meantime here in Tasmanian, endless fucking RVs and caravans being towed around aimlessly belching diesel exhaust for me to suck on as they go past me on my bicycle. I hope diesel gets to $10 a litre here
this post was submitted on 12 Mar 2026
157 points (99.4% liked)
Fuck Cars
15242 readers
651 users here now
A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!
Rules
1. Be Civil
You may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.
2. No hate speech
Don't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.
3. Don't harass people
Don't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.
4. Stay on topic
This community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.
5. No reposts
Do not repost content that has already been posted in this community.
Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.
Posting Guidelines
In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:
- [meta] for discussions/suggestions about this community itself
- [article] for news articles
- [blog] for any blog-style content
- [video] for video resources
- [academic] for academic studies and sources
- [discussion] for text post questions, rants, and/or discussions
- [meme] for memes
- [image] for any non-meme images
- [misc] for anything that doesn’t fall cleanly into any of the other categories
Recommended communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Brainworm, ACTIVATE
Hey can we all do that, just like, all the time? That'd be nice.
Please, please, please
Seems to me that the answer here should be a substantial tax on petrol.
Which basically, exclusively punishes the lower class?
I'd prefer a tax on private jets and a subsidy to switch your car for an (electric) bicycle.
Perhaps, but we shouldn't subsidise burning the planet.
Yes, but oh my goodness have you pondered the depths of that abyss. You can't spell fossil fuels without subsidy. It's just fo___l f_el_.
No, it hurts the status-seeking middle class, last I checked, lower class doesn't really have a lot of cars.
The price of food is very dependent on the price of fuel. Poor people spend much much more of their income on food and other necessities that are driven by fuel costs and which cannot be done without.
I agree, but then this isn't about fuel, but about subsidising logistics.
I don't know what "this" you are talking about but the fact of the matter is that high fuel costs hurt the poorest most, and I don't believe you have a meaningful solution to that.
Dunno about Denmark, but in my experience the higher class get to live wherever they want closer to their jobs, and probably own multiple cars they optionally drive short distances to show off.
Whereas the working everday folks gotta drive their 2008 Honda-of-Theseus MANY more miles in commute from outside the city, daily, hoping that expensive rattly motor mount can hold until pay week before it fails.
So taxing the heck out of fuel would hurt the working class a ton more.
Denmark has very good public transportation and bike networks.
Confused. Is Denmark footing the bill for their citizens' oil? Seems like you would just say "hey, oil is expensive now - if you drive for no reason you're a dumbass, but I won't stop you."
Maybe Denmark cares about preventing actual shortages, or about the damage wasteful driving with high gas prices does to the economy as a whole.
Are you by chance American and a free market fundamentalist or a rugged individualist?
A country asking its citizens publicly to pull together in adressing national risks is a very normal healthy thing to do. It offers obvious direct benefits. That you are confused by this, I find disturbing.
Edit: consider the possibility that your cultural programming may be incorrect in at least some important ways.
Oil costs are going to affect transportation costs all over the board, food, clothes, construction materials... so trying to reduce consumers consumption of oil can help to reduce that impact on the rest of economy. I don't think is going to actually work, but politicians needs to start planting the seed of scapegoats for the future.
Ah. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. Then when prices increase or rationing starts, they can point back and say "guys, we told you to use less gas!"
the supply is going to be limited if this goes on
agriculture and logistics need fuel more than joe drivearound
We're like 2 days in and they're already going into their reserves which aren't large enough for supply to be constrained for very long.
Are these, like, strategic reserves for the purposes of national security? I honestly know nothing about how this sort of thing should function, but I feel like if a nation is drawing down their reserves, they should implement a rationing system. Or else set a high price for the use of their reserves so that consumers will search for other options
Prices are also going up but its more to prevent economic stalling, which I suppose can be considered national security. High oil prices causes across board inflation. I'm sure the armed forces have a separate reserve.
Rationing is a more extreme measure.
If prices are high only the poor are affected. If you are rich and waste gas you aren't affected. But if you are rich and save gas, it keeps prices lower for those that can't afford it.
Most of the poor are on buses, trains or bikes, all of which are pretty good in Denmark. They can't afford to fund cars and their random repair expenses.