"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...


We do things backwards.

Fact: When we widen or build new highways from major urban centers, we
make
sprawl worse. So, we end up with cities like NY & Boston which are
surrounded by dense suburbs. In many cases, the population hasn't grown,
either. It's just relocated.

For good reason. Many people do not like living in cities.


In places like this, trains are ideal.

And for the rest?

The rest should be forced to have trains and use them. Left wing storm
troopers, trained by the Sierra Club, will hunt down violaters and make them
live in ponds with endangered frogs.


It certainly makes no sense to NOT build light
rail systems if only SOME people think it's expensive. Lots of people in
big
cities feel no need to own a car.

It costs me about $12 a week to put gas in my car and drive it to work.
Factor in other costs like insurance and maintenance, and it's still
less than $20 a week. When you have to pay $10 a day ($50 per week) for
train fare, how is that anything but more expensive? What would be my
incentive to ride the train then (Assuming they would actually build one
out to where I live)?

Dave


Gee. I guess the geographical arrangement of your neck of the woods makes
mass transport impractical. Logically, that means it's impractical and
pointless everywhere, even in places where is works like a charm right now,
or in places where the citizenry is asking for it, but their elected
officials aren't responding.