Cars-first transportation has brought with it a veil of bogus, sponsored claims about its pristine popularity, past and present.
In reality, transportation history is much more interesting and conflictual than the powers-that-be would have you believe.
According to historian Norman Pollack’s classic book, in the 1890s, populists and labor leaders were calling for public ownership of all transportation infrastructure, including the Robber Barons’ railroads, which had, of course, originally been built by means of public giveaways of land and crucial technical assistance.
In the pivotal year of 1900, there was also this lost marvel in Los Angeles, about which DbC has just learned:
In an unintentionally hilarious piece today, The Washington Post scolds Hugo Chavez for having used “oil as a political tool.” Could there be a bigger possible ROFL? This, from the second newspaper of record in the United States, where cars-first transportation has always been the keystone in the reign of history’s richest and most powerful overclass?
In its report, the WP quotes an anonymous “industry executive” as follows:
“He’s done a lot to improve the lot of his people. He ruined the oil industry.”
That’s about the size of the task for all of us, isn’t it? Now, where is our Hugo Chavez?
Let a thousand Silver Comet Trails bloom!
Indeed, let them be even nicer than this example, which is located, of all places, in the U.S. State of Georgia, hardly a Mecca of alternative culture! Let us have bikes-only roadways, with pedestrian paths alongside but protected by barriers! Let us have coffee and food carts and bathrooms and bookstalls and medical providers and art installations and performance venues all along their routes! And let the routes be converted not from abandoned rail lines, but from conquered and re-purposed automobile roads and highways!
Workers of the world, unite, and forge your (bike) chains! You have nothing to lose but your suburbs and oil wars and heedless, predatory overclass!
For those DbCers who are on the West Coast, keep an eye out for the book tour by Bianca Mugyenyi and Yves Engler. These two residents of Montreal have produced Stops Signs: Cars and Capitalism on the Road to Economic, Social, and Ecological Decay. It’s a treasure chest packed with information, references, and insights into the continuing tragedy of cars-first transportation. And, best of all, Mugyenyi and Engler dare to do what almost no prior car critics have done: talk plainly about the importance of cars-first transportation to capitalists and capitalism.
I will be attending Mugyenyi and Engler’s Portland, Oregon tour stop, which will be happening at 7:00 p.m., Tuesday, June 21, 2011 at Laughing Horse Book and Film Collective, 12 NE 10th Avenue.
Here’s a link to the rest of the tour dates.
One bit of evidence in support of this?
Remember those atrocious ads for the inexcusable muscle car, the Dodge Challenger?
Not working! As reported in Automotive News:
Chrysler poured significant dollars into the 2011 model. The front and rear suspensions were re-engineered to improve handling and ride. And, the new standard 3.6-liter V-6 produces a 55 horsepower boost over the much criticized 3.5-liter V-6.
A winning combination, right? Not so. I expected sales to catch fire this year. They haven’t. Sales are up only 15 percent over the dismal year-ago period. But May sales dropped 11 percent.
Dodge’s 21st Century pony car is averaging just 3,355 cars per month, hardly a sales momentum that can justify a future redesign. During the January through May period, Dodge sold 16,777 Challengers.
As for the two other pony cars [read: teenage-themed gas guzzlers] on the market, Chevrolet sold 40,275 Camaros in the same period, and Ford tallied 30,206 Mustangs.
Apparently, in France, they are starting to replace garbage diesels with horses and donkeys.
See? It’s not all bad news:
“Compared with €5,000–7,000 annual running costs for a diesel truck, an ass costs €1,000–1,500 and can live 25-30 years. A truck costs around €25,000, lasts around five years and can’t reproduce,” says Cicero, whose four asinelli have now produced 25 offspring, so he won’t even be buying any more.
When he was 9 or 10, my now-14-year-old son said, “Don’t worry, Dad, my generation is going to solve the environment.”
Maybe he was onto something.
In a major positive trend for ordinary people/a major crisis for the investing class, it seems that, even in our car-pushing social environment, younger residents of the United States are starting to vote with their feet against cars-first transportation.
Advertising Age, with great worry and a search for “blame,” reports:
It’s a rarely acknowledged transformational shift that’s been going on under the noses of marketers for as long as 15 years: The automobile, once a rite of passage for American youth, is becoming less relevant to a growing number of people under 30. And that could have broad implications for marketers in industries far beyond insurance, gasoline and retail.
In 1978, nearly half of 16-year-olds and three-quarters of 17-year-olds in the U.S. had their driver’s licenses, according to Department of Transportation data. By 2008, the most recent year data was available, only 31% of 16-year-olds and 49% of 17-year-olds had licenses, with the decline accelerating rapidly since 1998. Of course, many states have raised the minimum age for driver’s licenses or tightened restrictions; still, the downward trend holds true for 18- and 19-year-olds as well (see chart) and those in their 20s.
It’s not just new drivers driving less. The share of automobile miles driven by people ages 21 to 30 in the U.S. fell to 13.7% in 2009 from 18.3% in 2001 and 20.8% in 1995, according to data from the Federal Highway Administration’s National Household Travel Survey released earlier this year.
Meanwhile, Census data show the proportion of people ages 21-30 increased from 13.3% to 13.9%, so 20-somethings actually went from driving a disproportionate amount of the nation’s highway miles in 1995 to under-indexing for driving in 2009.
The environment is the reason Gen Y-ers most often give for wanting to drive less, [researcher] William Draves said.
[Draves also] sees the fundamental economic transformation wrought by the internet (and, apparently on the internet; research firm J.D. Power & Associates found that Gen Y-ers don’t talk about cars nearly as much as their elders in social media.) This demographic will be working on “intangibles” in professional jobs, not on tangible things that require physical presence, Mr. Draves said. “Time becomes really valuable to them,” he said. “You can work on a train. You can’t work in a car. And the difference is two to three hours a day, or about 25% of one’s productive time.”
The news gets even better:
In fact, Mr. Draves predicts a resurgence of urban living in denser housing surrounding train stations. As a result, suburban shopping malls and big-box stores such as Walmart, Target and club stores that rely on people hauling big purchases away in cars stand to suffer.
Before you scoff, consider Walmart. Few, if any, retailers are quite as dependent on the car. Walmart has yet to find a highly profitable small-store concept that fits densely packed urban areas; it’s disproportionately strong in rural and suburban areas and has had trouble penetrating big cities with mass transit.
When gas prices dropped sharply in late 2007, Walmart started posting its best same-store sales results in years. The rebound in gas prices was just as tough on Walmart as the drop was favorable. The retailer’s year-over-year customer traffic turned negative last year just as gas prices shot past their 2008 levels, U.S. Chief Operating Officer Bill Simon said in a March speech to analysts.
The auto-pushers, of course, are keenly aware of this and are hatching their plans and talking points:
The economy, rather than any longer-term secular trend, has impacted driving and licensing among younger people, said Paul Taylor, chief economist with the National Automobile Dealers Association. “If job prospects improve,” [NADA said, “people will want the personal freedom and mobility that owning a car provides.”
And social polarization, they know, is part of what compels car ownership:
Driving is more likely “delayed than denied,” argued NADA’s Mr. Taylor. “That age cohort may eventually get married and have children. Living near work is something you do when you’re young and single, and when you start picking out schools and amenities you want for your children’s development, people are less willing to live near the office.”
Interesting times ahead…