"Calif Bill" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:
"Fred Dehl" wrote in message
...
"Doug Kanter" wrote in
:

"Fred Dehl" wrote in message
...

The guy you voted for in 2000 said that the internal combustion
engine is the greatest threat to mankind, and you're calling the
purchase of its lifeblood "mandatory"?
In a sense, he's correct. In many parts of this country, there an
almost religious aversion to using mass transportation, an idea
that's
part of normal life in some countries, and a few of our busier
cities.
Even in New York only 10% of commuters use mass transit.

The reasons to not use mass transit are numerous:

- It's slower. The average mass transit commute takes 75% longer than
the
same commute by car.

- It takes quality time away from families. I run errands on my lunch
hour. In my car. If I took mass transit to work, I'd be tied to the
office and have to run errands after work, decreasing my evening
at-home
time (over and above the time lost to the longer commute as described
above).

- It's inconvenient. Unlike cars, mass transit seldom provides
door-to-
door service. So you end up walking in the elements (rain, snow,
extreme
heat) or driving to the station (Hey, isn't the goal of mass transit
to
"get us out of our cars"? Oops.)

- It degrades automobile travel. Buses move slowly, are impossible to
pass or see around, and stop every few blocks, slowing down traffic on
major arteries, decreasing fuel economy and increasing pollution
emissions. Plus if you drive to and from the transit station, your
car
doesn't have a chance to warm up. This means greater engine wear and
decreased fuel economy.

- It's unsafe. Mass transit has a higher deaths-per-passenger-mile
than
nearly every other method of transportation you can name. Also many
mass
transit stations, centers, and bus stops are nests of criminal
activity.

- It doesn't get us out of our cars. In addition to the need to drive
from home to the station, mass transit doesn't let us combine trips.
Transit won't let you go grocery shopping on your way home. Or get a
haircut. Or visit the doctor. Or pickup your children from school.
With
a car you can do all that in one trip on the way home from work.

The overusage of private vehicles affects us in quite a few negative
ways. At the top of the list is a certain sort of stupidity that
blinds people to the effects of their decisions.
More smug condescension from the elitist left. Go back to your triple
latte and your Oprah-approved book o' lies.

You've proven my point. Meanwhile, how have other countries gotten
around some of the problems you've described? Are you aware of any of
them, or do you prefer to assume that things could not be much better?


Poor Fred.

When I need to get downtown for a morning meeting, I take public
transportation. It's much faster and much cheaper than driving into the
city and paying for parking. We have nine buses a day leaving from a
nearby commuter lot, one returns back at noon, and the others start
leaving downtown at 3 pm. If I want, I can also drive to a Metrorail
station, take the train downtown, and return whenever I like. Also much
cheaper than driving downtown.

My wife commutes on the bus to her downtown office. She usually buys a
10-ride ticket for $40. That's five round trips. Parking downtown is $12
a day in a decent lot. Add to that the cost of fuel, wear and tear on
the car, insurance, and the fact that you can nap, read the paper or
chat on the bus, and driving into the city becomes a losing proposition.


OK, but don't you sometimes have to sit next to negroes or puerto ricans?
I'm really cynical. I think that's a major reason some people don't like
mass transportation. Matter of fact, a few have actually said it to me.


Mass transit works in a few areas in this country. As the mass transit
does not go from and to the places people need to go. If you have to
change buses 3 times, and add another hour to the commute, people will
avoid it. It is costly. If you get a couple people in the car, you can be
close to the price of MT in this country. In Europe, they have better
transit, and is reasonable. In 2001 the Metro in Paris costs about .75
Euro to go anywhere in the major metropolitan area of Paris. Fast, often
running trains. Compare to Bart in the SF Bay area. $3-5 one way for
most trips, and then you have to catch a bus or two. One line to an area.
The Metro, has several lines going different directions. Where we stayed,
there were 2 different line metro stops within 2 blocks. Manhattan Island
is one of the few places where mass transit is done correctly. Lots of
trains to Penn and Grand Central stations, and subway to get to other
areas of the city.


There is a reason mass transit works in Europe and not here. European
cities developed centuries ago in tight dense areas, with the remaining land
used for agriculture. Streets for the most part are narrow and not good for
auto traffic. Highways do not extend to the city center for the most part
either. On the other hand, US cities developed for the most part (except
for a few cities like NYC and Boston) after the rise of the automobile so
the demographics are entirely different and are not as well suited for mass
transit. Also, because of those differences, the cultures, work habits etc.
have developed differently as well.....wrt how one buy groceries, entertains
etc.