will the US military power dominate the world

Transport is one area I'd say we Americans have missed the boat on.

Every time I'm in Europe, I grow to love the public transport system
more and more, and wish we Americans hadn't destroyed our public transport
infrastructure.

Not me. The example I gave of sitting next to the chain smoker while a child
screams the entire trip that seemed like it was on a train that stopped every
block was my experience coming back from Oktoberfest two weeks ago. I love the
independance and freedom my car gives me. I could take a metro (train) to work
everyday, but it would increase my commute from 20 minutes to 60 minutes. I
sit in my car, listen to the radio at whatever level I'm in the mood for. I
stop-and-go often due to the traffic, but when I do, no one is pushing me to
get in or out of my car. On the way home, I put my sun glasses on, crank up
some music or listen to a sports talk radio program and wind down. Public
transportation? Not for me.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

(BUFDRVR) schrieb:

Not me. The example I gave of sitting next to the chain smoker while a child
screams the entire trip that seemed like it was on a train that stopped every
block was my experience coming back from Oktoberfest two weeks ago.

Mmmh. In most german "S-Bahn" systems (commuters train) smoking is
prohibited, you should have called in a chap at the next station to
catch the smoker. Smoking is prohibited in any train station by now,
as it is in most train wagons. Just check the cigarette decal on the
window. Simple, isn´t it?

Your having a problem with children? Too bad for for you.

some music or listen to a sports talk radio program and wind down. Public
transportation? Not for me.

I enjoy it everytime I visit a foreign city. Rome is great by bus or
by metro, as is London, Berlin or any major german city. Personally, I
commuted 10 years (for high school/Gymnasium( - it was affordable,
comfortable, easy to relay. In the morning train I slept, on the train
back I made my homework, read or fooled around with my friends.

I wish I could do this again...

BUFDRVR

Gruss, Roman

On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 21:46:10 +0100, Greg Hennessy wrote:

I haven't evaded anything, I have pointed out the clear flaws in your
rhetoric.

Oh for ****s sake! It wasn't rhetoric, it was inquisition[1]. Are
you always this defensive? In real life, do you assume anyone you're
having a conversation with is out to get you?


[1] but not in the Spanish sense.

--
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia
(Email: , but first subtract 275 and reverse
the last two letters).

BUFDRVR wrote:

Transport is one area I'd say we Americans have missed the boat on.

Every time I'm in Europe, I grow to love the public transport system
more and more, and wish we Americans hadn't destroyed our public transport
infrastructure.

Not me. The example I gave of sitting next to the chain smoker while a child
screams the entire trip that seemed like it was on a train that stopped every
block was my experience coming back from Oktoberfest two weeks ago. I love the
independance and freedom my car gives me. I could take a metro (train) to work
everyday, but it would increase my commute from 20 minutes to 60 minutes. I

That's pretty typical of American thinking. But increasingly, we're going to
find that car is making demands on us that we aren't going to like. In some
areas, that's already the case.

There are people spending 4 hours or more in their cars for round trip commutes
to work! That's by no means typical, but as the numbers of cars proliferate,
the congestion increases.

It is not unusual now for me to be able to ride my bike to work in the exact
same time it takes to drive, due to congestion on the main road. In many
communities, you MUST have a car to get around and it's not a particularly
people friendly experience getting out and about. Given American's propensity
for obesity, heavy car use isn't especially healthy either.

Socially, I note in Europe how much more people friendly cities and towns are
than American ones. That's because European centers are set up for people, while
American ones are for the convenience of cars. Some American city centers have
undergone renovation that are quite nice, but those renovations have tended to
be more restrictive of car movement in them.

sit in my car, listen to the radio at whatever level I'm in the mood for. I
stop-and-go often due to the traffic, but when I do, no one is pushing me to
get in or out of my car. On the way home, I put my sun glasses on, crank up
some music or listen to a sports talk radio program and wind down. Public
transportation? Not for me.

Sure it's great. I love my truck, and I have no problem driving miles and miles
and miles. But for me, it's not a great driving experience just going to work.
In fact it can be a source of irritation and annoyance, and becoming moreso in
many places.

I'll save my enjoyable driving experiences as you describe above for a genuine
trip/vacation/excursion rather than the work commute. For that, I actually
prefer my bicycle, and besides a great mental state such as you describe coming
from its use, I also gain some health benefits, and restrict my contribution to
pollution as well. Not too shabby.


SMH

Regnirps wrote:

car is a wonderful gadget, but it is responsible for a lot of social
destruction in the US IMHO. Never mind pollution concerns, just the social
ones. Suburbia, destruction of city centers, traffic congestion,
depersonalization and even fostering of anti-social behavior.

Yeah, freedom is a terrible thing. We need more public transport. Doesn't it
make you feel good to rob Peter so Paul can ride the bus (monorail/light
rail/cable car/ferry/underground)?

Yes that's what is being done in the name of diversity in transport choices.

