Cars = freedom, But For How Long?

[Zuplar]

Trying going 3 days without starting your car and then reevaluate how dependent you think we are.

First off I live out away from the city, so there is literally nothing close to me business wise. There is no public transportation around me and I doubt there is ever in my lifetime. But again I'm here because I want away from that. So for me to be able to go anywhere or do anything outside my neighborhood I have to have a vehicle.

That said there are several occasions where when I come home on Friday, I don't get in a car until Monday or Tuesday.

[Just the facts]

Zuplar, so its fair to say you are 100% dependent on your car? This essentially means that the government will be tracking your every move, determing when you can leave your house, the route you will take to and fro, how fast you will go, your priority status for an congestion based decisions, and the amount of tax owed. In the brave new world of tomorrow does the car still equal freedom?

[Plutonic Panda]

If you live in a auto-based environment and the government tracks, controls, and taxes your vehicle remotely what choice do you have but to comply? At what point does the car stop representing freedom?

I am more free since I have my car. If I didn't have my car, I would be stuck at home. I don't like riding buses and trains sitting right next people. I do ride my bike about 5-10 miles each day, but that is for fun.

[Plutonic Panda]

The car lovers among us hang their hats on "cars equals freedom" and equate mass transit to a communist take over. So let me ask, with the rise of the automated car how much longer will the automobile equal freedom for these people?

NHTSA May Mandate That New Cars Broadcast Location, Direction and Speed | CNS News

I will also be uninstalling this device if it happens, which I doubt it will.

[mugofbeer]

I really could care less if the government can see when I'm in my car. As for telling me when I can and can't use it, I don't see that happening in reality. That's a flouride in the water because of the Russians kind of fear.

[Plutonic Panda]

On government owned roads.

Thats what "we the people" pay for. The roads are our roads, not the governments.

[Plutonic Panda]

^

And that's exactly the problem with America. We can't fathom escaping our cars.

I don't want to. I enjoy driving my car, but I'm sure you're going to tell me that I am brainwashed or something.

[Plutonic Panda]

Trying going 3 days without starting your car and then reevaluate how dependent you think we are.

I already have. There are times I've riding my bike to the grocery store when I needed something.

[Plutonic Panda]

Zuplar, so its fair to say you are 100% dependent on your car? This essentially means that the government will be tracking your every move, determing when you can leave your house, the route you will take to and fro, how fast you will go, your priority status for an congestion based decisions, and the amount of tax owed. In the brave new world of tomorrow does the car still equal freedom?

I don't want to speak for Zuplar, but I get from him that he choosing to be dependent on a car. If he wanted to be living in DD, I'm sure he'd be living there.

As for your second part, JTF, you seem like an awesome guy, but you show a horrible bias towards cars. It is obvious to me, that you want this tracking to happen so you can use it against people in your car vs. mass transit arguments.

[OKCisOK4me]

Cars equaling freedom? No. Only if you buy your car free and clear and it never has a single issue you never have to pay for because cars are going to have mechanical failures and someone else is not going to pay for your maintenance unless you have a sugar mama or sugar daddy. Unfortunately for those of us that live in cities that don't have an established public transportation network AND a city so spread out, a car is a MUST HAVE. Now, folks like Sid have attested to getting by but I'm not going to hop on the Metro bus to figure out where I can't go and I'm not going to pay Uber or a taxi cab driver to take me to Taco Bell. We could also holler at a friend but who wants to be that scrub (thanks TLC). Having a car is the freedom to drive anywhere but it's just as well a chain that keeps us all tied down.

^

And that's exactly the problem with America. We can't fathom escaping our cars.

Especially if you live IN your car!

[tomokc]

Did you know that a pilot can fly an airplane almost anywhere in the United States without asking anyone, telling anyone, communicating with anyone, or being tracked by anyone (transponder)?

Now that's freedom!

It's not just the roads that the government owns, they've got the airspace as well.

[Mel]

If you live in a auto-based environment and the government tracks, controls, and taxes your vehicle remotely what choice do you have but to comply? At what point does the car stop representing freedom?

When the gov can do a remote lock out.

[tomokc]

Are you talking to yourself again, Tom?

No, I'm not.
Yes, he is.
Am no.
Are too.

Jeez - I sound like the House of Representatives!

[Just the facts]

As for your second part, JTF, you seem like an awesome guy, but you show a horrible bias towards cars. It is obvious to me, that you want this tracking to happen so you can use it against people in your car vs. mass transit arguments.

Trust me - I don't want the government tracking anything. However, in some of the recent transit based discussions two of the things that are constantly brought up by the anti-mass transit crowd is that in your own car you can come and go as you please and mass transit is a conspiracy to take away people freedom and force them to do something they don't want to do. That got me to thinking, if the government really did want to control people what would be the easiest way to control the most people? Answer, via their car, and if they could sell it as being for their own good people would lap it up. Then low and behold I read the story I linked to.

I keep going back to these 3 paragraphs.

NHTSA sees this technology as the first step on a “continuum” of automotive evolution that will ultimately lead to fully automated vehicles navigated by internal electronics linked to external infrastructure, communications and database systems.

The upside of a government-mandated movement toward cars that are not controlled by the people riding in them is that it could make transportation safer, allow people to use time spent in a vehicle for work, rest or entertainment, and give people who are currently incapable of driving because of age or disability the opportunity to move as freely as those who can now drive.

