Reckless, Aggressive Drivers: Homegrown Terrorists

On Feb 27, 7:07*pm, "Jack May" wrote:
wrote in message

...

In article , "Jack May"
wrote:

Your comments only apply to North America, where transit systems are
designed to be failures by consultants who drive everywhere.

In the rest of the world, transit systems have been developed that are
competitive with driving, and therefore render these expensive highway
systems unnecessary in the first place.

What the hell are you talking about. * In Europe cars are almost 90% *of the
travel and transit is only a little over 10%. *What you are saying is
totally nuts.

As you look at poorer countries, the amount of transit or motorcycles goes
up, but car usage goes up as individual income goes up. * In the very
poorest countries they can't even afford transit and people walk for most
things which of course keeps them poor.


If you were right, Miami (or any major American city) would be a car
paradise, and Curitiba, Brazil, would be a total failure. Well, I got
news for you: Miami is a traffic jungle and Curitiba is a model city.

I guess you were joking, right?

Sustainability in the Big City: What Chicago can learn from Curitiba
Carmen Vidal-Hallett and Mark Hallett

What would a city planned by architects look like?

Imagine a city where plum public projects go to leading architects,
resulting in stunning modern work. Where older buildings are protected
by law but incentives are also in place to encourage development too.
Old theatres, factories and even old train stations are renovated to
become popular shopping malls. Municipal buildings such as public
schools and even luxury hotels optimize the use of natural resources
by maximizing natural light and utilizing all kinds of simple methods
of energy conservation.

Sound nice?

But there's mo

Imagine a public transit system so efficient that when you go to work
in the morning you can jump on modern buses that go by every 30
seconds, speeding along commercial, high density streets in exclusive
central lanes, stopping at futuristic tubular mini-stations.

Imagine a city where you can ride your bike for over 100 km of routes
through native forests. Through dedicated parks with cultural elements
from both native and European immigrant cultures, past restored
waterways, listening to birds along the way.

Imagine that nearly everyone is careful about separating their trash
into different recycling bins. Children learn about the environment in
school and become enforcers on the domestic front. And the poor can
can exchange recyclable garbage for organic produce from local farms.

Well, the city exists. And it has done all of the above, largely
turning around an unremarkable urban history to become a leading
innovator in planning over the past 35 years. And it has done so while
facing astronomical population growth, primarily an influx of rural
poor.

The city is Curitiba, Brazil. And architects have played a significant
role there since the late 1960's: recent Mayors include several
architects, and the city's department of planning employs hundreds of
architects. In fact, when you talk with planners in Curitiba, more
often than not they'll pull out pad and paper and begin to sketch what
they're discussing.

http://www.aia.org/nacq_a_051013_outside_vidalhallet

"Jack May" wrote in message
. ..

"Amy Blankenship" wrote in message
. ..

"Jack May" wrote in message
. ..

"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
Jack May wrote:
"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
Jack May wrote:
"donquijote1954" wrote in message
...
On Feb 21, 12:57 am, Miles Bader wrote:
Tom Sherman writes:
In Jack's Utopia new tecknologies won't pollute and big SUVs won't

Nonsense. Now Jack May is just making things up.

I gave the statistics URL only a few weeks ago but since you only want
to lie, you are not worth my time to find it again.

You did, but you seem to have conveniently forgotten how thoroughly you
were debunked by the other participants in the thread.

I did not have time to deal with the thread but when I checked I saw the
exact same stupidity that is always apparent from bike and transit
fanatics.

Yeah, like logic ;-)

"Jack May" wrote in message
...

"Eric Vey" wrote in message
...
Jack May wrote:

What law? Why would we need such "stupid, stupid laws" if the market
"cleaned up" things on it's own?

I said absolutely nothing like that.

Oh, yeah. Car manufacturers took it upon themselves to clean up the
environment. They didn't need the government to push them, did they?

That is exactly what the data shows. Probably what happened is that with
present design software it is cost effective to design for low pollution.
With good software, maybe there is no payoff to design for higher
pollution.

You are a total loser wanting to claim conspiracy everywhere, but there is
some data at:

http://www.highways.org/Mar06-speake...chwartz.ppt#15

It is well known that the cheapest way to reduce pollution is to get
people to replace their cars with newer cars.

That may be true from government's perspective. But then that's why private
cars are attractive to governments anyway...they shift the investment from
the public sector to the private sector. If every individual has to buy a
car rather than pooling their money to buy a bus, then no money comes out of
the pool to buy vehicles, but the total cost to everyone is higher.

Amy Blankenship wrote:
"Jack May" wrote in message
. ..
"Amy Blankenship" wrote in message
. ..
"Jack May" wrote in message
. ..
"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
Jack May wrote:
"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
...
Jack May wrote:
"donquijote1954" wrote in message
...
On Feb 21, 12:57 am, Miles Bader wrote:
Tom Sherman writes:
In Jack's Utopia new tecknologies won't pollute and big SUVs won't
Nonsense. Now Jack May is just making things up.
I gave the statistics URL only a few weeks ago but since you only want
to lie, you are not worth my time to find it again.
You did, but you seem to have conveniently forgotten how thoroughly you
were debunked by the other participants in the thread.
I did not have time to deal with the thread but when I checked I saw the
exact same stupidity that is always apparent from bike and transit
fanatics.

