The Hazards of Collective Travel

After returning from a trip to the Midwest, the Antiplanner has been temporarily subdued by a raging cold or flu. Was I infected by someone on board an airplane or one of the trains I rode in Chicago? Or was it someone in one of the dense cities I visited? Regardless, I did not suffer a cold last Some prefer the outdoors and activities where you can be easily a victim of viagra sales in uk asthmatic disorder. I cialis 5mg did what most people do when they believe they are being wronged. It is cheap order viagra defined as lack of pregnancy after one year of steady and unprotected sex. In your quest to be cured, contact with an expert is necessary, but when? Meet levitra generic cialis consultant if: The problem continues even after the change of lifestyle The problem begins following an injury or a prostate surgery You suffer from other warning signs, such as abdominal pain, low back pain or a change in discharge in urine. winter because I spent that time in my ultra-low-density neighborhood writing the book that I am now out publicizing.

There are many reasons for people to select personal conveyances over collective travel and to live in low-density areas instead of crowded in multi-family housing. Relative immunity from disease is not the most important one, but it helps.

Bookmark the permalink.

About The Antiplanner

The Antiplanner is a forester and economist with more than fifty years of experience critiquing government land-use and transportation plans.

39 Responses to The Hazards of Collective Travel

  1. the highwayman says:

    O’Toole, if you had a real job, you’d be physically interacting with other people a daily basis.

    So next time you are at Wal-Mart, put in an application!

  2. Dan says:

    Framing is an art, and finding the right phrase to shove your ideology down the throats of others is hard to do. The best ones don’t telegraph their ideological intent. Telegraphing intent allows the intended recipient to tune out and the intent is to nod the head yes, not shake the head no. Shaking the head no means your ideological/political/policy message won’t get delivered in a positive frame.

    “Collective transportation” I dearly hope, Randal, isn’t something you came up with and are unit testing here, because it s*cks on many levels. It is so bad it is almost comical and certainly embarrassing. If one of your colleagues came up with it and you are being asked to push it, I feel your pain. Because it s*cks on so many levels.

    DS

  3. Andy says:

    Dan is lecturing on word choice? Priceless!

  4. Frank says:

    Highwaymanidiot, if you had a real job, you wouldn’t be spamming this blog with gibberish day after day during working hours.

  5. Borealis says:

    The President and Vice President agree with the Antiplanner (published 4/30/2009):

    At a news conference Wednesday evening, President Obama said Americans who may be sick should avoid airplanes and “any system of public transportation where you’re confined,” but the vice president today took it one step further.

    “I would tell members of my family — and I have — I wouldn’t go anywhere in confined places now. It’s not that it’s going to Mexico in a confined aircraft where one person sneezes, that goes all the way through the aircraft,” Biden said on NBC’s “Today” show.

    “That’s me,” he said.

    “I would not be, at this point, if they had another way of transportation, suggesting they ride the subway,” he said. “From my perspective, this relates to mitigation. If you’re out in the middle of the field and someone sneezes, that’s one thing. If you’re in a closed aircraft, a closed container, a closed car, a closed classroom, that’s another thing.”

  6. Dan says:

    There are many reasons for people to select personal conveyances over collective travel and to live in low-density areas instead of crowded in multi-family housing.

    Yes, and many of them are related to ideology. *

    It’s too bad that those who wish to cram their ideology down the throats of others in the mistaken belief that everyone wants to live the way they do misstate, mischaracterize, and hyperbolize about what they find in cities.

    DS

    *

    Abstract

    Problem: The future of compact development depends in part on understanding and shaping the public’s attitudes toward it. Previous studies have suggested life cycle, socioeconomic, attitudinal, and ideological dimensions to preferences regarding development patterns, but rarely have all of these factors been examined systematically across a broad, generalizable sample of respondents.

    Results and conclusions: Support for the compact development alternatives is significant, in some cases exceeding support for traditional, decentralized suburban patterns. However, question wording appears to matter considerably, and individuals’ beliefs about different facets of compact development are often inconsistent. Although race, income, age, and the presence of children in the household are strongly associated with some views on the four tradeoffs, only political ideology is consistently associated with opposition to compact development. [emphases added]

  7. Andy says:

    You planners spend money on studies to find out that people who have decided to politically oppose something also consistently oppose it? What a bunch of morons.

    The more telling part of Dan’s own quote is “The future of compact development depends in part on understanding and shaping the public’s attitudes toward it.” That is a clear admission that compact development is hated in the real world and thus planners must resort to government propaganda campaigns to force the public to accept it.

  8. Dan says:

    Kudos to the performance artist who has created this brilliant parody character, lacking in richness, sure, but exhibiting consistently accurate parodic credibility.

    I hope you can scale that up, if you wish, esp the ham-handed mischaracterizations. Brilliant!

    DS

  9. MJ says:

    The future of compact development depends in part on understanding and shaping the public’s attitudes toward it…However, question wording appears to matter considerably, and individuals’ beliefs about different facets of compact development are often inconsistent.

    There is a formal term for what the authors are doing.

  10. Dan says:

    Would that the purveyors of fear wouldn’t dupe their gullible readers into parroting fear phrases like “push poll”. High-larry-iss.

    Push poll. ha! Good one.

    snork

    Ohhh….

    Waaaaaaait….waaaait a minnnnnute…

    It’s April Fool’s Day! You are acting like a fool because of THE DAY!!!

    Got me!

    Sigh. Hoo-boy. Who’s the gullible one, eh?

    chuckle

    DS

  11. Andy says:

    I called 911 to report Dan’s stroke, and they sent an ambulance. I begged them to take public transit, but they said it would take way too long, and besides, since Dan lives on a paved public road and has two cars in his garage, they were sure he would prefer automobiles over waiting for the bus, then the train, then the bus, then walking to the hospital.

    Don’t worry though. The hospital says he is doing well and there probably is not much more brain damage than he has had for the last few years.

  12. lgrattan says:

    I with 350 +- others, from all over the world, daily read Randal’s thoughts to learn from him and other contributers. However, Highwayman, and a few others, contribute nothing by telling him to get a job. Will you please post some of your articles and or books that you have written lately to help educate us.

  13. Spokker says:

    I would think that by attempting to avoid illness with such fervor you only make yourself more susceptible to illness when you do interact with people. Hand sanitizers, avoiding public transportation and fussing over children too much may leave us more vulnerable at the end of the day.

    I take public transportation often in Southern California, with “dirty” illegal immigrants that conservatives in my area wish would all die. I rarely get sick, though that is anecdotal (then again, so was O’Toole’s post).

    Highwayman is right, though. If O’Toole has a job that he can do from home then he is most likely to get sick on his little trips (unless some salmonella hitches a ride on his broccoli). If avoiding “collective transport” is a good way to avoid illness, do we also avoid working in an office, letting our children go to school or simply hanging out with friends?

  14. Scott says:

    Dan,
    Andy & MJ, made some very good points. You just try to dismiss them with puerile tactics, which show your ignorance.
    If they are mistaken, explain why. You cannot.
    You have never explained why any of the opposition to your weak point are wrong.

    I think don’t even understand the quoted text that you provided, rephrased here:
    People need to be forced to “like” density.
    Questions need to be tweaked/loaded to make it appear that the answers support density.
    People are not willing to deal with the many tradeoffs in density.
    Liberty & laissez-faire are consistently against density.

    In addition to disease, close quarters are more dangerous for crime.
    Public transit is also uncomfortable & has many other negatives: extra time, limited coverage, inconvenience, no storage (trunk), no own music on speakers, etc.
    About the only positive, to the user, is lower price, while the actual cost is about thrice.
    That price savings is minimal, & most often, much less than the user’s income/hour.
    Do you leftists even know about the time-value of money?

    Why do you think that it’s mostly the poor & without cars that use transit?
    The portion of rail commuters (driving to station) to the CBD, making good change, is small.
    And regional rail has a higher fairbox recovery.
    If downtowns are great, why don’t they live there?

  15. Spokker says:

    “About the only positive, to the user, is lower price”

    And safety. I don’t find freeways very comfortable places to be.

