An interesting discussion on Planetizen that demonstrates that density by itself
does not automatically favour walkability: the poor design of a neigbourhood in
Jerusalem makes it well nigh impossible to easily get to nearby destinations by
foot in a reasonable length of time:
http://www.planetizen.com/node/53467
Christopher Miller
Montreal QC Canada
First an article that may be of interest to some:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/08/arts/design/taking-parking-lots-seriously-as-p\
ublic-spaces.html?_r=1&hp
Second, I shared the recent video of Crawford with an American acquaintance. He
responded 'sign me up'. I think that what is really needed is how to transform
cities (and other areas) to be car free. For example how can Philadelphia or
New York be transformed (what would the stages be, what can be meaningfully done
with the space that is freed, how could transportation of goods work, etc). I
think, as a start, my acquaintance should ditch his car and struggle with a poor
public transportation system and the danger of walking/biking.
Reading the comments I struggled to find any that suggested having fewer cars.
It makes me wonder if its true or an urban myth that there are people who’d
rather be diagnosed with cancer than be told they cannot have a car.
Simon
(Long term lobbyist for car free cities, car divorcee (I got the house and -
well - everything)
Simon & Linda Baddeley
34 Beaudesert Road
Handsworth
Birmingham B20 3TG
United Kingdom
00 44 121 554 9794 mobile 00 44 7548 820658
s.j.baddeley@...<mailto:s.j.baddeley@...> 00 44 121 414 5002
Skype: sibadd or linbadd
+33 6981758522
http://democracystreet.blogspot.com<http://democracystreet.blogspot.com/>
On 6 Jan 2012, at 18:29, hkcarley wrote:
First an article that may be of interest to some:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/08/arts/design/taking-parking-lots-seriously-as-p\
ublic-spaces.html?_r=1&hp
Second, I shared the recent video of Crawford with an American acquaintance. He
responded 'sign me up'. I think that what is really needed is how to transform
cities (and other areas) to be car free. For example how can Philadelphia or New
York be transformed (what would the stages be, what can be meaningfully done
with the space that is freed, how could transportation of goods work, etc). I
think, as a start, my acquaintance should ditch his car and struggle with a poor
public transportation system and the danger of walking/biking.
Interesting. In 2006, when I was there, this was not a
nice city to walk in except for a few small areas in
the center.
J.
>Welcome to the new Seville, a cleaner, greener and more breathable metropolis,
where bikes, pedestrians and streamlined electric trams roam. This Spanish city
has bidden adios to the organized urban chaos found in so many Mediterranean
cities and embraced a more sustainable outlook.
>
>Kick-started by proactive city mayor, Alfredo Sánchez Monteseirín in 2007, the
lightning pace of Seville’s “greening” defies its laidback fiesta and siesta
image. In the span of just five years, the Sevillanos have instituted a
community bike-sharing scheme, a surface tram, an underground metro, two
high-speed train links, a pilot electric car programme and -- 20km away in
Sanlúcar la Mayor -- the first commercial solar power plant in Europe.
>
>After decades of driving chaos, the inauguration of Seville’s
<http://www.sevici.es/>Sevici bike-sharing scheme in April 2007 was something of
a godsend, even for avowed car users. Sevici was the second bike-sharing
initiative in Spain (there are now nine), opening a few weeks after Barcelona’s
<http://www.bicing.cat/>Bicing programme. Despite subsequent copyists -- Paris’
Vélib was launched in 2009 -- it remains the fifth largest scheme of its kind in
Europe, with 2,500 bikes on offer. Grab a two-wheeled machine from any of the
250 docking stations and you will quickly discover that cycling suits this flat,
balmy metropolis.
>
>Most of Sevici’s 250,000 daily users are local, but visitors can take advantage
of the sharing system by purchasing a seven-day pass online for 10 euros (plus a
150 euro returnable deposit). You will need to proceed to the nearest docking
station and punch in the number from your coded receipt to get your bike.
Seville has 120km of city bike lanes and the first 30 minutes of usage are free.
Beyond that, it is one euro for the first hour and two euros an hour thereafter.
