use way before cars, right? The solution to transport wasn't and isn't cars, it's railways and bicycles.
And it's not "some" road repair, it's a stupendously massive amount of constant road repair that costs so much that it has driven multiple american cities to bankruptcy and innumerable places simply cannot afford to do it at all, hence why so many roads are crumbling these days.
You're the one inventing made up things to satisfy your own beliefs.
Have you lost the thread?
I said light trucks and SUVs don't contribute to road damage as much as commercial.
You then started ranting and horse carts and improving infrastructure and we should eliminate motor vehicles. I didn't say a word otherwise about rail or if it could be improved.
You're just looking for an argument it seems. I'm not even sure what the point of your reply was.