    “In addition to disease, close quarters are more dangerous for crime.”

    Ever been carjacked?

    “no storage (trunk)”

    And how many people drive huge trucks only to never haul anything? Not everybody is lugging around a bunch of crap. Those suitcases on rollers seem to get the job done nicely most of the time.

    “no own music on speakers”

    Ever heard of an MP3 player? Myself, I sometimes play video games or watch TV shows on the way to work on my phone. They’re not very expensive these days.

    “Do you leftists even know about the time-value of money?”

    Sure. I can get work done on the train. Read, work on a document on the laptop or simply catch up on the day’s news.

    There is another valuable thing that some commuters develop on the train, friendship. Rush hour commuters sometimes strike up lifelong relationships with people who they commute with every single day. I remember talking to a guy on the train who was disappointed about the rise in unemployment because his buddy that he used to talk to on the train was laid off. Some look forward to that hour on the train because it’s an hour to socialize with people other than co-workers.

    People understand the concept of the time value of money. Some people just value different things than you.

    “If downtowns are great, why don’t they live there?”

    If suburbs and freeways are so great, why don’t they drive to work?

    “The portion of rail commuters (driving to station) to the CBD, making good change, is small.”

    What’s “good change?” Is everybody on the freeway living it up? The median household income of Metrolink riders in Southern California is $72,000. Is that too low?

    If you’re lumping in light rail riders with rail riders, then that group tends to have higher incomes than bus riders.

  16. MJ says:

    “Collective transportation” I dearly hope, Randal, isn’t something you came up with and are unit testing here, because it s*cks on many levels.

    Actually, no. It is a fairly common term among academic researchers, describing modes of transportation that collectively transport people.

  17. MJ says:

    It’s April Fool’s Day! You are acting like a fool because of THE DAY!!!

    I don’t appreciate the insult and, for the record, my comment was serious. If you can stop “chuckling”, I’d appreciate a serious reply explaining why you disagree.

  18. Dan says:

    Nothing could be farther from a push poll than the methods used in the paper. Nothing.

    Perhaps you could quote from the methods to explain your conclusion to show how you arrived at it. Then quote from the conclusions to show us how the purportedly push-polly surveys were then used to push the agenda.

    That is: push-poll is a fear phrase some use to try and demonize and/or mischaracterize things they don’t like. Not saying your are doing it, but parroting such a phrase tips your hand.

    DS

  19. Scott says:

    Spokker, You brought up some good exceptions to the drawbacks of public transit, but only applicable to a few.

    Not quite sure about I don’t find freeways very comfortable places to be.
    Th interior of a car is more comfortable, including privacy & nor closeness to others.

    Carjacking is infrequent. Crime on public transit is always a potential. Riders need to always be on guard. For your side, it’s also true for more chance of a crash in cars. However, pedestrians can easily be injured/killed.

    Trunk space is great for carrying anything (ie gallon container). Not sure why went to extreme of a truck. Suitcases have many drawbacks, including needing to take each way.

    For music, the mention of “speakers” was to avoid the thought of headphones. Somehow you missed that. Driving with headphones is illegal. Wearing headphones can be dangerous, even deadly.

    The time available to read while riding transit is a plus, but the overall time travel, for most, is longer.

    Socializing on transit is very minimal, & for the time in transit of 6-12 hours/week, could be much more effective applied directly for socializing.

    Freeways are not so great, because gas taxes are not high enough & freeways have been neglected & there are rush hours. If living in suburbs & working in the CBD, public transit is a good option. Somehow you missed that partial recommendation. On avg, <20% of workers are in CBDs. Regardless of transport choice, it's good advice not to live very far from work.

    You seem to be missing the point that most public transit riders, use, because of low income & not by choice.

  20. Spokker says:

    “Th interior of a car is more comfortable, including privacy & nor closeness to others.”

    I don’t suffer from a mental illness that makes me uncomfortable around others.

    “Carjacking is infrequent. Crime on public transit is always a potential. Riders need to always be on guard.”

    Crime is very rare on transit (actually, the country has seen a steady drop in violent crime rates for decades). As I said, I’m always on my phone or laptop fooling around or getting work done. Are you saying it’s only a matter of time before I am stabbed for my iPhone? That’s also a danger in creepy parking structures!

