Reckless, Aggressive Drivers: Homegrown Terrorists

On Mar 19, 11:55*pm, "Amy Blankenship"
wrote:
"George Conklin" wrote in message

...



And trains aren't an upper class subsidy anymore than cars are an
upper
class subsidy. *They're both simply subsidies.

* Commuter trains in NYC are to to haul the rich to the city.

Easy: *transit is not trains.

OK, now you can admit it. *You're nuts ;-)

CHANGING TOPICS:

George, I know that you think all published studies are sancrosanct
and that no one can dispute the Bureau of the Census, so hold onto
your armchair -- your world may stop spinning.

The director fo the Regioal Institute at the University at Buffalo (a
real college) says the Census' population estimates might be wrongs.
gulp

http://www.buffalonews.com/home/story/303541.html

Oh, and she mentioned how they were wrong in the past, too. Real
proof !!! Oh, no, what to do... what to do...

"Bolwerk" wrote in message
...
Amy Blankenship wrote:
"Bolwerk" wrote in message
...

So...my response had nothing to do with you. I thought Martin would be
interested. There's no need for you to be a dick about that.

Cite?

:-)

Are you serious? I'll probably have to do some digging for a good one,
though a cursory Google search will tell you what I said. The NY Times
ran some photos last year, or maybe even early this year. I didn't save
the article, but it's probably online. If you're serious, I'll look in
the early afternoon.

Ni, a cite of whether or not it is necessary for George to be a dick LOL...

Pat wrote:
On Mar 19, 10:53 am, Martin Edwards wrote:
Clark F Morris wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 16:10:24 GMT, Martin Edwards
wrote:
george conklin wrote:
"Martin Edwards" wrote in message
.uk...
Bolwerk wrote:
Pat wrote:
On Mar 15, 12:13 pm, Bolwerk wrote:
Eric Vey wrote:
george conklin wrote:
"Eric Vey" wrote in message
...
We don't have white flight here much anymore. In fact, the black
sections of town are being "redeveloped" (gentrified) and the blacks
are moving where? To the suburbs. Whole subdivisions have gone from
white to black and latino.
Those so-called redevelopment areas are very, very heavily
subsidized directly by government in order to move people with better
incomes into the city and the poor out to the suburbs, a national
trend. It is called the revanchist city, in a book by that name.
This is not New York. They don't subsidize many developments around
here
directly. They did do some street improvements and new sewers since
the
old ones were worn out.
That's not really common practice in New York either, although
public-private efforts are.
Yeah, NY subsidizes upscale highrises in NYC for rich folks. Go
figure.
Not directly, although it does provide tax breaks to them at times. NYC
actually directly subsidizes lower income housing (too much, or at least
inefficiently, IMHO).
I haven't been there, but I have an impression of NYC mainly from cop
shows. I get the feeling that, if there weren't such things as rent
control, there would be a lot of jobs that could not be filled because the
potential workers could not afford to live there.
You mean you cannot afford $3,500 a month (plus utilities) for an
efficiency apartment? Come on now......
I have bought my house here in Birmingham. Ain't got (a heap of) money,
oh but honey, ain't I got fun.
I assume you are talking about Birmingham, England. I believe it is
the second largest city in England with over 1 million population, a
good commuter rail network, massive intercity rail and a light rail
line or two.
Just so. I pay just over £200 for three months unlimited use of *all*
carriers in the conurbation. That includes the portion of the
London-Glasgow inter city line between Wolverhampton, Birmingham and
Coventry. Who's going to drive that lousy freeway? (Ans.: the deeply
indoctrinated).


Well of course everyone rides trains where you live. It's unsafe to
drive because you-all drive on the wrong side of the road. Duh.

We sold it to the Japanese: that must be a first.

--
Corporate society looks after everything. All it asks of anyone, all it
has ever asked of anyone, is that they do not interfere with management
decisions. -From “Rollerball”

Bolwerk wrote:
Amy Blankenship wrote:
"George Conklin" wrote in message
...
"Bolwerk" wrote in message
...
George Conklin wrote:
But you must know that most jobs were NOT in the city,
but in areas surrounding the city. Yes, many took the train in....a
nice
upper class subsidy for most, since trains lose money. But if you
rich
enough to afford a trip back to Westport in the New Haven's bar
car, you
were not suffering for a second car, except by choice.
I don't know what it was like then, but there were and still are many
millions of jobs in the city.
Irrelevant to the total transportation mix where 85% of the trips are
suburb to surburb. Jobs today are located in many places, not just
downtown.


And trains aren't an upper class subsidy anymore than cars are an upper
class subsidy. They're both simply subsidies.
Commuter trains in NYC are to to haul the rich to the city.

And we certainly wouldn't want the rich to abandon their Hummers.

I find it completely hilarious that you variously claim that transit
can only work if people are desperately poor (so we shouldn't have it)
AND that transit is only used by the very rich (so we shouldn't have
it). Keep it up :-). You've made me smile today.

It shouldn't surprise you. Lack of rhetorical focus is a common trait
of ideologues and authoritarians. Jack May is even worse about it;
notice how he can, in one trolling session, reject statistics because
they're government-collected and support them because the government
finds them trustworthy.

The Bush administration is a pertinent example: leading up to the war in
Iraq, they portrayed the United States army as untouchable, insisting
that Saddam's puny military was no threat. The U.S. didn't really have
any threats because we're so big and powerful. Yet, Saddam Hussein was
such a threat we had to invade. Then, various reasons for invading were
offered, depending on the prevailing coniditions. First there was WMD,
but those were never shown to exist, so we moved to Iraq supporting
al-Queda/other unnamed terrorists, and then there was the whole idea
that we were removing a nasty dictator (as if no one worse existed
elsewhere, or would fill the vacuum left by Saddam). Sometimes there
was the altruistic excuse: we're helping a poor, oppressed people! Then
after Saddam's fall, terrorists actually started showing up because of
the power vacuum - indeed, Sadddam apparently prevented terrorism! Oh
****! New justification: what is it now? Democracy again?

As a secular dictator, he provided women with more equality than in any
other Arabic-speaking country except Tunisia, and the religious nuts
could do nothing about it.

--
Corporate society looks after everything. All it asks of anyone, all it
has ever asked of anyone, is that they do not interfere with management
decisions. -From “Rollerball”

Bolwerk wrote:
George Conklin wrote:
"Bolwerk" wrote in message
...
Martin Edwards wrote:
vey wrote:
George Conklin wrote:
"vey" wrote in message
...
George Conklin wrote:
"Bolwerk" wrote in message
...
george conklin wrote:
"Bolwerk" wrote in message
...
george conklin wrote:
"Clark F Morris" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 07:51:57 -0400, "george conklin"
wrote:

"vey" wrote in message
...
george conklin wrote:

The city does some but the state does more. Go look at
the NYS
HFA
80/20 program. It's major subsidies for upscale housing.
This is pretty much the national pattern too.
Sure it is. Alabama is a real hotbed for urban renewal.
Texas,
too.
LOL!

You don't know anything about demographic patterns. My
comment
was
based on a conference on this issue with members of the
census who
were
reporting on on-going work in their office on this issue.
The
new
findings
show that a national pattern to replace people in city cores
with
those
of
higher income is a national pattern. In fact, using taxpayer
dollars
to do
this has been the result of the Hope VI projects for many
years
now.
Cities are joining the suburbs in moving out the poor.
While I
don't
always agree with George, the move to upgrade the economic mix
is
alive and well in most jurisdictions.
The census shows that cities have moved the poor to the
suburbs,
according to the analysis by Brookings.
Sounds like cities are getting their comeuppance, if that's
true.
Suburbs
were designed to take the middle class from cities, and
initially
made
no
accommodation for the poor.
Staring in 1900, city density overall began to decline as the
rural
population moved to cities and they expanded using "modern"
(mechanical)
means of transport. The invention of the railroad and trolley
were
NOT
plots designed to lure the middle class from the cities. Your
paranoid
leanings should give you a visit to a physician for medication.
First of all, yeah, they kind of were designed to lure the middle
class
from tenements (who said anything about plotting?). Second of
all,
I
was referring to modern suburbanization with residential only
subdivisions, not early 20th century "suburbanization," which I
guess
you want to conflate with postwar subdivisions.

The postwar suburbs were less upper class, since transportation
became
cheaper. The APA loves upper class suburbs, but hated it when
Levittown
came along with affordable housing. This is all outlined
nicely in
Gan's
book "The Levittowners," and nothing has changed since, using you
as an
example.







And I guess you didn't know that many Levittowners rode the train
into
the city?

"Most families in the early days only had one car.
The wives that drove their husbands to the train station and got to
keep
the car all day were highly prized friends."

And that quote comes from where?


http://www.freeenterpriseland.com/BOOK/LITTLEBOXES.html
As the houses only had two bedrooms and no garage, what is the market
for them now?
Levittown in particular? They apparently only have a few of those
houses still in its original condition. Most have been heavily modified.

Yes, people took out the metal kitchen cabinets, so?

Or placed extensive additions onto the house, to the point where very
few are recognizable in their original form (I believe one of the
originals is an office for whatever authority manages the subdivision).

So...my response had nothing to do with you. I thought Martin would be
interested. There's no need for you to be a dick about that.

Thanks for the update.

--
Corporate society looks after everything. All it asks of anyone, all it
has ever asked of anyone, is that they do not interfere with management
decisions. -From “Rollerball”

Amy Blankenship wrote:
"Bolwerk" wrote in message
...

So...my response had nothing to do with you. I thought Martin would be
interested. There's no need for you to be a dick about that.

Cite?

:-)


Goerge being a dick? How many would you like?

--
Corporate society looks after everything. All it asks of anyone, all it
has ever asked of anyone, is that they do not interfere with management
decisions. -From “Rollerball”

Pat wrote:
On Mar 19, 11:55 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
wrote:
"George Conklin" wrote in message

...



And trains aren't an upper class subsidy anymore than cars are an
upper
class subsidy. They're both simply subsidies.
Commuter trains in NYC are to to haul the rich to the city.
Easy: transit is not trains.
OK, now you can admit it. You're nuts ;-)

CHANGING TOPICS:

George, I know that you think all published studies are sancrosanct
and that no one can dispute the Bureau of the Census, so hold onto
your armchair -- your world may stop spinning.

The director fo the Regioal Institute at the University at Buffalo (a
real college) says the Census' population estimates might be wrongs.
gulp

http://www.buffalonews.com/home/story/303541.html

Oh, and she mentioned how they were wrong in the past, too. Real
proof !!! Oh, no, what to do... what to do...

Of course the estimates are going to be at least a little inaccurate.
They're...estimates. The decennial count will be more accurate.

Nevertheless, they probably show trends fairly accurately.

Besides, have you ever seen Conklin use the census in a way that
supports his poopoo?

"Bolwerk" wrote in message
...
Pat wrote:
http://www.buffalonews.com/home/story/303541.html

Oh, and she mentioned how they were wrong in the past, too. Real
proof !!! Oh, no, what to do... what to do...

Of course the estimates are going to be at least a little inaccurate.
They're...estimates. The decennial count will be more accurate.

Nevertheless, they probably show trends fairly accurately.

Besides, have you ever seen Conklin use the census in a way that supports
his poopoo?

Dutch toilets have a little shelf that will, in fact, support anyone's
poopoo.

True story.

:-)

Amy Blankenship wrote:
"Bolwerk" wrote in message
...
Amy Blankenship wrote:
"Bolwerk" wrote in message
...

So...my response had nothing to do with you. I thought Martin would be
interested. There's no need for you to be a dick about that.
Cite?

:-)
Are you serious? I'll probably have to do some digging for a good one,
though a cursory Google search will tell you what I said. The NY Times
ran some photos last year, or maybe even early this year. I didn't save
the article, but it's probably online. If you're serious, I'll look in
the early afternoon.

Ni, a cite of whether or not it is necessary for George to be a dick LOL...

George will have to be your cite. I don't reckon it's ever necessary
for him to be a dick, but he really almost always is one in his posts.

"Pat" wrote in message
...
On Mar 19, 11:55 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
wrote:
"George Conklin" wrote in message

...



And trains aren't an upper class subsidy anymore than cars are an
upper
class subsidy. They're both simply subsidies.

Commuter trains in NYC are to to haul the rich to the city.

Easy: transit is not trains.

OK, now you can admit it. You're nuts ;-)

CHANGING TOPICS:

George, I know that you think all published studies are sancrosanct
and that no one can dispute the Bureau of the Census, so hold onto
your armchair -- your world may stop spinning.

The director fo the Regioal Institute at the University at Buffalo (a
real college) says the Census' population estimates might be wrongs.
gulp

http://www.buffalonews.com/home/story/303541.html

Oh, and she mentioned how they were wrong in the past, too. Real
proof !!! Oh, no, what to do... what to do...

Cities in decline often beat up on the census because otherwise they have
to admit failure.