|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Do bicycles and cars mix?
Marc writes:
My toothbrush sits unused for more than 99% of the time as well. However, I think that is a good purchase, even if it is only used for a short time every day. The same goes with cars for most people as well. How much of your income does your toothbrush consume? How about your car? If the internet has taught me one thing it's how to recognize bad anologies. -- Jordan Bettis http://www.hafd.org/~jordanb Such as it is, the press has become the greatest power within the Western World, more powerful than the legislature, the executive and judiciary. One would like to ask: by whom has it been elected, and to whom is it responsible? -- Alexander Solzhenitsyn |
Ads |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Do bicycles and cars mix?
wrote in message hlink.net... 1% of transit riders get 17% of funds. Ha! Our California transportation fools are much more foolish than your fools. Our Northern California fools spend 75% of their funds on 3% transit riders. |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Do bicycles and cars mix?
Krist wrote:
I do think that it is possible to create a transit system that allows a large fraction of the population this type of choice. The place I live in proves that. Some places in the States. In some other places it might not be possible... But then, the role of transit is not te force people out of their car, the role ought to be to offer choice where offering choice makes sense. I totally agree. But "makes sense" is defined economically. If it takes taxpayer subsidies for transit to exist at all, offering it doesn't make sense. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Do bicycles and cars mix?
John David Galt wrote:
I totally agree. But "makes sense" is defined economically. If it takes taxpayer subsidies for transit to exist at all, offering it doesn't make sense. So we should close all the roads and highways? That's where most of the transportation-related tax money goes. Next we should close all the airports? That's where most of the rest of the transportation-related tax money goes. Once users of those modes all have to pay their own way, I think mass transit will be very competitive, and will no longer need subsidies. Metro in the median of I-66, for instance, can carry more people faster, more efficiently, while using less energy, in less space, more safely, while producing less pollution, more quietly, than the surrounding highway. And passengers can read or work, rather than giving their full attention to driving. Nor do they have a massive upfront capital cost, or the need to carry what amounts to an internal passport, or the need to find and pay for a parking space at both ends of every trip. Also, Metro can carry everyone. Millions of people are unable to drive cars for medical, financial, legal, age, or temperamental reasons. If you don't generate your own electricity, sew your own clothes, build your own house, or grow your own food, why should you drive your own vehicle? Specialization just makes sense. (Yes, I know what Heinlein said. It's good to be *able* to drive a car, swim, send morse code, survive in the wilderness, fly a plane, repair a CD player, etc, but unless that's your profession or a hobby you enjoy, why do it every day?) The only reason why cars are so common is because of distortions in the economy caused by various government policies, taxes, and subsidies. -- Keith F. Lynch - - http://keithlynch.net/ I always welcome replies to my e-mail, postings, and web pages, but unsolicited bulk e-mail (spam) is not acceptable. Please do not send me HTML, "rich text," or attachments, as all such email is discarded unread. |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Do bicycles and cars mix?
"Keith F. Lynch" wrote in message ... So we should close all the roads and highways? That's where most of the transportation-related tax money goes. Its also where the transportation taxes come from that more than pay for the roads and some of the transit. Next we should close all the airports? That's where most of the rest of the transportation-related tax money goes. Also where a lot of the taxes come from which are part of the price you pay for a ticket. Once users of those modes all have to pay their own way, I think mass transit will be very competitive, and will no longer need subsidies. Transit receives large subsidies and does not contribute much in taxes unlike road and airlines. You are not even in the ballpark of being correct Metro in the median of I-66, for instance, can carry more people faster, more efficiently, while using less energy, in less space, more safely, while producing less pollution, more quietly, than the surrounding highway. All theoretical but reality is far different and not very pretty for transit. The rest of your post is good for a laugh, but it mainly shows you are living in a fantasy world instead of reality. |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Do bicycles and cars mix?
On Sun, 10 Aug 2003, Krist wrote:
But then, the role of transit is not te force people out of their car, the role ought to be to offer choice where offering choice makes sense. YES! That's why politicians' and self-proclaimed environmentalists' determination to "get people out of their cars" is a bassackward way of addressing the issue. Lane restrictions, fuel taxes, and other punitive measures aimed at "getting people out of their cars" will never work as well as offering a true alternative that works. If they build it, I will come. DS |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Do bicycles and cars mix?
