cycling in Los Angeles and cycling in Melbourne

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 23:24:03 GMT, "John Doe"
wrote:

: its always this battler thing that people go on about with this-if these
: cars are
: well tuned it makes a huge difference-just because someone is poor doesn't
: give them the right to pollute the environment and make life crap for
: cyclists-

I don't see what cyclists have to do with it. Pollution makes life crap for
everyone - cyclists, motorists pedetrians alike. That said. You have to be
socially responsible. Sometimes ideas look good on the surface but making
cars only available to the rich just reinforces the poverty cycle.
You cannot blame one part of the population for this. If we had a cheap,
reliable, and convenient public transport system then yes... take the cars
off those that cannot afford to have them maintained. Unfortunately it
seems that buses and trains don't win votes... sadly roads do.

That's a bit of a furphy - especially given recent publicity about the
fact that people care more about public transport than they do about
child abuse..

--
http://www.news.com.au/common/story_...5E1702,00.html
The community rates child abuse really low, it rates it after problems
with public transport and council rates.
--

Problem is that pollies need to manage a project closely and get it
right from the start for a PT project to win votes. It requires
effort. Meanwhile, there are enough brains around the roads
department to build successful freeways and tollways without said
politician having to make much effort.

Oh, one other thing - pollies may not feel like making an effort to
improve PT, but any talk about cutting services is a political, well,
to borrow from YM, a bed of nails. One vote gained, ten lost. Just
look at the debacle that Costa is stirring up in NSW with his idiotic
suggestions. It's a shame that the election is 3 1/2 years off.


PC

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 23:24:03 GMT, "John Doe"
wrote:

: its always this battler thing that people go on about with this-if these
: cars are
: well tuned it makes a huge difference-just because someone is poor doesn't
: give them the right to pollute the environment and make life crap for
: cyclists-

I don't see what cyclists have to do with it. Pollution makes life crap for
everyone - cyclists, motorists pedetrians alike. That said. You have to be
socially responsible. Sometimes ideas look good on the surface but making
cars only available to the rich just reinforces the poverty cycle.
You cannot blame one part of the population for this. If we had a cheap,
reliable, and convenient public transport system then yes... take the cars
off those that cannot afford to have them maintained. Unfortunately it
seems that buses and trains don't win votes... sadly roads do.

That's a bit of a furphy - especially given recent publicity about the
fact that people care more about public transport than they do about
child abuse..

--
http://www.news.com.au/common/story_...5E1702,00.html
The community rates child abuse really low, it rates it after problems
with public transport and council rates.
--

Problem is that pollies need to manage a project closely and get it
right from the start for a PT project to win votes. It requires
effort. Meanwhile, there are enough brains around the roads
department to build successful freeways and tollways without said
politician having to make much effort.

Oh, one other thing - pollies may not feel like making an effort to
improve PT, but any talk about cutting services is a political, well,
to borrow from YM, a bed of nails. One vote gained, ten lost. Just
look at the debacle that Costa is stirring up in NSW with his idiotic
suggestions. It's a shame that the election is 3 1/2 years off.


PC

I wonder how many car owners actually weigh up the true expense of
owning a car, new or old, and decide that the added financial burden
would outstrip the convenience of owning a car. This would have to
include a commitment to regular maintenance of an older vehicle.

I see far to many old bombs on the road. No brakes, no lights, smokey
exhaust. This is socially irresponsible. I think the fact that you see
so many older cars in tip top shape in the United States not only points
to their strict laws regarding maintenance but is also indicative of
their passion for their motor cars. The Aussie public just do not have
that sort of passion for their cars. Even though we feel that owning a
car is our right and is the norm. So often the bomb is just regarded as
a necessity.

I believe that a lot of people only own cars because it's "the norm".
No thought actually goes into it. Especially with ease of finance, the
hard sell from car companies, and the oversupply of new vehicles on
the market.



--
--------------------------
Posted via cyclingforums.com
http://www.cyclingforums.com

I wonder how many car owners actually weigh up the true expense of
owning a car, new or old, and decide that the added financial burden
would outstrip the convenience of owning a car. This would have to
include a commitment to regular maintenance of an older vehicle.

I see far to many old bombs on the road. No brakes, no lights, smokey
exhaust. This is socially irresponsible. I think the fact that you see
so many older cars in tip top shape in the United States not only points
to their strict laws regarding maintenance but is also indicative of
their passion for their motor cars. The Aussie public just do not have
that sort of passion for their cars. Even though we feel that owning a
car is our right and is the norm. So often the bomb is just regarded as
a necessity.

I believe that a lot of people only own cars because it's "the norm".
No thought actually goes into it. Especially with ease of finance, the
hard sell from car companies, and the oversupply of new vehicles on
the market.



--
--------------------------
Posted via cyclingforums.com
http://www.cyclingforums.com

: That's a bit of a furphy - especially given recent publicity about the
: fact that people care more about public transport than they do about
: child abuse..

This maybe a little misleading though. So where do they rate roads and
traffic - was that included? I think you have to look at it from the
individuals POV. They are probably not giving much weight to child abuse
because it does not affect them directly and only affects a small percentage
of the population. There are sympathetic people out there as you seem to be
one (which is a good thing) but most people are only interested in their lot
in life.

Governments are not doing their poling correctly (Especially in Sydney -
with the constant splurge on freeways and link roads) if it is true that
people would prefer a good public transport system over using their car to
get around.