>
>
>More:
><http://www.bbc.com/travel/feature/20120105-seville-goes-green>http://www.bbc.c\
om/travel/feature/20120105-seville-goes-green
----- ### -----
J.H. Crawford
mailbox@...
http://www.carfree.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/carfreecities
Video channels:
http://vimeo.com/jhcrawford/videoshttp://www.youtube.com/user/CarfreeCities
I think that the bus option has to be more supported (it is probably the only
option for many--at least as a transition alternative). As a long commuter trip
I personally prefer the Academy bus (NJ) to the NJ Transit trains due to the
fact that they are more comfortable (quieter). I also prefer the NJ Transit
buses to the local light rail due to the fact that the passenger behavior is
more civilized. It seems that until people (at least in NJ) are used to using
public transportation they often exhibit what I call territorial behavior (seat
hogging, playing loud music, spitting, etc). Buses could be made a whole lot
better and if people are told that they should have a rail or nothing they will
certainly hold onto their cars like an addict (which they are likely to do
anyway). I don't think a rail will be coming to most places in America. I
think the first goal should be to get the private cars out.
Hi All,
This is a significant study:
http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=106491
UXBRIDGE, Canada, Jan 19, 2012 (IPS) - The only green in biodiesel fuel is the
money producers make from it, new research has revealed.
Most biodiesel production is making climate change worse not better,
<http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/issues/view.php?sf=68>studies show. Biodiesel
from palm oil plantations may be the world's dirtiest fuel - far worse than
burning diesel made from oil when the entire production life cycle is
considered.
Biodiesel made from the many palm oil plantations on Indonesia's peatlands have
a "carbon debt of 200 years", said Louis Verchot, a research scientist at the
<http://www.cifor.org/>Center for International Forestry Research in Bogor,
Indonesia.
This means it will take 200 years of continuous biodiesel production from these
palm oil plantations to pay off the "carbon debt" that results from land
conversion and indirect land use changes.
Verchot and colleagues' study is the first real-world look at the climate
impacts of biodiesel and was published last month in the journal Ecology and
Society. The study looked at biodiesel production involving palm oil, jatropha
and soy at 12 sites in six different countries.
"Our study shows we have to eliminate a lot of what we're trying to do in the
name of protecting the atmosphere," he said.
Global biodiesel production worldwide has risen by 10 times over the last eight
years, topping 11 billion litres in 2010, according to the International Energy
Agency. Ethanol production has risen by more than four times since 2000 and was
close to 90 billion litres by the end of 2011. Those gains are being driven by
government policies that mandate ever increasing amounts of biofuel be used in
transportation fuels.
When burned, biodiesel emits between 40 and 75 percent less climate- heating
carbon than regular diesel, according to various estimates. However, in order to
grow palm oil, Indonesia's peat forests have been cleared and burned, resulting
in huge emissions of carbon - on the order of 200 to 300 tonnes of carbon per
hectare - Verchot told IPS.
In addition, these wet peatlands are drained and when exposed to air the peat
decomposes and releases about 10 tonnes of carbon per hectare per year. The
resulting "carbon debt" is so large it will take 200 years of continuous
biodiesel production from these palm oil plantations to pay it off, he said.
In other words, if palm oil was planted during Napoleon's invasion of Russia, it
would still be paying off its carbon debt today.
"I don't know of any place in the world where a single crop has been grown that
long," Verchot said.
The size of the carbon debt of biodiesel from palm oil plantations has been
seriously underestimated, said Ross Morrison of Britain's University of
Leicester. Morrison is co-author of an independent analysis completed before
Verchot's study was published.
Biodiesel from tropical peatlands emits more carbon than diesel from oil,
Morrison and his colleagues reported in their analysis for the
<http://www.theicct.org/>International Council on Clean Transportation.
Tropical peatlands in Southeast Asia hold more carbon than tropical forests and
are under steady conversion to highly profitable palm oil plantations.
Conversion of these lands also has negative impacts on local peoples and results
in loss of habitat for many species, including endangered orangutans and
Sumatran tigers.
"Projections indicate an increase in palm oil plantations on peat to a total
area of 2.5 million ha by the year 2020 in western Indonesia alone – an area
equivalent in size to the land area of the United Kingdom," said Sue Page,
co-author of the Leicester study.
The study also concluded that biofuels grown in Europe are no better than
oil-based fuels, and biodiesel made from food crops like soy and rapeseed are
worse. Bioethanol or biodiesel from waste cooking oil, on the other hand, could
still offer carbon savings.