    “For music, the mention of “speakers” was to avoid the thought of headphones. Somehow you missed that. Driving with headphones is illegal. Wearing headphones can be dangerous, even deadly.”

    What’s wrong with headphones? I wasn’t aware that they were dangerous. Driving with headphones in both ears is illegal, at least in California, but one is okay. But if you’re on transit, you can put them in both ears.

    “The time available to read while riding transit is a plus, but the overall time travel, for most, is longer.”

    During rush hour, I would say it’s about the same or better, depending on the situation. For my commute to work during rush hour, driving is about 1 and a 1/2 to 2 hours. Transit is always a solid one and a 1/2 hours, and it would be only just over an hour if the subway were extended.

    “You seem to be missing the point that most public transit riders, use, because of low income & not by choice.”

    Which is slowly changing with the proliferation of rail transit.

    “Regardless of transport choice, it’s good advice not to live very far from work.”

    It’s not always a choice.

  21. Scott says:

    Actually, your points that I labeled as “exceptions”, are actually still negatives of public transit, but “less bad” to some people.

    You are being dumb in 1) thinking about mental illness & the company of strangers, which can be hazardous, 2) thinking that headphones themselves can be dangerous, rather than the loss of hearing, 3) not realizing that there is more crime in public, rather than in privacy (car).

    You also admitted that living in high density is undesirable, when responding to the comment of people working in CBD & living in suburbs, but just avoiding that & switching to freeway topic.

    Try convincing 85% of commuters, that the negatives are not that bad & they should travel like 4% of people.

    People are not forced to live or work in certain places.

    You are actually funny, in a sad kinda way, to defend transit.

  22. Andy says:

    Spokker – You don’t have to act like Dan and call people names to make your point. You have some good point that would be interesting to discuss, but the name calling completely undermines your credibility.

    Scott – Spokker is reacting from the fact that he has 3-4 hour commute every day. He probably works in NYC, DC, or maybe Boston. He could probably drive to work in less than an hour if there was not traffic congestion. So of course he is frustrated and values transit that at least limits his extreme commute, which apparently is something he can’t control.

    Most Antiplanner allies feel for Spokker and are happy he enjoys transit. We just think he would be better off if government didn’t highly subsidize one mode of transit, because then it would fund transit options where it makes the most sense. Moreover, a huge majority of people don’t work in NYC, DC, or Boston. So we think that the rest of the US shouldn’t be forced to live like long commuters in those cities.

    Can’t we discuss these things without juvenile name-calling? Dan can’t work in a grown up environment, but the rest of us would have a great conversation.

  23. Spokker says:

    “Spokker – You don’t have to act like Dan and call people names to make your point.”

    Can I act like Scott and call people names, then?

    “Scott – Spokker is reacting from the fact that he has 3-4 hour commute every day.”

    Not everyday. I only have to commute to Los Angeles twice a week for business at minimum, fortunately. Otherwise most of my travel is on my county’s bus network. I also own a car and when I do fill up I’m glad some of that tax money is being diverted to transit.

    “We just think he would be better off if government didn’t highly subsidize one mode of transit, because then it would fund transit options where it makes the most sense.”

    Hm, I think you would be better off if government didn’t highly subsidize driving. Even after you “put back” money diverted to transit, highways get back around 65% of their costs through user fees.

    http://subsidyscope.com/transportation/highways/funding/

    Include local roads and what is the “farebox recovery?” I can’t imagine building out all that infrastructure, including utilities, out to the suburbs is efficient.

    I’m not saying that you should build light rail in the middle of nowhere. I probably wouldn’t have built light rail in Arizona, for example (but I would have supported dedicating some lanes to buses). But rail transit is a great way to get around even in a city like Los Angeles. With smart investment it could be an incredible way to get around in LA.

  24. Spokker says:

    “thinking that headphones themselves can be dangerous, rather than the loss of hearing”

    I do not set my headphones at a loud volume.

    “not realizing that there is more crime in public, rather than in privacy (car).”

