this post was submitted on 30 Jun 2026
176 points (95.8% liked)

Fuck Cars

16115 readers
577 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 CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon'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 topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo 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:

Recommended communities:

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
all 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] naught101@lemmy.world 34 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Tax on taking up what could be green space.

[–] Venator@lemmy.nz 11 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Except in Chicago, where the meters are privately owned 😅

Having a higher meter rate does create a perverse incentive for the city to provide more on street parking to make more money however...

[–] Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The Chicago parking situation is nuts. Not only did they sell them for 75 years, and not only did they sell for only a little over a single year of earnings, but they're also required to reimburse the parking companies for lost revenue (such as from reducing parking spaces or construction). The price of parking has more than doubled since then.

Maybe this can be a lesson to everyone about privatization.

[–] highduc@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago

That lesson: bribe govt officials to privatize public goods because you'll get your money back and then some 😅

[–] naught101@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago
[–] infinitesunrise@slrpnk.net 15 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

It's insanely easy and cheap to drive into downtown Portland. I'll never understand why parochials complain that it's difficult, I guess they've never been to literally any other city. I live in North Portland, it takes me about 10 minutes to drive into downtown, I can always find a curbside spot without having to search, and the ParkingKitty fee for a whole hour is < $3 (And only during business hours, night and weekends are completely free!!!). It would almost cost me more to take the Max train. In a city known for it's public transit. Make it make sense.

[–] Flames5123@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago

Yep! From Seattle and it’s still easy to find parking here. Every time I go to Portland, I never have an issue.

[–] Geobloke@aussie.zone 5 points 1 week ago

As long as they are using that money to subsidise public transport drive a change in behaviour

[–] infinitesunrise@slrpnk.net 4 points 1 week ago

Fun fact: Portland has an official rap video for their parking payment app, ParkingKitty https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4Hxewc_64M

[–] einlander@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Where are these fees being applied?

[–] SwingingTheLamp@piefed.zip 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

According to a previous article, the increased revenue is needed to patch up a $40 million deficit in the Portland Transportation Bureau budget. So, that's going to make people angry, what with the increased fees going to pay for infrastructure and services that they already get, which are invisible in a way, rather than PTB being able to point to something new.

[–] infinitesunrise@slrpnk.net 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Most of it goes to PBOT, the city transportation bureau. A 60 cent surcharge on each transaction goes to a collection of equipment modernization programs, climate equity initiatives, and payment processing.

[–] Anarki_@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Then in a while people wonder why the city center is dying. People stop visiting, stores close and get replace by boring-ass chains that can survive on a loss.

At least this is the case in my city.

But yeah fuck cars and all.

[–] Saledovil@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

According to another comment, this rate hike is needed to patch a budget deficit.

Car centric urban design is too expensive for the stakeholders to pay for it. So sooner or later you'll either see suffocating fees or decaying infrastructure.

[–] Anarki_@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 1 week ago

Parking outside city center and then public transit/walking to the city 🥳

[–] JC1@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago

This happens in some part of downtown here, mainly the business district. It's dead during any part of the day other than noon on weekdays. The reason isn't high fees, it's just that it's a boring part of the city center where there's nothing to do and it's very very car focused. Not a lot of interesting places can sustain by catering to cars. Every other part that isn't infested with cars is vibrant with life at any time of day. Raising parking fees, removing parking and removing car trafic has the opposite effect : it makes it so that the city center stops suffocating under cars.

Unfortunately, the idea of the city center being sustained by suburbs with cars is just a myth. It's mostly strangled by them in most north american cities. It can sustain on it's own by catering to the population that lives in them or close by. And if there's not enough population, densify. A focus on active transportation and public transit is the way to go.