With the end of the year, many people are making top ten lists for the last decade. The Antiplanner holds the quaint notion that the first year in history was year 1, which means the last year of this decade would be 2010, not 2009. On the other hand, every year is the end of some decade or other. In this way, you will be assured cheapest cialis online learn this here now of not having any side effects of the treatment. Tongkat ali could very well be a solution for free shipping viagra today’s active sexual partners. Vaginal atrophy creates intimate behave uncomfortable. viagra free A Canada Pharmacy can be helpful to people but there are sites that you need to be aware of your blood sugar level and consult your doctor, health care provider or 911(depending buy cheap sildenafil on the severity) at the first signs that something is awry.
In any case, 2009 is indeed the last year of a span of years whose third digit is 0, so the Antiplanner will spend the rest of this week writing about government planning disasters of this particular decade. I don’t know if the list will come to 10, but for now, I look forward to any nominations you may have.
http://www.transport-watch.co.uk/road-rail-comparisons.htm shows even the Brits, high density and all, are incapable of planning roads vs. railroads.
Merry Christmas lefties, I look forward to the complete list of logical fallacies being used by you to prove that railroads and Light Rail are gifts from the Sun-God, that roads and cars cane from Satan, that I am a jerk and the AP is a liar.
The big-mouth with the French-sounding name spewed forth:
Merry Christmas lefties, I look forward to the complete list of logical fallacies being used by you to prove that railroads and Light Rail are gifts from the Sun-God, that roads and cars cane from Satan, that I am a jerk and the AP is a liar.
To quote Randal,with a slight modification:
[A priori] ad hominem attacks and name-calling will reveal the shallowness of the author.
Well, I’ve never called Randal a liar. As I’ve said before, I know Randal believes what he says he believes. I think his politics and his views about transportation are mostly wrong, but that doesn’t mean I think he is honesty- or intellectually challenged, unlike some other spewing their dreck in this forum.
blacquejacqueshellac said: http://www.transport-watch.co.uk/road-rail-comparisons.htm shows even the Brits, high density and all, are incapable of planning roads vs. railroads.
THWM: Transport Watch? Come on, quoting a UK trucking lobbyist, that’s quoting Wendel Cox? That’s as bad as pimping O’Toole’s crooked junk data.
bjs: Merry Christmas lefties, I look forward to the complete list of logical fallacies being used by you to prove that railroads and Light Rail are gifts from the Sun-God, that roads and cars cane from Satan,
THWM: If there was 1 mile of rail line in the US for every 10 miles of road, now that would be awesome.
We’re not against roads, what we’re against is roads only policy.
bjs:that I am a jerk and the AP is a liar.
THWM: Sadly, that is correct.
I am always curious about those who complain of the makers of ad hominem arguments by calling them “big-mouth”, “shallow” and a “dreck spewer”.
Is my comment on “lefties” an ad hominem attack? Nu-uh, nope, “hominem” is singular, though it is a form of “argumentum ad populum”, but of course the “Merry Christmas” made ironical intent pretty clear.
How is it possible not to know that Blacques Jacques Shellacques from Montreal is a villain in the Warner Brothers Bugs Bunny cartoon collection, a French Canadian Yosemite Sam? His run-in with B. Bunny in the Yukon is a classic. Calling my nom de comment Fwench-sounding is a mighty big insult in these here parts.
So now we know msetty is serious, leftish, untutored in the modern arts and logical fallacies, likes ad hominem attacks himself but does not call AP a liar. Unlike DS and the Highwayperson and a few others.
So, how about that BritRail then?
Ah, hello Highwaydude, your comment intervened.
Why is AP a liar today? Enlighten me.
msetty said: To quote Randal,with a slight modification:
[A priori] ad hominem attacks and name-calling will reveal the shallowness of the author.
THWM: Then why does O’Toole make “ad hominem attacks” on railroads and transit?