    Much of the crime associated with transit actually happens in the park and ride lots. Right of the bat, having a car makes you a target (they see your GPS dock and smash goes the window, which can happen anywhere). Even the Blue Line, the most dangerous light rail line in the nation, only has 1-2 criminal incidents every 1-2 days, and many of those are in the park and ride lots. The odds are not very high of anything happening to you on the train. You can read the stats for Los Angeles here, http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/bottleneck/2008/09/post.html

    “You also admitted that living in high density is undesirable”

    Different strokes for different folks.

    “Try convincing 85% of commuters, that the negatives are not that bad & they should travel like 4% of people.”

    I think it is pretty much apparent that freeways + suburban living is not working as far as travel is concerned. Do we spread out more? Make the freeways wider? How wide can we make them?

    “People are not forced to live or work in certain places.”

    And people love to live in the suburbs and commute far to get to work? I guess we just masochists, then?

  25. Andy says:

    Thanks Spokker. Those are all things we can discuss and debate. Name calling is juvenile and undermines anyone who uses that technique, including Antiplanner allies.

  26. ws says:

    ROT:“Regardless, I did not suffer a cold last winter because I spent that time in my ultra-low-density neighborhood writing the book that I am now out publicizing.

    ws:I’m not sure I understand the purpose of this post. Isolation and lack exposure to germs creates susceptibility of getting infected easier (Native American deaths from exposure to foreign diseases). Maybe your low density lifestyle contributed to your sickness and weak immune system?

    On the topic of “collective” travel, when I drive my car (mostly single occupancy) I contribute to localized air problems for other people. Blaming transit/density for disease spreading is a bit lame.

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/11/13/MNQP143CPV.DTL

    “The study found that in the San Joaquin Valley, the cost of air pollution comes to more than $1,600 per person per year, which would translate into a total of nearly $8 billion in savings if federal ozone and particulate matter standards were met.”

    “By meeting federal air quality standards, the regions could avoid annually 3,860 premature deaths among those age 30 and older, 13 premature deaths in infants and 1,950 cases of adult onset chronic bronchitis. Cleaner air could prevent 2,760 hospital admissions, 141,370 asthma attacks, 2,800 emergency room visits and 466,880 lost days of work, the study said.”

  27. Spokker says:

    ws, the impacts of air pollution tend to hit low-income, minority groups hard, because freeways historically were rammed through their neighborhoods. The kicker is that many in these groups don’t even own cars.

    A recent study linked clogged arteries to living near freeways. http://articles.latimes.com/2010/feb/14/local/la-me-freeway-pollution14-2010feb14

    I wonder how the people whose neighborhoods were decimated by the 110 freeway in Los Angeles feel about this. Surely it isn’t the Metro Green Line that is killing them.

    “Name calling is juvenile and undermines anyone who uses that technique, including Antiplanner allies.”

    Hey, I’m just trying to fit in here.

  28. Andy says:

    That is the problem, Spokker. Dan has so contaminated the discussion here that intelligent people think they have to resort to name calling. Let’s get rid of that and just have intelligent discussions.

  29. Scott says:

    Spokker,
    Why did you falsely accuse me of name-calling? I think I know what you are thinking of, but it’s off.
    Example: it would be a dumb idea to think that people would be happy with walking the same distances in Miami as in St.Paul.
    It would be a dumb idea to think that people would be content with taking suitcases all around for purchases & that even all items can fit.
    It would be a dumb idea that a person in a car would wear one headphone, with only the MP3 format, rather than listen to the car audio system, with better sound & many choices.

    Hey, to tell you the truth, I don’t even recall you name-calling.
    Maybe I just read it as “not clearly thought out” or “no valid content to type”.
    I’m not sure about the “fitting in”. There are a few who use puerile tactics here, but their low-esteem, lack of thinking ability & paucity of substance, really show.

    When I am referring to crime in taking transit, that does not just mean on the bus or rail-car. It means in the station, & during walking to & from. Could that be called dumb to think it was crime only on vehicles?

    For regional rail commuting, most of those people have cars too, but decide to work farther away & also have higher incomes. You are probably aware of that.
    Separating the public transit for commuting only & then for most purpose, is needed for more thorough analysis & perspective.

    Point is, outside of commuting only, regular transit has many negatives.
    If you can overcome them, good for you. There are just too many drawbacks & trade-offs to have no car & rely on public transit, biking & walking.

    BTW, the LA has about the lowest amount of freeway-lanes per capita.
    It’s also the densest UA in the nation. The SF Bay UA is 2nd.
    Point is, not enough roads to handle needs, & more people in the area, creates more traffic in the same area.

    Most urban areas in the Great Plains (ie the KSC & OKC UAs, as well as any UA in Texas, except Austin, which has been malpracticing dumb growth) have low densities & a good amount of freeways & less congestion. According to NU (new urbanism) dogma & the general APA stance, that should not be the case; those 2 conditions should create congestion.

  30. Spokker says:

    “it would be a dumb idea to think that people would be happy with walking the same distances in Miami as in St.Paul.”

    When did I ever say that?

    “It would be a dumb idea to think that people would be content with taking suitcases all around for purchases & that even all items can fit.”

    It would be a dumb idea to think that someone always needs a suitcase, or that a suitcase cannot be put on rollers. My God, can’t carry a suitcase around? What do you do when you fly?

    “It would be a dumb idea that a person in a car would wear one headphone, with only the MP3 format, rather than listen to the car audio system, with better sound & many choices.”

    Not if what they want to listen to is on their MP3 player and not on the radio or on CD. Of course, when I’m out and about on transit, I’m never wanting for things to listen to. I can listen to my own music, downloaded podcasts, or stream music and even video on the 3G connection. It works wonderfully.

    “There are a few who use puerile tactics here, but their low-esteem, lack of thinking ability & paucity of substance, really show.”

    Friend, your posting style is probably one of the most annoying that someone on the Internet can adopt. I would look within for evidence of lack of thinking ability and low self-esteem.

    “When I am referring to crime in taking transit, that does not just mean on the bus or rail-car. It means in the station, & during walking to & from. Could that be called dumb to think it was crime only on vehicles?”

    It’s only a matter of time before I am stabbed in the train station! I am done for!

    What I am telling you is that I would rather be on a rail platform than in a parking structure. Maybe when someone tries to rape me in the parking structure I can find a blue light to hit that might send someone out to help, haha.

    “There are just too many drawbacks & trade-offs to have no car & rely on public transit, biking & walking.”

    You fail to recognize the drawbacks of driving of course. Studies link freeway pollution to hardening of the arteries. That’s only the latest study. Many of the people affected most are low income people of color who don’t even own a car, yet the freeways were jammed through their neighborhoods many years ago.

    I do not want to drive my car on a freeway through Compton if I can help it. Instead, I will take transit to Compton and have lunch at my favorite place for ribs, stimulating the local economy.

    “Point is, not enough roads to handle needs, & more people in the area, creates more traffic in the same area.”

    Los Angeles seems to be slowly moving from the goal of moving cars to moving people. The needs of LA are different from the needs of other cities. To build more freeway lanes in Los Angeles is to put a band-aid on the problem. In many places more lanes aren’t even feasible. Transit is where the big gains in capacity can be made and are being made.

    “Most urban areas in the Great Plains (ie the KSC & OKC UAs, as well as any UA in Texas, except Austin, which has been malpracticing dumb growth) have low densities & a good amount of freeways & less congestion.”

    Yeah, and they don’t have as many people. And their economies aren’t as large. Low density, less congestion, less opportunity, less choice. People aspire to move to the West Coast from the Midwest in order to achieve their dreams because there is more opportunity here.

  31. Spokker says:

    One of the things I find most ironic, Scott, is that you post on a libertarian web site which is supposedly all about freedom, yet you are so closed-minded in your thinking on just about every issue, from MP3 players vs. car stereos to luggage. The car stereo may be right for you, for example, but it’s not right for me. I don’t listen to the radio or CDs that much.

    You simply don’t understand that people have different needs and wants than you. You discount the things other people need or want, yet you never discount the things you need or want. I am willing to talk about the drawbacks of transit. Are you willing to recognize the drawbacks of personal automobiles, which are many?

  32. Spokker says:

    However, you might be happy to know that I am driving today because they cut the weekend morning train into Los Angeles recently. Even on a weekend, it’s going to take an hour and a half to get home 🙂

    More lanes!

  33. prk166 says:

    “Much of the crime associated with transit actually happens in the park and ride lots. Right of the bat, having a car makes you a target (they see your GPS dock and smash goes the window, which can happen anywhere).” – Spokker

    For anyone reading this, please keep in mind anything visible in your car is a target for characters that break into them. Heck, it’s gotten the point that these characters will break a window and pop the trunk in hopes that there is something in there for them. The risks are rather low.

    “Yeah, and they don’t have as many people. And their economies aren’t as large. Low density, less congestion, less opportunity, less choice. People aspire to move to the West Coast from the Midwest in order to achieve their dreams because there is more opportunity here.” – Spokker

    Actually, statically, that isn’t the case today. It may have been at one time in the 1970s. Most people growing up in smaller midwest towns move to bigger midwest cities. And when they’re not moving to Minneapolis, Indianapolis, Omaha or Des Moines, they’re moving to places like Dallas (8th largest Metro in the US IIRC and on the Great Plains) Salt Lake City or Denver or Phoenix or Houston or Charlotte or Atlanta or Orlando.

    http://technorati.com/lifestyle/article/top-2009-growth-cities/
    http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/6927069.html
    http://phoenix.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2010/03/22/daily32.html

  34. Scott says:

    Spokker,

    My example of walking was not directed at you. It was just random & general.
    However, it did point out that some are very pro walking & biking, while disregarding climate.

    Carrying a suitcase is a pain, especially for 2+ round trips each week, for 5+ reasons, which are so simple, they do not really need to be laid out. Perhaps for you though.

    You are getting pretty ridiculous about listening to one headphone in the car compared to many other options. Headphones on transit are counter to socializing, & can prevent hearing relevant talk or noise (ie traffic to avoid).

    I’m not sure what you see about my “annoying style”. No specifics were mentioned.
    It’s like saying “you’re a bonehead.” It can be annoying to be proven wrong & to want to avoid gov mandates.

    You are ridiculous in claiming that there is a great chance of getting stabbed.
    If you are not aware of conditions that lead to more crime potential, you need to read more.
    Of course with other people, there is less chance of crime, but you seem to ignore an average person being alone, at many times, when walking to & from stops & even at stops (much more for buses) & after sunset.

    If you & the <4% of the population (over 25% of them have cars too), can minimize the negatives of public transit, good for you.
    Over 80% of the population don't agree.

    I'm not sure what you see as close-minded & non-freedom. I'm not saying that "these" are definite negatives, hated equally be all & best to avoid.
    If some people can overcome those (very few do or want to), & persevere with public transit, fine for them. Public transit for commuting only does not really count though. There are other negatives that I haven't even mentioned.

    I'll give you a personal example. I live in downtown San Jose, with access to LRT & about a dozen bus routes. It's great to go to airport, but that's it. For maybe 20% of my destinations, I could take 2-3 routes, over 3x the time. Most places, I definitely a car. The convenience is great. I don't go to SF. If I was, I might take Caltrain though.

    I'm not trying to convince others to avoid transit & to drive instead.
    But, the pro-transit people seem to claim that it's so great, & are often hypocritical themselves, being drivers. Even many general voters are that way, voting for transit (usually without considering costs, ie CA HSR), but wanting others to use, not themselves.

    Why would I be happy that you are driving today? For you to claim something like, shows you are missing points. It's great for each person to have the freedom to do what they want, without interfering with others' freedom. I would be glad for more to take public transit, for many reasons, but it's rarely for me & that's true for about 50x of vehicle passenger-miles vs public transit passenger-miles.

    More lanes are great. However the LA region doesn't really have room, as you mentioned.
    If the gas tax was increased ($1) that would reduce driving & allow for more efficient roads (more bridges). Congestion pricing would help, but that is difficult & expensive, for monitoring, collection & admin.
    Although, there are still efforts to increase density in LA, which just puts more people on the roads. The apprx 10% transit usage doesn't help much.