While palm oil plantations have long been criticised by environmentalists,
Verchot's study also looked at biodiesel made from Jatropha and grown in Ghana,
Zambia and Tanzania. The study found it had a 100-year carbon debt on average,
although the debt could be as high as 300 years depending on where it is grown.
Jatropha yields much less oil per hectare than palm oil and more land must be
cultivated, increasing its carbon debt.
Biodiesel made from soy grown on Brazil's dry cerrado grasslands in the state of
Mato Grosso had the smallest carbon debt of the 12 study sites in six countries,
at about 30 years. The main reason the carbon debt is low is because the cerrado
doesn't have much biomass to begin with, Verchot said.
It is unknown whether soy could actually be grown year and year for three to
four decades.
"We're not saying that all biofuels are bad. What we've found is that the right
circumstances for growing biofuels are much more limited than people realise,"
he said.
Verchot's study did not look at the social impacts of biodiesel production.
There is very little land capable of growing food on the planet that someone is
not already using. Large-scale biodiesel crops often displace small landholders
and local people who often don't have formal land titles, resulting in growing
numbers of conflicts over land grabbing.
"Biofuels certainly create incentives for land grabbing," he says.
The biofuel industry and its supporters see things very differently. One reason
is that the European Union has a goal of biofuels providing 10 percent of all
transport fuels by 2020. The U.S. has target of tripling biofuel use from 2009
to 2022. Other nations also have targets as well creating a very large market in
need of supply.
Attention is turning to Africa and its more than one billion hectares of
rain-fed croplands as the next big source of biofuels.
Biofuels can be Africa's next big cash crop, according to the new book "Biofuels
in Africa" published by the World Bank last year.
"Abundant natural resources and low-cost labor make producing biofuel feedstocks
a viable alternative to traditional crops," the book says.
While noting that the effectiveness of biofuels in reducing emissions is in
dispute, the U.S. or Europe will have to import increasing volumes of biofuels
to meet their targets. In addition, the high fossil fuel prices mean Africa will
produce much more biofuel for domestic markets in the coming decade, it
concludes.
Governments, agribusiness, energy companies and venture capitalists have
invested many billions of dollars into biofuels for at best a tiny net reduction
and quite likely an increase in greenhouse gas emissions. Most climate experts
say biofuels are not even in the top five things that need to be done to meet
the climate change challenge.
"It turns out that biofuels are not the miracle crop people had hoped it would
be," Verchot said.
----- ### -----
J.H. Crawford . Carfree Cities
mailbox@... . http://www.carfree.com
Business owners moaned, but were wrong as usual, as São Paulo's
economy thrives in the years after billboards and other "visual
blight" advertising are banned. HP official notes they had "had never
considered how inefficient billboards and the like were until they
were illegal."
http://t.co/xNzgFsmg
Same with pandering to cars vs. emphasizing bikes, transit, &
walking: businesses oppose changes reflexively, but become
enthusiastic when they see the results of reducing car dependence.
Rick
--
Richard Risemberg
http://www.bicyclefixation.comhttp://www.newcolonist.comhttp://www.rickrise.com
Hi All,
I had this e-mail today, which I thought might be
an interesting opportunity for someone on this list.
Best,
Joel
>From: "Woldeamanuel, Mintesnot G" <mintesnot.woldeamanuel@...>
>To: "Woldeamanuel, Mintesnot G" <mintesnot.woldeamanuel@...>
>Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 09:13:19 -0800
>
>Good morning
>
>My name is Mintesnot Woldeamanuel and I am a professor at California
>State University Northridge in the Department of Urban Studies and
>Planning. My colleague, Professor Claude Willey, and I are putting
>together a book proposal on travel behavior and contemporary
>transportation. I am familiar with your work, that focuses on one or
>more of the topics listed below, and I am sending this information in
>the hope that you might contribute a chapter for possible inclusion in
>the book. Please look over our intentions below, and consider
>submitting your abstract. I would also appreciate you forwarding this
>information to your colleagues.
>
>CALL FOR BOOK CHAPTERS
>
>Book title: DRIVING LESS: Travel Behavior in Contemporary Transportation
>
>This book aims to be a compilation of contemporary thinking on the
>needed changes associated with global travel/transport behavior. We
>are looking for papers/book chapters focusing on the environmental and
>health impacts of automobile use, travel behavior, transport
>alternatives (cycling, pedestrian, carfree design, transit) and/or
>strategies and policies promoting changes in travel behavior and
>sustainable transportation development. The goal of this book is to
>exchange ideas and enhance the present discussion about travel
>behavior in the widest possible sense. We are open to papers/chapters
>from a range of disciplines including, but not limited to, urban
>planning, geography, sociology, psychology, behavioral studies, urban
>design, transportation design and activist perspectives.
