Austria is not applying Schengen in some of its borders currently, therefore should not have the right of veto. Instead it should be questioned if Austria should be allowed to continue in Schengen considering that it’s the number 1 country closing Schengen borders on a regular basis.
Sorry about your dog. But your example only highlights a tabu issue in these discussions, the negative impact that having a pet has. They consume meat, packaged food, are driven around, attack wild fauna (cats especially) etc. Pets is one of the items everyone should cut, but they’re only becoming more common, like SUVs.
The person under an abusive situation easily loses the car key to the abuser.
Ambulances get stuck all the time in congestioned cities and that’s a problem.
A car should never be someone’s night shelter, that person is homeless in that case. Houses, not cars, can solve the problem.
Want to do a special trip where car is the most convenient option? You can rent one out. If you only use a car a few times a year, buying one is a terrible waste of money and street space.
As far as I know these anti-theft measures they demand are optional in Europe and you pay extra for them. If crime is low is not such an issue not having them. So maybe Chicago should bet on reducing crime instead?
The retirees don’t last so long (sorry), but overtourism is indeed a problem. Finding the right balance is the secret but clearly our politicians are not aiming for that… but in fairness, tourism was fantastic for many years to promote Porto’s renewal. But now it’s time to put a break on it but no one is interested in that :/
As an European I’m extremely confused by this news as well… so Chicago has a high crime problem and the city’s solution is to sue Asian carmakers? Sorry but this only makes sense in the US, I guess…
PS: maybe Hyundai should also sue Chicago city for failing to curb crime, a failure that leads to many car thefts?