  35. Scott says:

    Additionally Spokker,
    Dan, Hrailman, Msetty & others, this whole thread is relevant too,

    You missed or avoided my point about many UAs, which have lower densities & more lane-miles/capita, have lower congestion.
    Those 2 conditions are supposed to lead to better traffic, by theory, but reality proves wrong.

    You went on about LA is more desirable & has more choice. More people, duh! So what?
    Did you forget the topic is transportation?
    There’s also much less public transit in lower densities, but less congestion, usually.
    You also contradicted yourself, again, versus what you said earlier, in response to location of work & home, that “some people have no choice.”
    I wasn’t aware of any slavery or involuntary confinement [for non-prisoners].
    Is that sarcasm, the thing that is annoying? Well, it doesn’t make sense that person has to live & work in a certain place, especially in an area with almost 20 million.

    The health problems you mentioned were not for drivers. I find it disgusting that cities allow home building near freeways, mainly as a noise problem, but there are many buyers. The “study” you linked to has many flaws. There are other variables, such as diet & exercise of those studied. Car exhaust is slightly everywhere (down 95% since 70s), & probably more so by local roads.

    You mentioned the 110. Kinda old excuse, that expired decades ago. That was built about 70 years ago. And most freeway in cities were finished by the 60s. There has been plenty of time to choose & move. Much building still goes on, even houses for $300,000+. Should there be a buffer zone of ~250′ from roads, for building? Fat chance. Most blocks are obsolete then.

    Go ahead, keep trying to convince others that public transit is not as bad as it is.
    Good luck, more power to you. Maybe some can ignore the shortcomings & tolerate.
    Of course, it depends on locations & individual needs/wants.

    **This highlights the hypocrisy of the ~anti-highway stance**
    –What’s the point of the market & freedom? It’s not anti-public transit.
    It’s taking money from the vast majority, to benefit a few, while also neglecting roads.
    Is it righteous for general funding going to <4% of the population? But for 80%+ is bad?

    –For highways, if gas tax was about $0.50/gallon more, general funding would not be needed, but it is rather irrelevant anyway, since about 90% of adults drive & 100% benefit from transportation of goods & other.
    For those who are against general funding for highways, on the grounds of not being directly user financed, then one should be against over 1/2 of gov expenditures.

    –Actually, there are more personal vehicles than driver's licenses. I'm not considering a portion of property taxes as general funds, since that is a part of the expense to living in a neighborhood, similar to protection (fire, police) education (schools, library) gov admin, etc. Also, buildings cannot really exist without roads.

  36. the highwayman says:

    Thank you Spokker!

    Scott, STFU!

  37. Richard B says:

    I have to agree. I suffered bouts of various respiratory illness when I did not have a car and relied on Trimet for transportation (1992-2000) compared to driving my self aft 2000. Max is worst because one is breathing recycled air with 100 of you fellow compacted travelers during rush hour.

  38. Scott says:

    Hman, you just admitted defeat, again. You cannot even argue or mention any of your points or lack of points.
    Just tell reason & facts to shit up. Quiet dissent.
    You have no substance.
    What are you even trying to prove or support?

  39. Scott says:

    This will only be read by those who look at the RSS

    Spokker, I just noticed this.
    You gave up on showing your perception for a ~10% exception, for transit negatives & driving positives, for your goal of each person riding transit.

    Your reasoning was horrible & was basically a tolerating gimmick.
    Examples:

    A car’s interior is spacious, has music & is comfortable. Your response had mention to having mental illness to being around strangers is fine & has no crime risk–only in transit areas. Privacy is a plus too, but it for avoidance of people. And car has more safety from crime & being hit, than walking.

    You prefer headphones & said no radio or CDs. The audio format/source was not the point, at all; it was the convenience & listening quality, for car systems, which can play digital.

    You impose your preference to carry/roll all purchases, rather than hold have in car truck. You also expanded my mention of trunk to having a truck, hardly used. I made no mention of truck. You need to exaggerate & misrepresent, for your pretensions.

Leave a Reply