hytdstd

I'm no exception to your rule, but are you really so confident that all of humanity shares the same appetite for status signalling? I'm not a particularly social person, but even I can think of some counterexamples in my personal life. Obviously, we can also consider most of the extremely wealthy (Zuckerberg, Bezos, etc) as well.

No, they may not explicitly enjoy it, yet they likely appreciate the ease the automobile-focused society brings, even though it contributes to around 7000 pedestrian fatalities annually. Anyone rational would view such preventable loss of life as disastrous. However, the solutions — improved street layouts, less wide roads, use of speed cameras and so on — are often deemed so unpalatable that it prompts a flag on the article. It appears as though a number of readers here don't find 7000 annual deaths significant enough.

My guess: people dislike critical discussion about the things they enjoy.

What? Clearly this man receives a great deal of value(>$50k) in having these statues in front of his home. Just because in theory, he's creating value for the franchise that he isn't capturing, doesn't mean he's being exploited. He's no more an idiot than a Disney fan wearing a Mickey Mouse hat or shirt.

The prius is one of the most reliable vehicles on the road today. These are just priuses with larger batteries and more powerful electric motors.

I'm interested in these statistics, can you suggest a source?

I'm confused, I don't see any memes in the article. Were they deleted?

Too much distracted driving, and too little enforcement of existing rules for me to care. Every day, I see other road users take calls, record videos, all behind the wheel: why should I give a shit? My options are either to remain frustrated with the world, or simply adopt societal norms and drive my Chevy Tahoe stress free :)

Yep, this is exactly why I recommend everybody I know to buy the biggest, largest car you can buy. The outcome of vehicular collisions is based almost entirely on who has more mass and energy, and you might as well set yourself to win. Sure, big cars cost more to operate-- but $150 fill-ups are nothing compared to a lifetime of chronic pain and injury.

I don't really have any evidence for this, but I always imagined the nimby's who care most about property values would concern-troll about housing projects being "affordable", or their "environmental impact".

> The primary aim of NIMBY is to lower density because less supply=higher prices

I don't think this is actually true. If you spend enough time on Nextdoor and read what nimby's complain about, the chief concerns are traffic, parking, and congestion (after crime and safety). Obviously, there are nimby's who are concerned with their property values, but the average 75 year old nimby isn't interested in selling/moving their property.