LA Times: U.S. Love Affair With The Car Ending

Calif Bill wrote:
"Bolwerk" wrote in message
...
SMS wrote:
Bolwerk wrote:

It would be *more* fuel efficient to arrange lifestyles so that you can
walk to do at least some things.
Well yes, that's exactly what I did. I bought a house close-in, rather
than out in the new suburbs where you get more house for the money, but
have to drive everywhere. I can walk to about 60 restaurants within 20
minutes, and walk to two supermarkets, three drug stores, Target, Home
Depot, a decaying mall, etc. The kids can walk to school.
Feel free not to answer (I'm really just curious, based on your
description), but where do you live?

Still, it's the after-school activities, softball, soccer, baseball,
climbing, etc., that require driving, and that require trading off on
carpools. The difference between now and the 60's is that there was far
less after school stuff, and the stay at home mom, could be a personal
chauffeur for the kids.
Yeah, I understand all that. FYI, I don't consider all driving, or all
automobile use, unreasonable.

The problem with the automobile is that we've let the right wing oil
companies and politicians define the whole economic structure of personal
transportation, for their own economic benefit. We could learn a lot from
other countries, which also have a history of private automobile use, but
have regulated it in a way that benefits the country as a whole, rather
than a small number of corporations. Ironically, the politicians that
scream the loudest about personal freedom are the ones whose policies
will end up taking it away.


You refeer to countries in Europe who control a lot of driving via high cost
of fuel, high cost of license, and the public transit is because you have a
very high density of people in a small area. I doubt you realise how
compact most of Europe is.

Me? I'm quite aware of how densely populated Europe is. (I'm guessing
you're responding to SMS.)

Actually, though, it's also rather surprising how much driving some
Europeans do. There was recently an interesting article on I think the
BBC about Milan and its love of cars (it's, of course, something of the
Los Angeles of Europe in terms of air pollution).

On the other hand, there are rural areas of Europe that have transit
systems too, so go figure. But for all the talk of "small town
America," I don't suppose we really have a lot of small towns anymore
that really could facilitate the complementary pedestrian and transit
modes (even simple street cars, which you certainly used to see in small
cities, have all but disappeared in the U.S.).

Jamie Brinkoeter wrote:
"Scott en Aztlán" wrote in message
...
"Jamie Brinkoeter" said in
misc.transport.urban-transit:

Or, better still, use public transit for commuting, and *rent* the SUV
when you actually need one.
You have to live somewhere that actually *has* public transit to use it.
It's a free country. You can live anywhere you choose.

Not everyone lives, or wants to live, on the east or west coast. Should we
all decide where to live based on whether they have public transit? Boy,
that would wreak some havoc on the populations of major metropolitan areas.
I live in a smallish town about 30 miles from Austin, Texas. A lot of people
who live here (and in other towns surrounding Austin) work in Austin. We
certainly choose to live here and I, for one, wouldn't give up the Texas
Hill Country for the pleasure of riding a bus or train to work. I'm sure
that feeling exists in many, many places. Would it be nice to have public
transit available? Sure. Would enough people use it to make it economically
feasible? Probably not.



And a lot of people who don't live near the east or west coast enjoy one
of the best commuter rail systems in North America. They live near Chicago!

As for the Texas hill country...well my Grandmother on Dad's side is
from there. I still have family in Marble Falls, Fredricksberg and
Stephensville. It is very nice country to look at, but I wouldn't want
to live there...humid (with "dry counties" no less!), bugs, etc. Nice
folks, to be sure, and all of my family that is still there wouldn't
leave Texas for anything. But I am glad my Great Grandfather opted to
leave over 100 years ago for California, where again, a lot of folks
simply wouldn't live anywhere else!

Regards,

DAve

In article , Bolwerk
wrote:

You refeer to countries in Europe who control a lot of driving via
high cost
of fuel, high cost of license, and the public transit is because you have a
very high density of people in a small area. I doubt you realise how
compact most of Europe is.

Me? I'm quite aware of how densely populated Europe is. (I'm guessing
you're responding to SMS.)

Actually, though, it's also rather surprising how much driving some
Europeans do. There was recently an interesting article on I think the
BBC about Milan and its love of cars (it's, of course, something of the
Los Angeles of Europe in terms of air pollution).

On the other hand, there are rural areas of Europe that have transit
systems too, so go figure.


But you see, that is the difference: because of the number of people in
Europe that get around using public transit (which, by the way, tends to
be fairly well thought out and reasonably quick) driving is still
something that *can* be pleasurable there. In the USA driving has become
a daily chore akin to cleaning the toilet or doing the laundry.

--
-Glennl
The despammed service works OK, but unfortunately
now the spammers grab addresses for use as "from" address too!
e-mail hint: add 1 to quantity after gl to get 4317.