Yeah, like logic ;-)

Stop distracting Jack with facts.

Martin Edwards wrote:
Bolwerk wrote:
Jack May wrote:
"Bolwerk" wrote in message
...
Miles Bader wrote:
Tom Sherman writes:
Pat who? wrote:
Bike riders complaining about car drivers is also particulary
hypocritical.[...]
That statement makes no sense at all.
Very little of what Pat has said on this thread has made any sense...
Pat is Conklin Lite. More intellectually honest perhaps, but still
has a kneejerk dislike for cities. Which makes you wonder why he
trolls transit and urban planning groups.

Gee since most people now live in the suburbs, I guess most people
don't like large cities either.

So what? I don't really care what most people like. I just find it
odd that trolls feel the need to come in here and berate people who
aren't even harming anyone.

As I have asked before, why are they here? There are plenty of carhead
groups.

I understand the carhead thing. They're probably just brainwashed by
advertising or ideology. Jack is a particularly extreme example of
both, probably.

But why are the anti-city trolls here? This is being posted to an URBAN
planning group and to an URBAN transit group. I see no reason for Pat
and Conklin to even take an interest.

Some interesting facts for those Americans who love the environment as
well as hate terrorism...

"If Americans were to use public transportation at equivalent rates as
Europeans, scientists estimate that U.S. dependence on imported oil
would decrease by more than 40% and that carbon dioxide emissions
would be reduced by more than 25%."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_transportation

Of course, there's a T-shirt for you...

http://www.zazzle.com/i_love_shirt-235077560498164886

"Eric Vey" wrote in message
...
Jack May wrote:
In Europe cars are almost 90% of the
travel

Prove it.

Data sources going back 20 years show the same intercity patterns.

wrote in message
...
In article , "Jack May"
wrote:

wrote in message
...
In article , "Jack May"
wrote:

Your comments only apply to North America, where transit systems are
designed to be failures by consultants who drive everywhere.

In the rest of the world, transit systems have been developed that are
competitive with driving, and therefore render these expensive highway
systems unnecessary in the first place.

What the hell are you talking about. In Europe cars are almost 90% of
the
travel and transit is only a little over 10%. What you are saying is
totally nuts.


You have made this comment many times before and have been proven wrong.

Now you are back to your "I've proven you wrong" rant, when your only
evidence is your pathetic comments you know are fake from the start. Then
you state everyone but you misquotes sources and so forth and so on.

On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 21:07:09 -0800, in misc.transport.urban-transit
"Jack May" wrote in
:

"Free Lunch" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 17:20:38 -0800, in misc.transport.urban-transit
"Jack May" wrote in
:

wrote in message
...
In article , "Jack May"
wrote:

"Miles Bader" wrote in message
...

Of course private companies spend almost nothing on science.

Most of their money is probably spent on technology to solve problems to get
solutions to markets. Science research seldom gets results to users.
Companies do often develop technology that is way ahead of University
research.

Technology never gets ahead of science.

I don't think you understand how the future is invented. Extremely good
research work is often done in companies.

Technology is applying science. The research is first done by
scientists. Once we had Watson Labs and Bell Labs doing real science in
the private sector, but almost all technology now relies on publicly
funded researth, generally in universities, for breakthroughs.

Eric Vey writes:

Bill Z. wrote:
Eric Vey writes:

Jack May wrote:
Are you totally blind ???? Bikes run red lights and stop signs so
often that it is the number one complaint of drivers when the
subject comes up

I must be blind. I've never seen even one. I have heard the
complaints, too, but I have never seen one.
You can't be serious. Try visiting the Bay Area, particular San
Francisco or any place with a large university. You'll see bicyclists
running stop signs and red lights all the time. Of course, you'll see
drivers doing the same thing.


No, I am serious. We don't have bicycle couriers here and I have never
seen a Critical Mass except on You-Tube.

You must not have universities either. While walking across the street
today, some college age guy on a bike cut me off as he ran a stop
sign. I had the right of way as a pedestrian in a crosswalk. Once,
while about to cross an arterial after the light had changed, some
teenager riding a bike too fast for conditions shot off the sidewalk,
running a red light, and I had to try a maximum performance stop to
avoid a collision even though I was barely moving.


I personally know two people that were driving and were "T-boned" by a
red light running cars. One died. I don't know any bicycle rider that
was killed running a light. I suppose if I surfed the 'net long
enough, I could find one, but most people on bicycles get killed here
while riding the wrong way on the sidewalk on their way to or from
work.

Oh, it happens.

This is why I keep telling you not to extend your view of NoCal to the
rest of the country. The laws are different and people are different.

Rather, you are simply a loon. I might add that, being near a major
uiversity (Stanford) with students from all over the U.S., the sample
of college-age bicyclists (ones using bicycles for transportation) are
pretty much representative of the U.S. as a whole. Trying to pass it
of as "NoCal" is incredibly stupid of you.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB