Comments on: Envirowhacko update – Cheddar edition

By: Christopher

Christopher — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 19:58:12 +0000

Show me where the biggest votes against it have been recently. Charlotte voted to keep theirs, Dallas voters voted yes, Houston Voters, Denver, Salt Lake City.

By: steveegg

steveegg — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 19:50:26 +0000

And why millions more have voted against it.

By: Christopher

Christopher — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 19:43:38 +0000

You are right, we do like choices, that’s probably a big reason why millions of Americans have voted to build these systems because when the car is the only option, people don’t have a choice.

By: steveegg

steveegg — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 19:39:23 +0000

Glad to see you wised up a bit. Now that we’re past the pissing contest, let’s get to the business at hand.

I tend to distrust an analysis from an organization with a stake in providing a specific answer. Still, since that’s all we have, let’s roll with it.

Depending on factors beyond the control of the current crop of politicians (namely, pre-existing development), throwing more money down the mass transit hole may yield a higher percentage of return from fares. Still, there is no point of increased “investment” at where the marginal rate of return approaches that increase.

Specifically for rail, it has the disadvantages of being fixed in place, high-maintenance, and, in much of the country including the KRM corridor, in need of an almost-complete construction of the basic infrastructure. Buses, on the other hand, can adjust for people going where the central planners didn’t figure on them going (or going in larger numbers to the places the central planners wanted them to go), and cost less to operate.

The whole problem, at least for the central planners, is choice. America values having choice.

By: Christopher

Christopher — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 19:21:09 +0000

Okay maybe I did act a little immature but nobody is perfect.
My point is that transit does help take pressure off the roads and helps to save fuel, the TTI report confirms that. If it’s taxes you are worried about then I say legalize marijuana and put a tax on it and spend some of that money on our infrastructure. Study after study has shown alcohol to be the more dangerous substance.

By: steveegg

steveegg — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 19:11:17 +0000

It would seem you have the problem with the Chinese in general:

Christopher said on April 28th, 2008 at 21:34:

Steve are you going to go to China and say to them? Excuse me Chinks but you have no right to be building your economy because it boosts my pump prices at home. I am an American and I am better than you and I have a right to that resource and you don’t. I need it so I can show off my fancy vehicle and proove that I am better than others. Oh yeah that will work. LOL

Do consider this your last, public warning. It’s been a while since I threw somebody out of here, and I’m in a mercurial mood.

By: Christopher

Christopher — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 19:05:34 +0000

Shoebox, as I said before, the money is the price we pay to take the pressure off of roads and to save fuel. And I never said that transit was the only solution.
It’s not just Europe that has good transit systems, Asia does too. As should we. And it’s the voters who agree with me.
I believe we should subsidize what is beneficial including education and transportation. I do not believe in universal health care and I do not believe in prosecuting marijuana smokers.
And Steve do you have something against Chinese people? Look at the things that the Chinese have brought to this world and all the intellectuals, and their political and economic system is changing.
As for people dying on a train, you mentioned 66 people compare that to 40,000 Americans dying every year in car crashes.
And as for Shoebox the biggest road subsidy we pay is for the cost of air pollution. And it is an important issue, just ask anybody with asthma or bronchitis.

By: Shoebox

Shoebox — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 13:29:48 +0000

Why move to Eurabia when all of the real destructive work has already been done….much more fun to suck the blood out of something that is still alive!

By: Shoebox

Shoebox — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 13:24:37 +0000

Christopher,
And that is the problem….we’ve got bloated goverments and quasi governments (schools) at all levels because folks don’t want to be concerned about actual money equations they want to feel good about the money being spent. Even the report you reference says there is no 1 solution and multiple (including building roads) need to be included. There are finite resources available for transportation and they need to be prioritized. Not only to Choo Choos take a significant multiple of cost per passenger mile above roads to build but than they add to state deficits with ongoing subsidies.
If you’re sold on subsidies, good for you. I’d suggest you send a few hundred bucks additional to your state government and show your proportional support.

By: steveegg

steveegg — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 13:09:48 +0000

First things first, Christopher. If you want to try putting words in my mouth, at least get the terms right. It’s ChiCom, not Chink.

It’s funny that you brought China into the mix. I seem to recall seeing something in yesterday’s paint catcher about a train crash killing 66 in China.

As for the oil, my message is to the pols in DC – DRILL AND REFINE OUR OWN!

As for your desire to remake America in Eurabia’s image, may I suggest moving there?

By: Christopher

Christopher — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 12:04:15 +0000

Shoebox it is not required to support itself, I will say it again, the subsidies are the price we pay for conservation, and if you think that transit does nothing to help alleviate traffic congestion then read the Texas Transportation Institutes Urban Mobility Report of 2007, overall it saves us fuel and reduces road pressure by 13% nationally. That 13% is really good considering many of our cities are still underdeveloped in this category but we are catching up. It is no doubt higher than 13% in places like DC, New York, and Chicago. I trust the TTI over you.

By: Shoebox

Shoebox — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 03:48:52 +0000

Christopher, I suggest you work on a few facts rather than spewing on about what are no more than “good intentions.”

First, the population of the Confederate States voted to form the CSA primarily to retain the practice of slavery. I think this one example shows that a majority of people agreeing on something doesn’t always mean its right (think manmade global warming nonsense)

Second, you picked a couple of the worse systems for your examples. Denver only gets fares that cover 20% of its operating costs, Dalls only gets 10%. That means 80% – 90% of the Operating Costs of those two systems is paid for by the tax payers. That is only Operating Costs and doesn’t even consider any recovery of the capital cost. Compare that to gasoline which gets no subsidy (unless you count Ethanol nonsense but that’s actually increasing other costs)but in fact gets taxed at an average of $.42/gallon nationally. Gosh, if we could pay for everyone’s car and get their gas back to $.35/gallon, I’ll bet we’d find a lot more people that would want to drive rather than ride the choo choos.

Also, if you think lightrail helps traffic you need to spend some time in a city that has one. Any corridor that they traverse becomes snarled in traffic because the choo choo needs to stop traffic as it crosses intersections.

By: Christopher

Christopher — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 02:38:38 +0000

In Dallas, Denver, and Salt Lake City, these systems were not shoved down anybody’s throat because the voters voted on them and they voted yes. And they are riding them. Nice to have a break from traffic jams, pollution, and such. Go voters!

By: Christopher

Christopher — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 02:34:00 +0000

Steve are you going to go to China and say to them? Excuse me Chinks but you have no right to be building your economy because it boosts my pump prices at home. I am an American and I am better than you and I have a right to that resource and you don’t. I need it so I can show off my fancy vehicle and proove that I am better than others. Oh yeah that will work. LOL

By: Christopher

Christopher — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 02:24:43 +0000

Why don’t you go look at the numbers for light rail in cities like Salt Lake City, Denver, Dallas, just to name a few. What is your solution to transportation problems?
Are you going to go ask the Chinese to stop using so much petroleum?

By: Coop

Coop — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 02:00:12 +0000

About the OBD-II check… Mom’s van (2000 Dodge Caravan) has to have that done, and you’re right, all they do is plug in a computer. But all it checks is to see if the “Check Engine” light is on, or if the car’s computer is pitching any trouble codes. We found that out when a $3 fuse caused the Check Engine light to stay on, which caused the van to fail repeatedly.

The whole thing is a farce. Time for it to die.

By: steveegg

steveegg — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 01:44:12 +0000

Way up, you say? Let’s take a look at the Hiawatha service between Milwaukee and Chicago. The last ridership numbers for one of AMTRAK’s “success stories” had less than 600,000 riders served in fiscal year 2007, an increase of 2.6% from 2006.

Impressive? Let’s start deconstructing the numbers:

– Virtually all of those not-quite-600,000 riders took round-trips, so that number can be halved to 300,000.
– Assuming an even distribution of ridership over all 365 days (yes, that’s a dangerous assumption), that takes us down to under 1,000. For the sake of rounding, let’s call that 1,000 per day.
– It is fair to say that most of those using the service during the week are regular commuters, so I’ll be generous and say that there are 3,000 commuters.
– I’ll similarily be generous with the weekenders, and say there’s 6,000 of those.
– Toss in maybe a thousand that don’t fit in either, and that expensive service struggles to break 5 figures in the number of unique riders.

How expensive? AMTRAK charges Wisconsin and Illinois over $8 million for the service, and eats some of the fixed costs.

I’ll send you my bill for that subsidy.

By: Christopher

Christopher — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 00:42:57 +0000

Seems Steve that you like to call transit choo choos. Well guess what, it’s gotten support from conservatives, moderates, and liberals alike and has gotten many votes from voters. Ridership is way up in most places and the subsidies are the price we pay for conservation ;-)

By: Shoebox

Shoebox — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 23:26:40 +0000

Each state that has had these programs and honestly evaluated them found that they did not find all the envirohorrible cars they thought they would. As you’re seeing in Wisconsin, they eventually fail due to budget issues. Unfortunately you’re getting the drip, drip version.

By: Jeni

Jeni — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 23:11:16 +0000

…wouldn’t it behoove the state to test the cars most-likely to be polluting (i.e. the older ones)?

Exactly! This is so incredibly preposterous it can only be for one reason — for the Dim Dems to act like they care about the average working class guy/gal.

They ought to just do away with this whole foolish business of emissions testing, totally. Get rid of it already! I hate it, it’s inconvenient and my car is just over 2 years old and doesn’t even have 20,000 miles on it yet but I had to waste my time and gas to go down there and have them gun the engine a few times and tell me “Your car passed, ma’am”. DUH! Like there was ever any doubt??

Sorry…ranting. :(