But that's the sort of thing government does. Wile *most* car infrastructure
costs (roads, bridges) come from fuel taxes, not all of it does. Some comes
from local property or state taxes which is in effect a type of robbery.

But given automobile users aren't paying the *full* cost of automobile usage,
we're all passing the buck when we pay to drive our cars to some degree.

Health costs associated with pollution being the biggie, and car use is a
significant part of that.

I'm very much in favor of stealing money from the fuel tax fund to support
bus, train transport, and especially the conversion or "banking" of rail
corridors into bike lanes and paths. It's good long term policy.


SMH

On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 03:04:32 +0100, ess (phil hunt)
wrote:

On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 21:46:10 +0100, Greg Hennessy wrote:

I haven't evaded anything, I have pointed out the clear flaws in your
rhetoric.

Oh for ****s sake! It wasn't rhetoric, it was inquisition[1].

One example of many.

" is it OK for someone to donate a few million pounds to a
politician?"

Clearly a rhetorical question.


Are
you always this defensive? In real life, do you assume anyone you're
having a conversation with is out to get you?


Hmmm I wonder why you felt the need to tell me that.



greg


--
$ReplyAddress =~ s#\@.*$##; # Delete everything after the '@'
The Following is a true story.....
Only the names have been changed to protect the guilty.

(Regnirps) wrote in message ...
car is a wonderful gadget, but it is responsible for a lot of social
destruction in the US IMHO. Never mind pollution concerns, just the social
ones. Suburbia, destruction of city centers, traffic congestion,
depersonalization and even fostering of anti-social behavior.

Yeah, freedom is a terrible thing. We need more public transport. Doesn't it
make you feel good to rob Peter so Paul can ride the bus (monorail/light
rail/cable car/ferry/underground)?

-- Charlie Springer


You need to rob someone in order to be able to go from point A to
point B?
Geez... things are apparently even worse than I thought.

I have a good idea though, which might decrease the need for robberies
in the future. You could raise the tax on gas and use that revenue to
improve the transportation system. Everyone benefits. I mean, who can
be against a tax which is completely voluntary to pay? And why not
lower the income tax at the same time as you increase the gas tax?

On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 11:12:59 +0100, Greg Hennessy wrote:
On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 03:04:32 +0100, ess (phil hunt)
wrote:

On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 21:46:10 +0100, Greg Hennessy wrote:

I haven't evaded anything, I have pointed out the clear flaws in your
rhetoric.

Oh for ****s sake! It wasn't rhetoric, it was inquisition[1].

One example of many.

" is it OK for someone to donate a few million pounds to a
politician?"

Clearly a rhetorical question.

A rhetorical question is one that isn't looking for an answer. I
clearly was looking for an answer to the questions I asked, so they
weren't rhetorical.

Are
you always this defensive? In real life, do you assume anyone you're
having a conversation with is out to get you?

Hmmm I wonder why you felt the need to tell me that.

To get you to realise how you come across (at least to me).

--
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia
(Email: , but first subtract 275 and reverse
the last two letters).

Stephen Harding wrote in
:

Regnirps wrote:

car is a wonderful gadget, but it is responsible for a lot of
social
destruction in the US IMHO. Never mind pollution concerns, just the
social ones. Suburbia, destruction of city centers, traffic
congestion, depersonalization and even fostering of anti-social
behavior.

Yeah, freedom is a terrible thing. We need more public transport.
Doesn't it make you feel good to rob Peter so Paul can ride the bus
(monorail/light rail/cable car/ferry/underground)?

Yes that's what is being done in the name of diversity in transport
choices.

But that's the sort of thing government does. Wile *most* car
infrastructure costs (roads, bridges) come from fuel taxes, not all of
it does. Some comes from local property or state taxes which is in
effect a type of robbery.

Except that even those without autos benefit from roads;fire,medical,and
police arrive by motor vehicle,food,medicines and other consumer goods are
delivered by road transport.IMO,no robbery.

Or do you want the EMTs to wait for the next tram,and then walk the rest of
the way to your home when you are in urgent need of medical care?
(carrying all their kit,what little they can.)



--
Jim Yanik,NRA member
jyanik-at-kua.net

Jim Yanik wrote:

Except that even those without autos benefit from roads;fire,medical,and
police arrive by motor vehicle,food,medicines and other consumer goods are
delivered by road transport.IMO,no robbery.

What about people with no children paying for schools? People without boats
paying for public boat ramps? Paying for government to insure people who live
of flood plains or barrier island? People who don't care for music paying for
summer concerts on the town common?

There's always someone who isn't going to like having their tax dollars spent
on something. It is effective robbery for them, even if there is a public
good in it somewhere.

Or do you want the EMTs to wait for the next tram,and then walk the rest of
the way to your home when you are in urgent need of medical care?
(carrying all their kit,what little they can.)

I don't think there is any shortage of roads in the US. Perhaps ones with
too many potholes, but ones that can be driven for public service if needed.


SMH