On Sun, 04 Feb 2007 04:05:42 GMT, "Jamie Brinkoeter"
wrote:


"Scott en Aztlán" wrote in message
.. .
"sharx35" said in misc.transport.urban-transit:

Or, better still, use public transit for commuting, and *rent* the SUV
when you actually need one.

That doesn't really work. Families often need the larger vehicle every
weekend, and several times during the week. Where they don't need it, is
in everyday commuting. The SUV or minivan has become the defacto
replacement for the large station wagons of the past. At least they get
better mileage.

So, who put a gun to their heads and forced them to have that many
children
that they NEED a SUV? 2 or 3 children can EASILY be transported in the
back
seat of even a medium-sized car.

And who put a gun to their heads and forced them to buy a house that's
so far away from school, activities, and everything else that the kids
need to be driven EVERYWHERE?


I thankfully don't have kids in school any more, but are you suggesting that
children be allowed to ride public transportation alone?


I did in Evanston, Illinois starting at age 10 or 12 in the early
1950's.

Hello, Clark!
You wrote on Sun, 04 Feb 2007 13:09:48 GMT:

?? "Scott en Aztlán" wrote in
?? message ...
?? "sharx35" said in
misc.transport.urban-transit:
??
?? Or, better still, use public transit for commuting,
?? and *rent* the SUV when you actually need one.
?? And who put a gun to their heads and forced them to buy
a
?? house that's so far away from school, activities, and
?? everything else that the kids need to be driven
?? EVERYWHERE?
??
?? I thankfully don't have kids in school any more, but are
?? you suggesting that children be allowed to ride public
?? transportation alone?

I grew up in Britain and I certainly remember using public
transportation, including the London Underground, at the age of
11. In fact, that's how I got from the suburb of Pudsey (great
name, isn't it?) to my school in central Leeds (no school bus!).

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.comcast.not

Clark F Morris wrote:

On Sun, 04 Feb 2007 04:05:42 GMT, "Jamie Brinkoeter"
wrote:

I thankfully don't have kids in school any more, but are you suggesting that
children be allowed to ride public transportation alone?


I did in Evanston, Illinois starting at age 10 or 12 in the early
1950's.

In NYC a friend's kid started riding the city bus to school when he was
11. He's 17 now. Public transportation gives kids a lot more freedom.

John Mara

David Nebenzahl schrieb:


There was, at least in the San Francisco Bay Area:
http://www.bikesummer.org/1999/zine/freewayRevolt.htm


Thanks, this is interesting.


Hans-Joachim

Jamie Brinkoeter schrieb:


I thankfully don't have kids in school any more, but are you suggesting that
children be allowed to ride public transportation alone?


A better question is, wether they should be allowed to ride in the car
of their parents, which is about 10 times more dangerous than riding the
rails.

In countries with an existing public transport network, pupils/students
riding public transport alone make up about 1/3 of total education
traffic. For rail operators in rural areas, kids riding alone are about
60% of the passengers.

Here some horror pictures to scare you:
http://www.breisgau-s-bahn.de/img/impression_nr30.jpg
http://www.breisgau-s-bahn.de/img/impression_nr16.jpg
http://www.breisgau-s-bahn.de/img/impression_nr09.jpg
That's a small operation into a rural area near Freiburg/Germany. They
run a single DMU off peak, and couple 5 units for the school peak, which
means more than 500 children riding public transport alone, just within
that single hour.

Nobody has yet detected a problem with it, with the exception of
discipline problems of the kids. Riding such a train means, that the
little deleted can really get on your nerves.


Here some more pictures out of old units, which were kept around for the
school peaks:
http://zu-den-zuegen.de/seiten/mensc...90-hofheim.jpg
http://zu-den-zuegen.de/seiten/mensc...5-imschibu.jpg
http://zu-den-zuegen.de/seiten/ohneworte/schulerzug.jpg
Quite typical scene for trains in rural environment during school peak.


Hans-Joachim




--
The United States has the best recovery money can buy.

Kenneth Rogoff

Calif Bill schrieb:


You refeer to countries in Europe who control a lot of driving via high cost
of fuel, high cost of license, and the public transit is because you have a
very high density of people in a small area. I doubt you realise how
compact most of Europe is.

Last time I looked at a map, it wasn't.

Sweden has a lower population density than the USA, but 14 times the
rail modal share.


Hans-Joachim


--
The United States has the best recovery money can buy.

Kenneth Rogoff

Jamie Brinkoeter wrote:

I thankfully don't have kids in school any more, but are you suggesting that
children be allowed to ride public transportation alone?

Happens all the time in NYC and San Francisco, once the kids are about 10.