The downside is that such a transportation system would give the government at least the capability to exert increasing control over when, where, if--or for how much additional taxation--people are allowed to go places in individually owned vehicles. It could also give government the ability to track where people go and when.

Also, just to clarify, I know all people who drive cars are not anti-mass transit. I drive a car.

[Garin]

On government owned roads.

Who pays and paid for the roads?

[Just the facts]

Who pays and paid for the roads?

Indirectly the taxpayers. In OKC it is usually the bond holders, subdivision developers, etc... who pay for the road, and the taxpayers pay them back with interest. Are you trying to imply that the taxpayers own the roads?

[Zuplar]

Zuplar, so its fair to say you are 100% dependent on your car? This essentially means that the government will be tracking your every move, determing when you can leave your house, the route you will take to and fro, how fast you will go, your priority status for an congestion based decisions, and the amount of tax owed. In the brave new world of tomorrow does the car still equal freedom?

Yes I am, but let me be clear I am not on the side of government tracking. My comments were solely to express a point that for many a vehicle is a necessity and public transit doesn't make sense for everyone.

[Zuplar]

I don't want to speak for Zuplar, but I get from him that he choosing to be dependent on a car. If he wanted to be living in DD, I'm sure he'd be living there.

As for your second part, JTF, you seem like an awesome guy, but you show a horrible bias towards cars. It is obvious to me, that you want this tracking to happen so you can use it against people in your car vs. mass transit arguments.

Don't worry, you nailed this one. I chose to move where I did because I wanted to be away from the hustle and bustle therefore I absolutely chose to depend on my truck.

[Plutonic Panda]

It isn't "our" roads.

A municipality is a corporation. An affiliate of the state. They are designed to provide services to local groups of state citizens. To do this, they levy taxes, fees, etc.

The roads don't belong to you. They are quite literally the property of the municipality, who derives its power from the State. You own not a single piece of road unless you own ROW (in your name) and pay for the pavement.

Now, you may know all of this but the semantics game means you're simply trying to make a political point where it is a simple matter of jurisdiction.

And more to the matter, a municipality not only has the authority, but the responsibility to maintain the roads and build them with prudence and responsibility. Hence the problem myself and other conservatives have with endless building and expanding of road networks. Especially when pure market forces aren't at work. Enormous subsidies (debt) must be levied to provide this so-called freedom and market choices. A debt myself and others all have to bear. One man's "freedom" is just another man's debt when we are talking about infrastructure. No two ways about it.

Sid, that is exactly why I said the roads are ours. Yours, mine, and every other tax payer out there. I pay taxes, you pay taxes, my neighbor pays taxes; every person in this should be paying their taxes. No tax payers(which is a collective term I use for "us")= no roads. I"m sure if people wanted to, they could band together and build roads with their own money. The government can't and doesn't without taxpayer money.

[Plutonic Panda]

Cars equaling freedom? No. Only if you buy your car free and clear and it never has a single issue you never have to pay for because cars are going to have mechanical failures and someone else is not going to pay for your maintenance unless you have a sugar mama or sugar daddy. Unfortunately for those of us that live in cities that don't have an established public transportation network AND a city so spread out, a car is a MUST HAVE. Now, folks like Sid have attested to getting by but I'm not going to hop on the Metro bus to figure out where I can't go and I'm not going to pay Uber or a taxi cab driver to take me to Taco Bell. We could also holler at a friend but who wants to be that scrub (thanks TLC). Having a car is the freedom to drive anywhere but it's just as well a chain that keeps us all tied down.



Especially if you live IN your car!

Yeah and people choose to live in this city that they know, is not easy to live in without a car.

[Plutonic Panda]

Trust me - I don't want the government tracking anything. However, in some of the recent transit based discussions two of the things that are constantly brought up by the anti-mass transit crowd is that in your own car you can come and go as you please and mass transit is a conspiracy to take away people freedom and force them to do something they don't want to do. That got me to thinking, if the government really did want to control people what would be the easiest way to control the most people? Answer, via their car, and if they could sell it as being for their own good people would lap it up. Then low and behold I read the story I linked to.

I keep going back to these 3 paragraphs.



Also, just to clarify, I know all people who drive cars are not anti-mass transit. I drive a car.

I'm not anti mass transit, in fact, I would love to see more mass transit options here in OKC. The only problem I have is it seems like there are a few that no matter how many times they say it, I would put my money on if they were in charge there would be no money at all going to highways and anything support highway projects etc.

I'm not supporting the conspiracy that you speak of, but know this- if the everyone relied on mass transit, the government could shut it down and "trap" people. If everyone had cars, then it wouldn't be so easy.

[Plutonic Panda]

Indirectly the taxpayers. In OKC it is usually the bond holders, subdivision developers, etc... who pay for the road, and the taxpayers pay them back with interest. Are you trying to imply that the taxpayers own the roads?

I am. At least in a sense. Please explain to me how the taxpayers pay for the roads but don't own them?

[catch22]

The same way a leaseholder does not own the property.

[Oh GAWD the Smell!]

I drive a big truck.

I OWN THE ROAD SUCKAS, NOW MOVE B***H, GET OUT DA WAY.

[Mel]

if they take over our cars they might not start if you owe any kind of legal or civil fine. maybe even if you vote the wrong way. It will make it easier for the drones to follow you.