|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Do bicycles and cars mix?
Scott in Aztlan wrote in message ... On Fri, 08 Aug 2003 02:43:33 GMT, "Pete" wrote: All this merely points to a poor implementation of non-car transport. It *can* be done. The US public merely lacks the will or desire to do it. For a variety of reasons. Mainly, I think, because we don't *want* to. I fully understand why. I live approximately 3 miles from my office. It takes me less than 9 minutes door-to-door to drive there. If I take the bus, that trip becomes 45 minutes, primarily because the bus that comes closest to my house takes me 6 miles in the opposite direction before I can transfer to the bus that drops me off near my office. Alternatively, I can take a different bus and walk about a mile; this version of the trip takes about 30 minutes. I could also ride my bike, but there are no showers in my office building, and going through the workday reeking of sweat typically isn't the best career move. If these are our choices, we will NEVER pry people out of their cars. Those are the tradeoffs you get with public transit. |
Ads |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Do bicycles and cars mix?
"Daniel J. Stern" wrote in message ...
On 7 Aug 2003, Tanya Quinn wrote: I don't see how this is diminishing productivity. Its not so hard to plan your schedule around the transport schedule Irrelevant. In a free society, people justifiably demand the freedom to go exactly where they want, exactly *when* they want. Well I'd like to exactly where I want and when I want too, but I don't think that the car is the way to do it. By car, I can *leave* when I want to go *where* I want, but I don't necessarily get there *when* I want. At many times of day and many places automobile traffic is too congested to get people where they want to go when they want. If they choose to take public transit that has to compete on the same roadway space as the car, they aren't going to get where they want when the want either. But if for instance, one lane of a multi-lane road was physically only usable by transit, then people that want to get where they want faster could actually use it. People that wanted to have the comfort of their cars but didn't care about how fast could do that too. Problem is people that drive the cars whine too loudly about taking away some of the space that is now theirs to use for people that want to get places quickly by taking 50+ single occupancy vehicles and putting their occupants in one slightly larger vehicle. Most taxi trips are cheaper than that, and if as the OP says they only need to use a car about once a month its much cheaper to use the taxi than to pay maintenance, insurance etc on the car. (not to mention it is depreciating in your driveway) Fortunately, it's not your decision to make for anyone but yourself. 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. Is it so terrible to have to wait five minutes while reading a paper or book Yes! It's not the degree of the wait, its likelihood or its frequency -- it's putting oneself at the mercy of the vagaries of somebody else's schedule. It's the principle. I don't see how this is any different from having to wait in a traffic slowdown. If you live somewhere where your car trip is consistent in timing every time well good for you then but most places there is something called traffic. And that's the main problem with automobiles - while cars give you freedom to go where you want when you want, once too many people start enjoying the freedom, nobody goes anywhere at all, the steel boxes just crawl along like little ants. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Do bicycles and cars mix?
|
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Do bicycles and cars mix?
Tanya Quinn wrote in message om... "Daniel J. Stern" wrote in message ... On 7 Aug 2003, Tanya Quinn wrote: I don't see how this is diminishing productivity. Its not so hard to plan your schedule around the transport schedule Irrelevant. In a free society, people justifiably demand the freedom to go exactly where they want, exactly *when* they want. Well I'd like to exactly where I want and when I want too, but I don't think that the car is the way to do it. By car, I can *leave* when I want to go *where* I want, but I don't necessarily get there *when* I want. At many times of day and many places automobile traffic is too congested to get people where they want to go when they want. If they choose to take public transit that has to compete on the same roadway space as the car, they aren't going to get where they want when the want either. But if for instance, one lane of a multi-lane road was physically only usable by transit, then people that want to get where they want faster could actually use it. People that wanted to have the comfort of their cars but didn't care about how fast could do that too. Problem is people that drive the cars whine too loudly about taking away some of the space that is now theirs to use for people that want to get places quickly by taking 50+ single occupancy vehicles and putting their occupants in one slightly larger vehicle. Most taxi trips are cheaper than that, and if as the OP says they only need to use a car about once a month its much cheaper to use the taxi than to pay maintenance, insurance etc on the car. (not to mention it is depreciating in your driveway) Fortunately, it's not your decision to make for anyone but yourself. 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? |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Do bicycles and cars mix?
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. -- Jordan Bettis http://www.hafd.org/~jordanb The truth is more important than the facts. -- Frank Loyd Wright |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Do bicycles and cars mix?
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. At least in our area they provide delivery services and also offer trucks for rent. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Do bicycles and cars mix?
|
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Do bicycles and cars mix?
"Tanya Quinn" wrote in message om... Problem is people that drive the cars whine too loudly about taking away some of the space that is now theirs to use for people that want to get places quickly by taking 50+ single occupancy vehicles and putting their occupants in one slightly larger vehicle. How often do 50+ people want to start at one place and go to same place. The answer is very very seldom. If you are going to pick them up and let the off along the way then the trip takes about four times as long. Where time is expensive, that is obviously a non-solution. 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. My experience is that a cab tends to run about $1.50 to $2.00 per mile (including tip) compared to about 35 cents per mile for a car. You typically have to wait about 30 minutes for a cab to arrive which is about $18 for a typical income of $75K per year where I live. So the people are making a wise economic decision using a car and a terrible decision to use a cab except for a few circumstances. Why is there a fixed cost for a car. If you use a car less, it cost less per year. Since most people these days drive a car until it is worn out, the cost is mainly a function of mileage (including insurance). There are some time fixed cost, but a large part is mileage based. And that's the main problem with automobiles - while cars give you freedom to go where you want when you want, once too many people start enjoying the freedom, nobody goes anywhere at all, the steel boxes just crawl along like little ants. Crawl along like little ants every where, every time? That is nonsense for most places. There are obviously traffic jams, but people still use cars because they are still faster than transit. A large part of the congestion is caused by excessive spending on transit and gross under spending on roads. For example in Silicon Valley the amount of money to get 1K people out of their cars into transit is running at about the same as the money it would take to add capacity for an additional 100K people. Obviously the more you spend to try to get people out of cars into transit, the more congestion you are going to produce. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Do bicycles and cars mix?
On Sat, 9 Aug 2003, Mitch Haley wrote:
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? You're still barking up the wrong tree, here, Mitch. It doesn't make a particle of difference if the expenditure wouldn't pass even the laxest cost-benefit analysis. Y'see, in a free society, no individual has to "justify" his purchases and expenditures to anyone but himself, 'cept maybe his spouse. DS |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Do bicycles and cars mix?
|
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 |