Three hour parking

[somjournal.livejournal.com]

You can now park for three hours at lots in Davis Square. Weigh in on the change on our blog.

Comments

[turil.livejournal.com]

It looks to me like you being an arrogant elitist who believes that she is more important than anyone else. As in, "I'm too lazy to ride a bike or walk or take some busses, and I refuse to spend my precious time contributing to a movement that would bring more useful public transit to my neighborhood, and I couldn't possibly shop locally because the scum of the earth shop here...

I'm sure this is not really a good representation of what you really think. But you really do present an attitude of spoiled brat. Some of us don't have the luxury of owning or driving a car, even if it would make our lives easier...

[bombardiette.livejournal.com]

I completely respect your right to walk, ride, crawl, skip, hop and generally transit in any way that you see fit.

I do not respect someone who bitches about an area that is heavily populated and congested simply because they moved here to NOT drive which implies that it is THEY who feel that they are more important than anyone else.

And if you saw the car I am still paying on, you wouldn't consider it such a luzury. A shit box, yes. A luxury, no. But I made the decision based on my needs without being a condescending asshole to those who don't drive.

I did, however, return a generally snide, snobby, brattish comment with one of my own.

I also drive because my work schedule does not at all coincide with a T schedule that would get me to work in any semblance of time and I do not work in the city.

And for the record, I food shop in Haymarket. I shop for shiny things in the local area and in Boston and Cambridge. I make it a point to purchase things I don't need from local specialty shops just to give them business because I'm tired of seeing places I grew up around closing down. And when I food shop or leave the local area, I drive to Davis or Wellington and take the T.

[dani-namaste.livejournal.com]

"I'm too lazy to ride a bike or walk or take some busses, and I refuse to spend my precious time contributing to a movement that would bring more useful public transit to my neighborhood, and I couldn't possibly shop locally because the scum of the earth shop here...

With respect to your feelings, comments like this really annoy me - because they assume that people who choose to (or need to) own cars are lazy. The fact is that we are all born with a CHOICE - we choose to remain carless or we choose to get a car. That choice does not need a statement of morality attached to it. Most people in this community, whether they own a car or not, seem to care about the environment as much as anyone else - whether they have to drive places instead of taking the T (which, by the way, I do quite often - although I have to say that running a business doesn't leave a ton of time in my day to spend the 3x longer traveling from place to place on the T, so I do use my car if I'm not going into downtown Boston or someplace similar) - does not make them a bad person. And for whatever reason, you and the other poster seem to believe that it does.

[turil.livejournal.com]

I was mostly pointing out that it was completely hypocritical to me to call someone who does not own a car an elitist. Know what I mean?

Sure, you can choose to own a car if you want, but I think it's important to realize that it is a choice, and not a need. And while I'm not going to force you to stop driving your car, I do indeed believe that it is a moral choice, since owning and driving a car is one of the most environmentally harmful and anti-social things an individual can do to a community.

I also want to you know that I just went out in a car to run an errand because I was too lazy to bike or walk. So it's not like I'm saying that I'm any better than anyone else :-) I'm just saying that it would be far better for everyone if we all worked together to find better solutions to our daily needs than using large private motor vehicles.

[dani-namaste.livejournal.com]

But the fact is, NOBODY on this forum is calling you or the other person an elitist because you don't own cars. Frankly, nobody cares that you don't own cars, just as nobody cares that I happen to own a car. The reason people are being called elitists is because they're basically saying that people who do drive cars are somehow morally inferior, and that people who spend time in the Square shouldn't have to drive there. That attitude is transparent in all of the comments made regarding the situation, and it is, in fact, elitist - not to mention incredibly short-sighted.

Do what you think is right, and don't worry about what other people think.

[turil.livejournal.com]

Well, you clearly got a different message than I did from the elitist comment, then. You can believe that you need a car, but that seems like an unhealthy addiction to me. And while I know that interventions don't usually work all that well for addictions, it sometimes does. So I try to help people realize what they've gotten themselves into.

And did you read the part about me running an errand in the car just a bit ago? I'm addicted too. So, you can feel morally inferior to me if you want, but that has nothing to do with me. As far as I'm concerned, we're all morally equal, since I believe that we all want to do what's right.

Re: Do what you think is right, and don't worry about what other people think.

[talonvaki.livejournal.com]

Sigh. You say it so much better than I do. I keep stressing the "choice" angle...but it doesn't seem to be working.

[bombardiette.livejournal.com]

I should point out that I was not at all calling someone an elitiest for not owning a car. I was calling them an elitiest for the way in which they presented themselves - and their responses to others have borne out that tag.

And yes, I do NEED a car right now if I want to meet my basic list of needs. Given that I don't see an incredible social shift in my lifetime (no matter how hard we work toward a common good) that will enable me to not have to work where I can find employment to pay rent for shelter and food for my table, I will continue to need a car.

When I get a job downtown or on the T again that will allow me to ride it without fear of getting fired for chronic lateness and thus losing access to the means to get my basic needs in the first place, I will park my car and it will no longer be a need but a means to getting out more, exploring the nation around me vis a vie road trips and then I may be accused of being too lazy to bike from here to, say, Texas or New Orleans or Georgia to visit friends who have left the area.

I see your point, I do. But I think it's a little utopic and it's not a realistic vision without a complete social collapse and re-build.

[ukelele.livejournal.com]

I was mostly pointing out that it was completely hypocritical to me to call someone who does not own a car an elitist. Know what I mean?

I know what you mean but I don't agree. There are many factors that make car ownership more or less necessary -- family structure; proximity of jobs (a problem which increases in complexity the more people there are in the household); physical (dis)ability; time constraints; ability to afford neighborhoods with good public transportation. Some people have the good fortune to have these factors align in a way that makes it easy not to own a car, because the costs of that choice are low. But for some people the costs of that choice are high.

You don't seem to acknowledge in your rhetoric that the costs of that choice vary tremendously for different people, and that you are tremendously privileged to be able to make that choice with low costs. Not recognizing that privilege, and going on to criticize others who may not share it for having made a different choice, in fact strikes me as blithely elitist.

[turil.livejournal.com]

Tremendously prividged? The way I see it, a car costs a lot of money to own and run. Only priviledged people can afford them. And getting a license is a priviledge that some folks don't have (kids, blind people, people with epilepsy, etc.). So, you see, it seems like the priviledge must lay with the folks who can have a car.

Personally, I couldn't even afford a car when I did have a job. Now that I'm unemployed, I can't even afford rent, let alone a luxury like a car. However, if you'd like to share some money with me, I'd be happy to have you call me priviledged!

Though, obviously, I'm more priviledged than many people, since I do at least have some cool friends, can still borrow good books from the local library, have a reasonably good education, am not starving, and have a nice bike. So I'm happy to have those priviledges.

[nalz.livejournal.com]

How did you come to the conclusion of someone believing they are more important than everyone else from one line of sarcasm. I mean... REALLY?

[bombardiette.livejournal.com]

Because sarcasm is lost on those born without mirth.

[turil.livejournal.com]

I am mirthless? Yay!

Ah, I get it now, the irony was that you were referring to yourself when you were talking about the pompous and arrogant elitists...

[bombardiette.livejournal.com]

I wasn't referring to you, per se, at all.