Do countries need to make a one car policy per family?

1. 0

   threekeysposted 6 years ago

   Do countries need to make a one car policy per family?

   replyreport
2. 91

   Jeremy Gillposted 6 years ago

   While that would help with some climate issues, it'd make situations incredibly difficult for certain families, especially those with multiple working members. 1 car per adult would be more feasible.
   
   In a similar manner, unless war wipes out enough people, to control overpopulation  I predict we'll eventually have to limit households to one kid a la China. Or at least impose fines for having multiple children.

   replyreport
   1. 45

      Ericdierkerposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      I do not think that is the point of the question is it? Having 3 cars you can still only drive one at a time. So this can't be about pollution. It must be about resources used to make autos. Asia would be exempt as you could have ten motobikes?

      replyreport
   2. 91

      Jeremy Gillposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      One person could only drive one at once, but a family consists of multiple people capable of driving multiple cars; this could very well could be about pollution.

      replyreport
   3. 45

      Ericdierkerposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      In our case one car would mean about 50% more driving time to drive one place then to the other and back again and then home. A very interesting thought though. We did it for about year once but I worked exclusively from home.

      replyreport
   4. 0

      threekeysposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      I was thinking about how to help reduce polllution, freeing up congestion on the roads so people can spend less time travelling in their cars and away from their loved ones. I do think the rest of us will need to adopt either a 1 or 0 child policy.

      replyreport
   5. 45

      Ericdierkerposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      You guys have to admit it sounds a little Orwellian? China is relaxing the 1 child policy as it is not working so well. Any restriction on the quality of the gene pool as opposed to the quantity is dangerous.

      replyreport
   6. 91

      Jeremy Gillposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      It does, but eventually we'll need a method to limit births. Or else kill a bunch of people in a war. I'd take the former as the lesser of two evils.

      replyreport
   7. 45

      Ericdierkerposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      Jeremy how do you fine or in any way prevent a Somalian mother from having 3 knowing that she will need one to help her and probably the other 2 will die of malnutrition? Kill the 1st if it is a female?

      replyreport
   8. 91

      Jeremy Gillposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      I'm not saying there wouldn't be special cases,but overpopulation will become an issue in the future and we should brainstorm ideas. Anyway, that's another topic.

      replyreport
   9. 45

      Ericdierkerposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      Yes we did get sidetracked there and agree solutions must be sought after.
      On the one car issue. It is another concept that we must consider and search for solutions. I think the question is valid.

      replyreport
3. 67

   ptosisposted 6 years ago

   Hmm, Tried to pass this multiple times on the island of 'Oahu in the state of Hawaii. Problem was that all these car rental places like to have newer cars for the tourists to drive around a 40 square mile island.
   
   The problem was the older cars are simply junked, not transported off island. And land is very expensive. Just ditch the car off the road, the state will take care of it. So now what does the state do with all this junked cars? Don't want to give them away - that would make the crappy traffic even WORSE.
   
   I think Hawaii imports 2 million cars per year.  It's an island. Been trying to beat this for 4 decades. It's a Democratic Party controlled state since it's inception.  Nothing has been done so far.
   
   Go figure.
   
   "The Hawaii Automobile Dealers Association is keenly aware of rising congestion, and has advocated for expanded lane capacity, overhead lanes and more carpools. “The solution that is needed right now is the freeing up of the vehicle so we can move more freely,”
   
   hahahahahahaha - gasp! hahahahahhahaha!
   
   "Prevedouros predicts we will see more cars on the road in the future, but says traffic congestion will eventually be reduced by autonomous cars that drive better than people-driven cars, while more energy-efficient cars will ease environmental concerns."
   
   Yeah, and monkeys will fly outta my butt!

   replyreport
   1. 45

      Ericdierkerposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      This is interesting as there is now a market here in So Cal for Hawaiian used cars. I understand salvage titles are the best deals.10 year old cars with 30,000 on them. The market just may fix this problem.

      replyreport
4. 50

   bradmasterOCcalposted 6 years ago

   
   
   What countries, especially the US need to do is give people an alternative to not use their cars. California has the most cars in the country, and there is no real valid alternative to the auto for commuting to work.
   
   You didn't say why there is a need to limit cars to 1 per family.
   There are so many families where both people work and both need their own vehicle. So how are these people going to get by with 1 car, and no real valid alternative?
   
   If the issue is air pollution, or climate change then we should look to the real air polluters. Like, War machines that gobble us huge amounts of oil fuel. The US for example has been in one war or another for the last 100 years. Tanks, Planes, Ships, rockets, bombs, etc are not good for the environment.
   
   Even commercial airliners are polluting the skies, and we have been doing nothing to reduce that use, like high speed rail.
   
   We can use alternative energy sources that are cleaner to run rail, but electric planes don't exist for commercial use.
   
   In S Cal we have 5 airports that have no connection to rail service. That means the passengers have to use ground vehicles other than rail to get to these airports. Having rail service to these airports would reduce the number of vehicles on the road.
   
   2017 has the highest level of technology, but the road traffic computers make it look like pre 2000. The longer that traffic is stopped the more there is wasted fuel and more pollution.
   
   The list goes on, but the answer to your ? is NO.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      threekeysposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      A meaty answer that has taken me to think in alternate directions, of which I hadn't considered earlier.

      replyreport