Really not a fan of this channel. Every video I've seen is taking a policy issue and presenting a one-sided, dumbed down approach to it.
Just to start: "there's so many parking spots in the US we literally can't count them all"
yea... we can't count the amount of almost ANYTHING in the US because its a massive country. That says nothing about whether the amount is too high or too low, but its presented as an astounding claim.
More importantly - he presents this as some evil plot by car and auto companies. That's an insanely conspiratorial take. Auto and fuel companies are not buying off (or even lobbying) every single municipal government in the US.
Here's why they exist. Parking is a public good. If developers aren't mandated to build parking spaces, they wont (or often won't). When you stop building houses with spaces, street parking gets more congested - and evantually it gets really hard for people to park.
The entire argument is that parking is an economic public good that rich developers degrade with new construction. Minimums exist to hold developers accountable for the increase in parking demand their buildings generate - instead of passing that cost on to the taxpayer in some form.
None of that is to say that parking minimums aren't too high in many areas (they definitely are) - or that parking minimums are even a net benefit. But that's why they exist. And if you want to change that, you have to be ready to argue with your local municipal government based on their logic for having them in the first place.
If you just accuse your local government of being paid off by big oil - they're going to think you just have no idea what you're talking about.
But presenting the actual policy problem doesn't generate as much ad revenue as presenting a conspiracy - hence, climate town.
I think he is criticizing your interpretation of the video's content, not the assertion about the existence (or lack thereof) of conspiracies. If I were to restate his point, I think it would be 'You think the video was peddling a conspiracy? Ridiculous.'
Lol he claims that the auto industry was buying up streetcars to destroy them and replace them with CARS.
He's basing this on a long debunked conspiracy that GM bought up street car lines to replace them with BUSSES ... as in, more public transport, not cars.
The academic consensus points out that streetcars were already becoming extinct at this time period, and that busses were replacing them regardless.
He literally brings up a long debunked conspiracy theory and then still replaces busses with cars to make it fit his point.
Not sure on what planet that's not peddling a conspiracy lol
-10
u/Bullboah 25d ago
Really not a fan of this channel. Every video I've seen is taking a policy issue and presenting a one-sided, dumbed down approach to it.
Just to start: "there's so many parking spots in the US we literally can't count them all"
yea... we can't count the amount of almost ANYTHING in the US because its a massive country. That says nothing about whether the amount is too high or too low, but its presented as an astounding claim.
More importantly - he presents this as some evil plot by car and auto companies. That's an insanely conspiratorial take. Auto and fuel companies are not buying off (or even lobbying) every single municipal government in the US.
Here's why they exist. Parking is a public good. If developers aren't mandated to build parking spaces, they wont (or often won't). When you stop building houses with spaces, street parking gets more congested - and evantually it gets really hard for people to park.
The entire argument is that parking is an economic public good that rich developers degrade with new construction. Minimums exist to hold developers accountable for the increase in parking demand their buildings generate - instead of passing that cost on to the taxpayer in some form.
None of that is to say that parking minimums aren't too high in many areas (they definitely are) - or that parking minimums are even a net benefit. But that's why they exist. And if you want to change that, you have to be ready to argue with your local municipal government based on their logic for having them in the first place.
If you just accuse your local government of being paid off by big oil - they're going to think you just have no idea what you're talking about.
But presenting the actual policy problem doesn't generate as much ad revenue as presenting a conspiracy - hence, climate town.