I try to deal mainly in facts while many who disagree with me seem to deal mainly with emotions, such fear of global warming or compassion for the poor. Of course, your emotions on these subjects are only legitimate so long as you agree with their prescriptions.
One thing they are good at is coming up with appealing terms that are, in fact, meaningless. Complete streets, for example. Who would want an incomplete street? Or how about smart growth, a term that says nothing about what it means, but that was specifically picked so they could accuse anyone who disagreed with them of being for dumb growth.
When we come up with terms, we try to make them as accurately descriptive as possible, but the results aren’t very appealing. Mileage-based user fees, for example. Are you for embuff? Or how about road user charges, or RUCs. That doesn’t sound appealing at all. In fact, it rhymes with some potentially unappealing things. “RUCs sucks; don’t get f**ked by RUCs.” Continue reading
