"donquijote1954" wrote in message
oups.com...


PG wrote:
Coming back to the original question, are conservatives those who want
change (law of the jungle), or those who want to preserve stability
(things
were good back then...)?

Conservatives are the dinosaur in the story. They are unmovable, lazy
(they want no effort) and stupid. And I say stupid because in the end
their size will be their doom. They can't have fun without 260hp...



In that case, some of the most conservative people I know are liberals.

Steve Shank wrote:
"donquijote1954" wrote in message
oups.com...


PG wrote:
Coming back to the original question, are conservatives those who want
change (law of the jungle), or those who want to preserve stability
(things
were good back then...)?

Conservatives are the dinosaur in the story. They are unmovable, lazy
(they want no effort) and stupid. And I say stupid because in the end
their size will be their doom. They can't have fun without 260hp...



In that case, some of the most conservative people I know are liberals.

Liberal is a label and may be used for camouflage purposes. That
happens in the jungle (and the sea) quite a bit.

Conservative shouldn't be a derogatory word, being opposed to evolution
while being a pig should...

Chuck Norris wrote:
I guess then forget it Jack, even though where I live, I see cyclist
all the time. Why even bother, I will continue to ride, no matter
what. I will eventually get hit by a car and get seriously hurt. It is
funny that while the D.O.T. tries to make things safer for automobiles
all the time, people such as yourself think that cyclist asking to not
be killed in the roads is a special interest case, and not worthy of
any tax dollars at all. Whatever, Jack, I'll just continue to ride my
white ass to work each and everyday, just so I can smile and nod to
the SUV driver as he sucks down the dino goo.

Small Fish (such as sardines) do not figure in the plans of the Big
Fish, as these includes plans for big appetites. Well, I hate to throw
that example he Sardines find safety in numbers but cyclists are out
there alone.

Another way to look at it. That guy in the SUV is paying road use taxes
with every gallon of gasoline that he buys. The bicyclist isn't paying
his way.

donquijote1954 wrote:

Chuck Norris wrote:


I guess then forget it Jack, even though where I live, I see cyclist
all the time. Why even bother, I will continue to ride, no matter
what. I will eventually get hit by a car and get seriously hurt. It is
funny that while the D.O.T. tries to make things safer for automobiles
all the time, people such as yourself think that cyclist asking to not
be killed in the roads is a special interest case, and not worthy of
any tax dollars at all. Whatever, Jack, I'll just continue to ride my
white ass to work each and everyday, just so I can smile and nod to
the SUV driver as he sucks down the dino goo.



Small Fish (such as sardines) do not figure in the plans of the Big
Fish, as these includes plans for big appetites. Well, I hate to throw
that example he Sardines find safety in numbers but cyclists are out
there alone.

"Mark Sprague" wrote in message
...
Another way to look at it. That guy in the SUV is paying road use taxes
with every gallon of gasoline that he buys. The bicyclist isn't paying
his way.

I (as a bicyclist) am not producing the stress on the highways that an SUV
(or any other vehicle of significant weight) causes which necessitate the
repairs that road use taxes are earmarked for.

"Don Freeman" wrote in message
...
I (as a bicyclist) am not producing the stress on the highways that an
SUV
(or any other vehicle of significant weight) causes which necessitate the
repairs that road use taxes are earmarked for.

Awh, hell, ya' don't think you put stress on the road when you and your bike
are ground into the pavement by the cell-phone-talkin' soccer mom in her
SUV?

"Grumman-581" wrote in message
news:aEXHe.214789$_o.145184@attbi_s71...
"Don Freeman" wrote in message
...
I (as a bicyclist) am not producing the stress on the highways that an
SUV
(or any other vehicle of significant weight) causes which necessitate the
repairs that road use taxes are earmarked for.

Awh, hell, ya' don't think you put stress on the road when you and your
bike
are ground into the pavement by the cell-phone-talkin' soccer mom in her
SUV?

I suppose I will get sent a bill, after all she (and the BMW driving male
working his PDA) has the right to drive without being impeded by other users
of the road. Or at least that's the way it seems.

I have had my life threatened many more times by these types then by drunken
drivers.

In rec.boats.paddle Don Freeman wrote:

: "Mark Sprague" wrote in message
: ...
: Another way to look at it. That guy in the SUV is paying road use taxes
: with every gallon of gasoline that he buys. The bicyclist isn't paying
: his way.
:
: I (as a bicyclist) am not producing the stress on the highways that an SUV
: (or any other vehicle of significant weight) causes which necessitate the
: repairs that road use taxes are earmarked for.

Most calculations for stress on highways start at 18k pounds per axle...
SUV's, like most cars and light trucks don't cause much damage except for
slowly rutting ashphalt roads...

--
John Nelson
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chicago Area Paddling/Fishing Page
http://www.chicagopaddling.org http://www.chicagofishing.org
(A Non-Commercial Web Site: No Sponsors, No Paid Ads and Nothing to Sell)

"Chicago Paddling-Fishing" wrote in message
...
In rec.boats.paddle Don Freeman wrote:

: "Mark Sprague" wrote in message
: ...
: Another way to look at it. That guy in the SUV is paying road use taxes
: with every gallon of gasoline that he buys. The bicyclist isn't paying
: his way.
:
: I (as a bicyclist) am not producing the stress on the highways that an
SUV
: (or any other vehicle of significant weight) causes which necessitate
the
: repairs that road use taxes are earmarked for.

Most calculations for stress on highways start at 18k pounds per axle...
SUV's, like most cars and light trucks don't cause much damage except for
slowly rutting ashphalt roads...

That's not the case in the Pavement Management Systems (the acronym drove
the women in my office at the time crazy) that are used to determine
maintenance scheduling on city streets. Though, if I remember correctly the
emphasis was more on the amount of traffic then the weight of the vehicles.
But it doesn't take much extrapolation to assume that bicycles are not going
to produce the damage that the more massive vehicles are going to cause.
Got to admit I've only experience with one city's PMS (god I loved saying
that for some perverse reason) but its a fairly large one, San Mateo CA, so
don't think it is too atypical. Often the trucks of the size you mention
are not even allowed on them other then the arterial routes.

There was some ruckus in the news lately about the larger SUVs such as
Hummers, Expeditions, and Escalades exceeding the allowed weight on some
city streets. Haven't heard much more about it so it was probably just some
BS that the media jumped on during a slow news day.

On Tue, 02 Aug 2005 02:27:30 GMT, Mark Sprague
wrote:

You're ass-uming that the bicyclist doesn't drive, therefore doesn't
pay. I cycle, and have been driving and paying for 40 years. I think
my share is paid for by now.

You might also want to think about road wear caused by 30-lb bicycle
and 180-lb rider at 20 mph vs. 4800-lb SUV and 180-lb driver at 60
mph.

But isn't it really about a lard-butt, sedentary SUV-jockey feeling a
little guilt when he sees someone getting some exercise, while he is
too lazy to do anything but wait passively for the coming heart
attack?

I could be wrong... ;^)


Another way to look at it. That guy in the SUV is paying road use taxes
with every gallon of gasoline that he buys. The bicyclist isn't paying
his way.