I believe there should be a immediate ban on the production and use of cars, with the goverment immediatley changing the roads so that they are suitable for energy saving trams, this will allow natural resources to be saved and promote a cleaner environment.

Idea for the world


  • While this is not the stupidest idea I've ever heard, it hasn't actually been thought through as regards cost (how do you pay for such an incredible overhaul?), replacement travel ability (I still have to get to work tomorrow), employment (the hundreds of thousands of people you just threw out of work in primary and ancillary jobs will want to eat next week), and even travel time (last time my car was in the shop, I spent two weeks taking buses. Because no bus went directly from my home to my work, I spent four hours each way). While that can all be worked out, to say it can be done immediately is silly.

  • I object because I found the idea to be impractical

  • I like this idea. To change that system of transport that cause so many accidents and dead. To change this transport system that only serve people with money and car. But in other hand, it's impossible to ban immediately because of social economic consequences. Better would be to create a new kind of transport system. A commun system that connect everybody in the world. Maybe by a metro underground?

  • I object because this idea is simply unrealistic. It would require people to forgo their inherent freedom to travel to someplace whenever and wherever they would like. "Sorry, cant go to Grandma's for Christmas this year because the tram schedule doesn't fit with my work schedule." Now your overall intent is a valid one. We DO need to significantly reduce our gas emissions. But relegating everyone to 'municipal trams' is not the answer. I think a better response would be to increase our efforts to utilize lower emission, and no emission, cars. The two areas I would concentrate our efforts would be in researching better battery technologies, and increase the number of car charging stations.

  • My cause is the Thornberry Animal Sanctuary they are brilliant they never put a hahetly animal down,without there help there would be so much misery for unwanted pets and animals in this area.People are so cruel and the other causes such as Children in Need get so very much money and the animals are often forgotten about.We have no RSPCA in this area and Thornberry are going through very diffiicult times so they need all the help they can get it is so important to keep this sanctuary going for the animals sakes who are often neglected,abused,unwanted and illtreated until they arrive there at Thornberry.Remember also that a dog is for life not just for Christmas so anyone that is thinking of buying a pet for Christmas theni say to them DONT it is not the time to bring a new pet into thehousehold at this time becase it is so busy, noisy and must be very bewildering to be wrenched from your mum and brothers and sisters into a family at Christmas when they are so busy ,and cannot spend thetime or the money on a pet.

  • I object because not only is it economically unfeasible but it just wont work. Im all for creating more efficient transportation, but this idea is too extreme.

  • in a statement. "Censoring citrical speech, however, will not assist us in moving the state forward."Legislator Proposes Bill To Prevent 'Politically Motivated Censorship'"FRANKFORT - Three days after a Kentucky political blogger sued Gov. Ernie Fletcher's administration for blocking state workers' access to his Web site, state Rep. Kathy Stein said today she is drafting legislation to prevent what she said was "politically motivated censorship."Joining Stein to support the legislation were Treasurer Jonathan Miller and David Sirota, co-chair of the non-partisan, non-profit Progressive States Network based in Washington, D.C."State Lawmaker Wants Bloggers Protected "Democratic state Rep. Kathy Stein of Lexington said Thursday she plans to file legislation to prohibit state government from banning state workers' access to Web sites on the basis of a site's viewpoint."

  • I object because I find the notion entirely unrealistic and unpractical in the modern age. Although it is commendable that you are thinking about the state of our planet and its environment, the knock on effects of this being put into place would be huge and I think detrimental to society.

  • I just have to say is they should come up with a healthier mode of transportation and ween everyone of motor vehicles or use bio fuels for our vehicles like brazil

  • I object because what about people who live in rural areas who are cut of from civilisation

  • This removes the convenience of personal transportation, especially for people physically unable to use something like a bike or too far from where they do want to be to walk. Such a big change is unfeasible. Introducing trams may be a good idea and a good alternative to buses but removing cars completely is definetly a bad idea.

  • Shutup and i don't like your username quit pretending to own everybody

  • I object because modes of transportation are necessary that allow individuals to choose their own time and place of travel. They should not be dependent on tram services

  • I object because restricts the people to much, in travels, going where they want or need to when they want to need to. Instead lets look to ways to improve ALL forms of transportation.

  • This Zorbear guy is like, "I got to go to work tomorrow so I can buy gas for the rest of my life for money." It is pointless to go on consuming. I agree with the radical approach. Job cause and purpose must be completely rethought to have true freedom. What if we tore up all of the roads and planted crops for human consumption there? Working for money because we have no other choice is not freedom. Going on this pointless path of dependence is tyranny. Food systems should be set up in excess and manufactured directly by the consumer. Let the world grow its own food and make paradise where the home and heart are. Millions of cars running back and forth to work polluting the air is silly, silly. You would not run your car in your garage and breath the result? Right, silly?

  • Thank you a lot for giving evnyoree an extremely superb opportunity to read articles and blog posts from this blog. It is usually very ideal and packed with a good time for me and my office peers to visit your site nearly thrice in a week to learn the new issues you have. And of course, I am also certainly motivated concerning the fantastic tips and hints you give. Some 4 facts in this post are undeniably the very best we've had.

  • There's a srecet about your post. ICTYBTIHTKY

  • We have cars that run on water, plasma energy, magnetics and more; all being hidden from us. Like Nikola Tesla inventing free energy devices that have all been hidden from us by the banksters and greedy power companies. Jail em! Why would I want to take a train or bus when my own car could run off of water or energy in the atmosphere?

  • I object because this idea isn't well thought out. There's nothing wrong with electric /cars/. It would make more sense to stop all production lines on gas run cars, and provide tax breaks for car companies who want to switch to electric...

  • This should not be "immediate" but we clearly need a transition to be started, regardless of the amount of oil there is left on earth.

Similar Ideas: