What American Cities are Missing: Bikes by the Thousands

"Bolwerk" wrote in message
...

In the U.S., places like Compton don't have poverty? Detroit? The Bronx?

Do they? Don't mistake dysfunction for poverty.

"George Conklin" wrote:

"Scott M. Kozel" wrote
"George Conklin" wrote:
"Bolwerk" wrote
George Conklin wrote:

I suggest you understand the demography of poverty these days, which you
obviously do not.

Here is an article by the President of the Southern Sociological Society:

http://www.ncsociology.org/sociationtoday/v42/wim.htm

Read it and stop blessing your own stupidity.

I don't see any reason to open that URL.

Naturally. You bask in ignorance and stupidity.

He can't help it... it's chronic.

Agreed. He should open the URL and look at the real facts. Ron gave a
presentation of several hours with even more current data in April in
Atlanta. He had cartograms of USA counties which were amazing. They will
be in Social Forces in a few months.

Bolshevik is not interested in facts...
he wants to maintain his preconceived notions.

Joe the Aroma wrote:
"Bolwerk" wrote in message
...

In the U.S., places like Compton don't have poverty? Detroit? The Bronx?

Do they? Don't mistake dysfunction for poverty.

Rural poverty doesn't include "dysfunction"?

"Free Lunch" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 28 May 2007 16:20:05 GMT, in misc.transport.urban-transit
"George Conklin" wrote in
.net:

"Free Lunch" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 28 May 2007 15:45:56 GMT, in misc.transport.urban-transit
"George Conklin" wrote in
k.net:

"Free Lunch" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 28 May 2007 11:18:36 -0400, in misc.transport.urban-transit
Bolwerk wrote in
:
George Conklin wrote:
...
Poverty today is concentrated in rural areas. Cities have driven
the price
of food down, down, down.

In the U.S., places like Compton don't have poverty? Detroit? The
Bronx?

George has hobbyhorses, he rides them wherever he can.

I just know demographic facts, unlike the ignorant like you.

And you selectively simplify them to the point that they are no longer
accurate.

You are wrong again. You need to use some of the international data
sources
which are out there. But, for the United States, poverty is now
concentrated
in rural areas, and there are more poor people in the suburbs than in the
city. You are the one with old data.

Since when do you get to redefine suburban as rural?

Only you do that.

"Bolwerk" wrote in message
...
George Conklin wrote:
"Scott M. Kozel" wrote in message
...
"George Conklin" wrote:
"Bolwerk" wrote
George Conklin wrote:

I suggest you understand the demography of poverty these days, which
you
obviously do not.

Here is an article by the President of the Southern Sociological
Society:
http://www.ncsociology.org/sociationtoday/v42/wim.htm

Read it and stop blessing your own stupidity.
I don't see any reason to open that URL.
Naturally. You bask in ignorance and stupidity.
He can't help it... it's chronic.

Failing to follow your red herring isn't "ignorance and stupidity."
Maybe I have better ways to spend my time.


You always find ignorance a good way to spend you time.

"Scott M. Kozel" wrote in message
...
"George Conklin" wrote:

"Scott M. Kozel" wrote
"George Conklin" wrote:
"Bolwerk" wrote
George Conklin wrote:

I suggest you understand the demography of poverty these days,
which you
obviously do not.

Here is an article by the President of the Southern Sociological
Society:

http://www.ncsociology.org/sociationtoday/v42/wim.htm

Read it and stop blessing your own stupidity.

I don't see any reason to open that URL.

Naturally. You bask in ignorance and stupidity.

He can't help it... it's chronic.

Agreed. He should open the URL and look at the real facts. Ron gave a
presentation of several hours with even more current data in April in
Atlanta. He had cartograms of USA counties which were amazing. They
will
be in Social Forces in a few months.

Bolshevik is not interested in facts...
he wants to maintain his preconceived notions.

He finds ignorance comforting.

"Bolwerk" wrote in message
...
Amy Blankenship wrote:
"George Conklin" wrote in message
link.net...
Pushing the labor laws back to those of the third world is not a
viable
goal. Such work is abusive, and if you pull the pedicab yourself, then
you
are abusing yourself.

I guess any work that involves physical exertion is "abusive." Like,
say, construction, carpentry...um, farming?

George believes that everyone in the US should be free...
to do things George approves of.

I'm starting to wonder if George knows what George approves of.

Pushing third world abuses into the USA is no victory for anyone but this
fool.

"George Conklin" wrote in message
hlink.net...

"Bolwerk" wrote in message
...
Amy Blankenship wrote:
"George Conklin" wrote in message
link.net...
Pushing the labor laws back to those of the third world is not a
viable
goal. Such work is abusive, and if you pull the pedicab yourself,
then
you
are abusing yourself.

I guess any work that involves physical exertion is "abusive." Like,
say, construction, carpentry...um, farming?

George believes that everyone in the US should be free...
to do things George approves of.

I'm starting to wonder if George knows what George approves of.

Pushing third world abuses into the USA is no victory for anyone but this
fool.

You have failed to convince anyone (except maybe your alter ego, Scott) that
bicycle taxis are abusive as practiced in the US. Your line of logic seems
to be something like this:

Rhubarb leaves are often red, and can be poisonous.
Tomatoes are often red, and are always poisonous.

Do you not see the flaw in this kind of "logic"?

-Amy

On Fri, 25 May 2007 13:16:20 -0700, (Tom Keats)
wrote:

In article ,
Nobody writes:

It simply is not practicable (note the use of adjective), either by
wish or function.

It is for me, and for many others.


Yeah, but what youse who like this "challenge" in transportation don't
seem to appreciate, you're not even in the slightest minority.

We have enough presence to show up in modal share statistics
for numerous North American cities.

I lke to go biking for exercise, enjoyment...but for basic
transportation to and from my place of employment 10 km away? Go jump
in the closest pond.

10 km might be a bit much for a beginning rider.
But it doesn't take long to be able to easily
and routinely ride that distance, and even further.

It just does not make sense for most of us. As I say, it is not
"practicable". (And that's different than beng practical.)

Who exactly /is/ "most of us"?

And why are you so vehement about discouraging people
from cycle-commuting by denying its practice-ability?

Bloody hell, what you're suggesting is a situation of "enthusiasts"
dictating what they believe the rest of humanity should be doing.

I'm not discouraging anybody from doing anything.

So, regardless of distance, let's say, I can (i.e. "am able to") ride
a bicycle to work. Um, urban size dictates that is gonna be a
time-consuming, and in weather-challenging conditions, rather
unpleasant.

I, as a fine, upstanding citizen, might grind my butt away.. and be
very happy with that.

But a helluva lot of others won't be. YOU quantify that proportion,
be it 95 or 75 or 50 or 25%! Given the paucity of two-wheelers versus
even puiblic transit vehicles, I think you'll discover the percentage
of negatives will be way closer to the High Mark than lower.

Of course, your next suggestion might be that I move my home location
to be closer to my ultimate destination.

Sure... I move... and then I negotiate a more beneficial employment
contract elsewhere. So I have to move? And probably have to SELL
then re-buy? Simply to satisfy the quirks of the Huff-And-Puff crowd?

Give us all a break

-
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free Software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Bolwerk" wrote in message
...

That there's disproportionate poverty in rural areas is well known, and
nobody is denying it, near as I can tell. The point was that George
blames urban areas for failings of rural economies. Many of these
failings go back generations.

And then when richer people move to the rural area and buy up the property,
George complains again - railing about "horse farms". In short, all George
has to offer is jealousy and NO solutions.