Dave Head wrote in message ... On Sun, 10 Aug 2003 12:11:47 GMT, wrote: Dave Head wrote in message .. . On 09 Aug 2003 17:40:05 -0500, Jordan Bettis wrote: writes: Nope, but I was just pointing out the economics. People complain that cabs are too terribly expensive, but they don't consider the fixed costs of the automobile if they use that automobile extremely infrequently. If they still prefer the car that's their choice but they can hardly say its because of money. People who post drivel like this are impractical people who do nothing around the house. Can you imagine going to Home Depot in a taxi? Home depot dosen't deliver large items? I'd go somewhere that does. Yes they do, but they do it on Tuesdays an Saturdays. You either have to take off work to meet the truck on Tuesday, or possibly put off a trip to something fun on Saturday, plus wait 'til Saturday. Its much more satisfying to have your 4' X 8' sheets of plywood on the roof of the Jeep the same night, with no waiting. Dave Head That was the problem with the old-fashioned urban delivery systems. Women would put on their white gloves, take the trolley downtown, and then have to be there on Tuesdays or Saturdays when delivery would take place. It assumed an upper class lifestyle where women stayed home all day or the maid took delivery for you. Plywood on the roof? Dangerous. I put it inside. Not inside a Jeep Cherokee, I think. Dave Head That is one reaerson why my wife and I compromised on a Suburban: big enough for plywood and not open to the elements, so the dogs can travel in comfort. Otherwise, a sedan and a pickup would have been in order, both 4-wheel drive, however, due to the remote location of the place we live 6 months a year. Very remote. |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Do bicycles and cars mix?
John David Galt wrote in message .. . Krist wrote: I do think that it is possible to create a transit system that allows a large fraction of the population this type of choice. The place I live in proves that. Some places in the States. In some other places it might not be possible... But then, the role of transit is not te force people out of their car, the role ought to be to offer choice where offering choice makes sense. I totally agree. But "makes sense" is defined economically. If it takes taxpayer subsidies for transit to exist at all, offering it doesn't make sense. Research Triangle Park in NC does not fit modern urban planning models. It was set up to be a PARK, with 18% of the land not covered in trees or ponds. It worked. But no one lives there. Planners say, "Redevelop it." Durham's long-range plan calls for 'compact' business development where people live. In short, in Durham RTP has been soundly repudiated by the planners, but a huge economic success. Why? People do not want to live in 1900 houses. So now we have buses to take people to RTP. They get back 11% of the costs in fares. Is that good economic sense? Planners say YES. The rest of us say NO. |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
Do bicycles and cars mix?
Marc wrote in message ... wrote: People who post drivel like this are impractical people who do nothing around the house. Can you imagine going to Home Depot in a taxi? Yes. I see people do it all the time. I have never seen a taxi at a Home Depot, and I got 3 times a week and for years on end. You cannot carry anything in a taxi. |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
Do bicycles and cars mix?
wrote in message thlink.net...
Mitch Haley wrote in message ... wrote: People who post drivel like this are impractical people who do nothing around the house. Can you imagine going to Home Depot in a taxi? People who post drivel like the above... Can you really justify a year's worth of truck payments to have it handy for a couple of trips to the home improvement store? Makes as much sense as paying $200 a sheet for plywood. On second thought, you ARE paying $200 a sheet for plywood. Mitch. People don't drive a truck only to Home Depot. The F150 is the most popular vehicle in the nation, and for good reasons. I have to hit home depot several times a week. And now that home updating is on the schedule, probaby every day. Sounds like you don't plan out your projects very well if you have to hit home depot every day. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Do bicycles and cars mix? | wafflyDIRTYcatLITTERhcsBOX | General | 62 | September 13th 03 03:24 AM |
why did moths change color? was Do bicycles and cars mix? | Dr Engelbert Buxbaum | Social Issues | 0 | July 18th 03 08:50 AM |