>
>A selection will be made from the papers we receive, and those papers
>will go on to serve as chapters in the next step of our book proposal.
>At that point, a publisher will be sought for the project. The book
>will address the following topics, but it is by no means limited to them:
>
>PART I- ENVIRONMENTAL AND HEALTH IMPACTS OF DRIVING
>-Automobility: historical perspective
>-Environmental impacts of automobility
>-Automobile dependency and public health
>
>PART II- BREAKING THE HABIT: TRAVEL BEHAVIOR CHANGE
>-Driving: a habit or a necessity?
>-Unnecessary car trips
>-Examples of ‘travel behavior change’ research and programs
>-Travel Feedback Program of Japan
>-Travel Blending of Australia
>-IndiMark®
>-InMotion of King County, WA, USA
>-Car-lite of CA, USA
>-Others
>
>PART III- DRIVE-ALTERNATIVES
>-Walking
>-Bicycling
>-Public transportation
>-Car pool/car share
>-Flexible working hours
>-Telecommuting
>-Pedestrian and cycling facilities
>-Perception of public transportation and walking/ bicycling environments
>-Bicycle, walking and public transportation courses in universities
>
>PART IV- STRATEGIES FOR SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORTATION
>-TOD: land use and transportation connection
>-Complete street
>-Compact cities
>-Livable cities
>-Fuel/energy efficient vehicles OR compact/livable/TOD cities? Which
>one is sustainable?
>
>Important dates:
>Author’s intention: title, abstract (250 words), name, address
>(including e-mail address), affiliation- by March 31, 2012. At this
>point we will submit our book proposal using the abstracts submitted
>and the full papers will be requested if and when the book contract is
>solidified.
>
>Electronic Submission:
>An author guideline will be sent to the intended contributors after
>the acceptance of abstracts. All abstracts and potential chapters are
>required to be submitted electronically as email attachment in MS Word
> file format to Dr. Mintesnot Woldeamanuel (Email:
>mintesnot.woldeamanuel@...<mailto:mintesnot.woldeamanuel@...>>) or
Claude Willey (Email:
>claude.willey@...<mailto:claude.willey@...>)
>
>Editors:
>Mintesnot Woldeamanuel, PhD., California State University, Northridge, CA
>Claude Willey, M.F.A., California State University, Northridge, CA
>
>I am looking forward to hearing from you.
>
>Sincerely
>
>Mintesnot Woldeamanuel, PhD
>Assistant Professor
>Department of Urban Studies and Planning
>College of Social and Behavioral Sciences
>California State University, Northridge
>18111 Nordhoff Street, Northridge, CA 91330
>Tel: 818-677-7246, Fax: 818-677-5850
>E-mail: mintesnot.woldeamanuel@...<mailto:mintesnot.woldeamanuel@...>
----- ### -----
J.H. Crawford
mailbox@...
http://www.carfree.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/carfreecities
Video channels:
http://vimeo.com/jhcrawford/videoshttp://www.youtube.com/user/CarfreeCities
Dear CFC list readers
Tallinn (capital of Estonia) City government will Poll Citizens on Free
Public Transport this March
http://news.err.ee/society/ecb6cbaf-3521-4bcf-8979-570dcfe8ab87
This proposal has come totally out from the blue. Tallinn just has drafted
a new public transport plan in August and there is no proposal of
considering free fares for residents, nor it has never been proposed by
transport professionals. Income from ticket sales is 20 million a year and
now that the mayor has shown the sources for finding this money for "free
public transport" this money is urgently needed for development of public
transport. For regular city-drivers the ticket price is not an argument for
choosing the car and those drivers who complain about ticket prices either
do not know the monthly ticket prices (18 eur) or have "a free" car from
their company.
Of course , local elections are coming in 2013 and the mayor who has
proposed it is in the middle of several media scandals, so this seems to be
just their way of dealing with elections and PR.
Any comments?