Cox pulls the same bullshit on his site. “There is a single rule — ad hominem attacks and questioning of the motives of participants is not permitted.”
Though my favorite is: “What government does for one it should do for all;
What government does not do for all it should do for none.”
Now is that hypocrisy, hell yeah!
Though they get paid very well to produce all of this political bullshit.
LowRoadDude, please explain how it is possible to make an ad hominem attack on railroads and transit? Has the AP ever attacked the arguments for railroads and transit by citing irrelevant characteristics or beliefs of the persons advocating for them?
I think not.
He has, often, asked “Cui Bono” when someone argues for them and that is certainly an attack based on base motives, but such a double base argument is countenanced by logicians because it is like, y’know, “relevant”.
No, sorry LowRoad, old beast, I fear AP has taken the high road, not you, and will get to Scotland afore you.
So anyway, how bout that BritRail? Any lessons to be learned?
I hereby nominate airport security.
blacquejacqueshellac said: I think, not.
THWM: He attacks railroads & transit. Just because, they are railroads & transit.
The people that pay him don’t like competition to roads & automobiles.
AP,
Before nominating one’s favorite “government planning disaster,” some thought should be given to criteria. I suggest that the planning should not simply have failed in meeting its stated objectives. To be truly disastrous (and thus warrant a top 10 placing), there should be horrific unintended consequences. Even better, the unintended consequences should have been predicted contemporaneously by skeptics (“we told you so . . .”) or, at a minimum, predictable to anyone with an average IQ.
On these bases, I cannot in good conscience nominate my favorite agency’s planning during the past ten years. The US Forest Service has only wasted a chunk of the public’s money on forest planning. No unintended consequences resulted because only few, relatively non-controversial, forest plans were produced during the past decade. Forest Service planning exists for the purpose of planning, not to produce plans.
Happy Holidays,
Andy
HighwayDude, you say AP “attacks railroads & transit. Just because, they are railroads & transit.” but in the year and a bit I have been reading this blog I have seen no evidence at all to support your theory. None. Quite the reverse, he takes little choo choo train trips and claims to enjoy them. Perhaps you could cite me something.
You continually say: “The people that pay him don’t like competition to roads & automobiles.” and similar. That is a clear Cui Bono argument, but it fails until you cite something indicating who the payors are, why they don’t like rail, that they pay AP, directly or indirectly and that AP is likely under pressure to change his stated opinion as a result. Got something?
As for Mr. Stahl, good comment.
Hmmm, serious adverse consequences unintended by the planners, but pointed out as likely by others, I like that.
I nominate liberals, especially Barney Frank & Co. for the complete relaxation of credit standards for deadbeats so that every deadbeat can own, trash and abandon a home of their own, all without risking much, if any, of their own money. Who woulda thunk that deadbeats would stay deadbeats, not become citizen types and not repay the loans? Quelle surprise!
I nominate:
1. the Iraq War.
2. the Afghanistan War
3. the inability to pay for these wars on account of decimating revenue (Bush tax cuts)
4. the Republican Campaign of 2008
5. Tea Party Resistance to anything (impotent)
I’d add to t g’s comment
6. the plan by the opposition party (not for too much longer, alas) of alienating the smart people in their party, with the consequence of ending up with the Palin-worshippers and anti-intellectual crowd.
7. The plan of the Energy Interests to use a Big Tobacco-like
deceptionplan to delay polluter pays policy action, with the consequence of many more hundreds of $Bns needed to adapt and mitigate.8. The plan of deregulating the Financial Interests, esp. repeal of Glass-Stigall act. This plan of deregulating consequently led directly to the financial bubble.
9. The plan to kick the can down the road wrt maintaining critical infrastructure. It hits home here on the Front Range about once a quarter.
DS
Dan,
In regards to #8, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act that repealed Glass-Steagall occurred during the last decade (It was signed into law in 1999).
Thank you MJ, that’s what I get for relying on memory. I stand corrected.
DS