Re: Mass Transit
- From: Andre Lieven <andrelieven@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 12:07:25 -0700 (PDT)
On Mar 29, 10:36 pm, "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
David V. Loewe, Jr <davelo...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Keith F. Lynch" <k...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I don't like the word "driver," since it's possible to drive thingsWhat about passengers, then (since I am almost always a passenger
other than motor vehicles. "Motorist" is synonymous with "motor
vehicle driver."
nowadays)?
I wouldn't put them in the same category. Riding as a passenger in
a car, bus, train, plane, etc., is very different from driving one.
Yet a passenger in a car can do useful things to help the driver,
such
as performing navigation tasks, that tend not to be asked of
passengers
of commercial vehicles.
That isn't proven, it's asserted.It has been proven. You can continue to cover your eyes and ears
and chant loudly if you want, but it HAS been proven.
Repeating something several times and criticizing anyone who doesn't
take your word for it doesn't constitute proof.
It simply means that you cannot quantify it.
THAT means it could be what you say and it could be zero and no
body knows.
Nobody knows what proportion of people in prison are innocent, but
zero percent and one hundred percent are both very unlikely numbers.
Similarly with almost everything else that can't be quantified.
About how many civilizations are there in our galaxy?
Cars provide a very illusory sort of freedom.No.
You can go pretty much whenever you want, pretty much as much as you
can afford.
Trust me. Having lived without a car for close to two years now,
the freedom to go where I want, when I want is something that is
greatly missed.
That's another problem with cars -- they cause people to become
dependent on them.
The same thing can be said of conventions, books, furniture for
said
books, a roof over said bookcases, and so on and so on.
Then, we're still dependent on air, water, food...
I can't count the number of times coworkers have
been "unable" to make it to work because their car was in the shop or
their garage door wouldn't open or their street hadn't been plowed,
when I had no difficulty *walking* a greater distance than they would
have driven.
"The plural of 'anecdote' is not a synonym for 'citation'. "
As a resident of a region where significant snowfalls are all too
common, I doubt that most folks could walk with any degree of comfort
(Defined as arriving not exhausted.) through a couple of klicks of
snow
that is deep enough to prevent car traffic from moving.
Such as here in the Town of Vienna, Virginia,Most cul de sacs are not in Vienna.
For any place you can name (with the possible exception of Earth),
most cul de sacs are elsewhere. So?
That coal is burned in huge power plants with stack scrubbers toReally?
remove the air pollution. What little pollution does escape is
emitted far from population centers.
Here, the coal-fired plants of AmerenUE are all within 40 miles of
downtown St. Louis.
How does that compare with the distance to the nearest car tailpipe?
That's a relvent question if a car's emissions were on a level
comparable to that of such coal power plants.
And how do the anti-pollution devices in coal plants compare in
effectiveness to the far small smaller, lighter, and cheaper ones
that can fit in individual cars?
Well, one only need fit, say, a couple of hundred power plants,
as opposed to, say, 80,000,000 cars.
If most of the motorists were to become bus riders, there would beMost motorists CANNOT become bus riders as there is no bus that
no congestion,
comes near enough to service them.
What does that have to do with whether cars create more congestion for
cars than vice versa?
Congestion cannot be cured if no other usable alternative exists.
If you
wish to claim that transit can "cure" traffic congestion, then the
burden to
show how you will route transit to where presently non served by any
transit
folks are. Plus, how such expanded routings will be affordable, and
how they
won't increase average travel times for riders.
You might as well say that congestion caused by
buses doesn't exist if any of the bus passengers CANNOT drive a car.
It's a complete non sequitur.
No, it's you failing to understand that not all areas of the 1st
World
are amenable to transit. Even in a minor city, I can get a lot more
done,
in a shorter span of time, by doing it by car than by bus. Nor does
that
take into account the greater capacity for stuff in my car over a bus
rider's.
Moreover, cars almost never stop in traffic to disgorge their
passengers where buses almost always do so.
So? Unless traffic is all moving at the speed limit, within moments
the cars will catch up to right where they would have been if the bus
hadn't stopped.
Well, thats not only grossly false, but it displays a shocking
(Were
it from most anyone else.) ignorance of how traffic *flows*. Just as
with
water in a pipe, if you form a clog, everything behind it backs up,
and
just removing/speeding the clog back up to flow speed will not make
the
clog's propagation backwards not be.
Think of snapping a long rope. The effect shoots all the way back
through the rope (road.).
Further than that, in a nearly all transit system, there will be
not a few
areas where the useage (Due to low population densities, etc.) will be
so low, that the transit system would save money by sending a taxicab
rather than a bus (Lower fuel use.). Ergo, you still end up with some
cars,
no matter what.
Andre
.
- References:
- Re: Mass Transit
- From: David Loewe, Jr.
- Re: Mass Transit
- From: Keith F. Lynch
- Re: Mass Transit
- From: David V. Loewe, Jr
- Re: Mass Transit
- From: Keith F. Lynch
- Re: Mass Transit
- Prev by Date: Re: Snooping -- ??
- Next by Date: Re: Reading (was Re: John Carter Of Mars)
- Previous by thread: Re: Mass Transit
- Next by thread: Re: Mass Transit
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