: Problem is that pollies need to manage a project closely and get it
: right from the start for a PT project to win votes. It requires
: effort.

Not really... The sort of PT investment we need will take longer than a term
of government. Most voters can only see what happened in the last couple of
months.

Meanwhile, there are enough brains around the roads
: department to build successful freeways and tollways without said
: politician having to make much effort.

Apart from funding.

: One vote gained, ten lost. Just
: look at the debacle that Costa is stirring up in NSW with his idiotic
: suggestions.
:
:

You would find that most of the NSW population don't care about PT.. In fact
he is probably gaining votes because most of NSW don't use PT and don't want
to. When people cost using a car they often only include the cost of fuel.
Costa himself is using the figures that only a small percentage use PT but
everyone is paying. Even with those idiotic comments I still fail to hear
the media ask the obvious questions about road users being advantaged by PT
users. It keeps them off the roads. The government has to build less roads
if it has a cheap PT system. Hell I reckon PT should be free. You would
see a sharp drop in the use of cars... Followed by a sharp drop in the use
of Petrol... Followed by a sharp drop in petrol tax revenue... They
wouldn't want that now. They would have to find another way to raise
revenue and that is never popular. People get used to paying a type of tax.
They never like new taxes whether or not its replacing a different one.

:It's a shame that the election is 3 1/2 years off.

Costa is not going to make a difference to the election but he will **** off
most of us PT users. I don't own a car personally. I ride and catch PT 90%
of the time. I love PT and wish that it was better to get people off the
roads.

: That's a bit of a furphy - especially given recent publicity about the
: fact that people care more about public transport than they do about
: child abuse..

This maybe a little misleading though. So where do they rate roads and
traffic - was that included? I think you have to look at it from the
individuals POV. They are probably not giving much weight to child abuse
because it does not affect them directly and only affects a small percentage
of the population. There are sympathetic people out there as you seem to be
one (which is a good thing) but most people are only interested in their lot
in life.

Governments are not doing their poling correctly (Especially in Sydney -
with the constant splurge on freeways and link roads) if it is true that
people would prefer a good public transport system over using their car to
get around.

: Problem is that pollies need to manage a project closely and get it
: right from the start for a PT project to win votes. It requires
: effort.

Not really... The sort of PT investment we need will take longer than a term
of government. Most voters can only see what happened in the last couple of
months.

Meanwhile, there are enough brains around the roads
: department to build successful freeways and tollways without said
: politician having to make much effort.

Apart from funding.

: One vote gained, ten lost. Just
: look at the debacle that Costa is stirring up in NSW with his idiotic
: suggestions.
:
:

You would find that most of the NSW population don't care about PT.. In fact
he is probably gaining votes because most of NSW don't use PT and don't want
to. When people cost using a car they often only include the cost of fuel.
Costa himself is using the figures that only a small percentage use PT but
everyone is paying. Even with those idiotic comments I still fail to hear
the media ask the obvious questions about road users being advantaged by PT
users. It keeps them off the roads. The government has to build less roads
if it has a cheap PT system. Hell I reckon PT should be free. You would
see a sharp drop in the use of cars... Followed by a sharp drop in the use
of Petrol... Followed by a sharp drop in petrol tax revenue... They
wouldn't want that now. They would have to find another way to raise
revenue and that is never popular. People get used to paying a type of tax.
They never like new taxes whether or not its replacing a different one.

:It's a shame that the election is 3 1/2 years off.

Costa is not going to make a difference to the election but he will **** off
most of us PT users. I don't own a car personally. I ride and catch PT 90%
of the time. I love PT and wish that it was better to get people off the
roads.

: so many older cars in tip top shape in the United States not only points
: to their strict laws regarding maintenance but is also indicative of
: their passion for their motor cars.

You obviously have not spent much time in the US. They may not blow as much
smoke but their cars are much much bigger. Our largest passenger car would
be classed as a compact in their eyes. One of my colleagues that lives in
Chicago told me that you just get used to it. As I only travel over their
several times a year I still shake my head at the monsters.

Pete

: so many older cars in tip top shape in the United States not only points
: to their strict laws regarding maintenance but is also indicative of
: their passion for their motor cars.

You obviously have not spent much time in the US. They may not blow as much
smoke but their cars are much much bigger. Our largest passenger car would
be classed as a compact in their eyes. One of my colleagues that lives in
Chicago told me that you just get used to it. As I only travel over their
several times a year I still shake my head at the monsters.

Pete

In article ,
says...
: Problem is that pollies need to manage a project closely and get it
: right from the start for a PT project to win votes. It requires
: effort.

Not really... The sort of PT investment we need will take longer than a term
of government. Most voters can only see what happened in the last couple of
months.

I think that's an easy excuse to dish out, and doesn't really give
respect to voters. Take Kennett as an example. During his initial
election campaign he said under his g'ment things were going to get bad
in the short term, but to stick with him and in the long run they'd be
better. He's still there. Just goes to show people are smarter than
you think.

In article ,
says...
: Problem is that pollies need to manage a project closely and get it
: right from the start for a PT project to win votes. It requires
: effort.

Not really... The sort of PT investment we need will take longer than a term
of government. Most voters can only see what happened in the last couple of
months.

I think that's an easy excuse to dish out, and doesn't really give
respect to voters. Take Kennett as an example. During his initial
election campaign he said under his g'ment things were going to get bad
in the short term, but to stick with him and in the long run they'd be
better. He's still there. Just goes to show people are smarter than
you think.