I realize that trucks, and industrial machinery will still be necessary, but I can't imagine that the car avalanche is necessary that is polluting our cities every day.

I am sorry, but most people could easily switch to public transport or cycling for their daily commute, and they would be healthier for it. That goes for European cities anyway - maybe in the US you are out of luck without a car.

Also, where I live there is a tax reduction for living outside of the city. Obviously that has to go away. If you decide to live outside the city, why shouldn't you have to pay for it.

Please list who am I hurting with my stance on cars, I would honestly be interested and would like to take it into consideration.

How feasible is using horseback for small distances?

Horses are quite inefficient; in fact, all animals are. The only reason it's cheaper to ride a bicycle someplace than a motorcycle is because of the lesser weight and speeds; if you created electricity with a human-powered generator like [this](http://www.los-gatos.ca.us/davidbu/pedgen.html), you'd actually burn more energy in extra food than you would by getting the same amount of electricity from a gasoline-powered generator.

...which, of course, isn't a direct concern since many people bicycle for their health anyway. But it is a concern when it comes to more equine suggestions.

It may hurt regular working folks, who or whatever they are, but it's hard to feel very sorry for them.

Uh, why?

Because they bought costly to operate and maintain things bigger than they needed. A few years later they became even more costly, and suddenly they feel like they can't afford it. Tradesmen are one thing (but can't they write off fuel purchases as a business expense? (I'm not entirely certain about this.)), but most of the people tooling around in their SUVs aren't tradesmen, and, like I said, I have a hard time feeling sorry for them. They made a bad decision and now have to deal with the consequences.

Ermm, have you ever even set foot outside of a city? You do know that people live outside cities, right? You know there are these things called small towns, and farms? Can your smug little mind even comprehend that there are people who drive pickup trucks (NOT SUVs) and other vehicles because that's what's necessary where they live?

Carry on living in your self-absorbed little world, and wonder why the price of food goes up when the people who grow it and transport it to you have to pay more for fuel.

Ermm, I grew up in suburbia and do know that people live outside cities. I also know that the price of goods and services I appreciate are impacted by the price of fuel.

I don't know what that has to do with what I said, though: people who bought bigger vehicles than they needed are now finding out what a bad investment they were. On the other hand, farmers and tradesmen can and do pass the cost of fuel on to consumers. That may suck for me, but it is what it is. I don't blame them for it.

I'm pretty sure that the suburbanites commuting in big cars they don't need form the majority of complainers. And, as I've said, I have a hard time feeling much pity for them.

(To put it another way: get off your high horse about people up on high horses. I'm not one of them.)

So move to a city, it's not so difficult. Besides, I have lived in smaller towns, too, and I still never needed a car.

Edit: as mentioned elsewhere, of course cars are necessary for transportation of goods. But the majority of car travel is very unlikely to be necessary.

> but can't they write off fuel purchases as a business expense?

Sure, but writing off expenses against profit only gains you the amount you'd have paid in tax on that amount, and not the actual amount itself. Writing off expenses doesn't make it a zero-sum game, it just puts 20-30% back in your pocket.

Maybe because they are actively hurting my health and polluting my environment every day?

Because they did not had the insight to become hackers and fund startups.