Greetings
Mari
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Mari said:
>Tallinn (capital of Estonia) City government will Poll Citizens on Free
>Public Transport this March
>
><http://news.err.ee/society/ecb6cbaf-3521-4bcf-8979-570dcfe8ab87>http://news.er\
r.ee/society/ecb6cbaf-3521-4bcf-8979-570dcfe8ab87
I suppose that this proposal will actually cost nearly
nothing. Here's why:
Most fares are already discounted or free so the revenue
loss is not so great.
The fare recovery ratio is only 40%.
The costs of collecting a fare are large for both the
transit operator and the passenger. Nearly all bus
operations are delayed by fare collection (BRT is an
exception). This directly increases operating costs.
The cost of printing, collecting, and checking tickets
is quite significant, and often quite expensive machines
must be purchased and maintained. Dealing with all of
the coins collected also costs some money.
For the passenger, time is wasted (a lot of it). The need
to always have exact change or a ticket or transit pass
in hand is a substantial irritation and time consumer.
The fear of "doing something wrong" and getting caught
without a valid ticket, even when a good-faith effort
was made, is a subtle deterrent to the use of public
transport. Most people would be acutely embarrassed if
caught traveling on an invalid ticket.
Transfers are bad enough without adding the complication
of additional fare payment and transfer tokens or scrip.
So, even though the direct savings to the passengers may
not be all that great, I think the increase in ridership
may be greater than expected (although probably not huge).
I see this as a win-win approach and have long advocated
free urban public transport.
This story ought to go to the Free Public Transport
organization. I don't have a contact handy.
Best,
Joel
----- ### -----
J.H. Crawford
mailbox@...
http://www.carfree.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/carfreecities
Video channels:
http://vimeo.com/jhcrawford/videoshttp://www.youtube.com/user/CarfreeCities
Current proposal from the mayor is that it will be free only for local
residents and not people who are commuting in from other municipalities or
tourists.
So this will not make the point for savings from ticket sales and controls.
Currently hardly anyone buys tickets from drivers because it is made
relatively more expensive to buy it on the bus compared to kiosk or mobile
ticket
Mari
On 31 January 2012 16:24, J.H. Crawford <mailbox@...> wrote:
> **
>
>
>
> Mari said:
>
> >Tallinn (capital of Estonia) City government will Poll Citizens on Free
> >Public Transport this March
> >
> ><http://news.err.ee/society/ecb6cbaf-3521-4bcf-8979-570dcfe8ab87>
> http://news.err.ee/society/ecb6cbaf-3521-4bcf-8979-570dcfe8ab87
>
> I suppose that this proposal will actually cost nearly
> nothing. Here's why:
>
> Most fares are already discounted or free so the revenue
> loss is not so great.
>
> The fare recovery ratio is only 40%.
>
> The costs of collecting a fare are large for both the
> transit operator and the passenger. Nearly all bus
> operations are delayed by fare collection (BRT is an
> exception). This directly increases operating costs.
> The cost of printing, collecting, and checking tickets
> is quite significant, and often quite expensive machines
> must be purchased and maintained. Dealing with all of
> the coins collected also costs some money.
>
> For the passenger, time is wasted (a lot of it). The need
> to always have exact change or a ticket or transit pass
> in hand is a substantial irritation and time consumer.
>
> The fear of "doing something wrong" and getting caught
> without a valid ticket, even when a good-faith effort
> was made, is a subtle deterrent to the use of public
> transport. Most people would be acutely embarrassed if
> caught traveling on an invalid ticket.
>
> Transfers are bad enough without adding the complication
> of additional fare payment and transfer tokens or scrip.
>
> So, even though the direct savings to the passengers may
> not be all that great, I think the increase in ridership
> may be greater than expected (although probably not huge).
>
> I see this as a win-win approach and have long advocated
> free urban public transport.
>
> This story ought to go to the Free Public Transport
> organization. I don't have a contact handy.
>
> Best,
>
> Joel
>
> ----- ### -----
> J.H. Crawford
> mailbox@...
> http://www.carfree.com
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/carfreecities
> Video channels:
> http://vimeo.com/jhcrawford/videos
> http://www.youtube.com/user/CarfreeCities
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Thanks for the clarification, Mari.
Maybe some of the advantages of a truly free system
can be put forward to the local government.
(One strategy, used in Switzerland, is to include a
transit tax in the price of hotel rooms, so tourists
pay for it.)
J.
At 2012-01-31 09:34, you wrote:
>
>
>Current proposal from the mayor is that it will be free only for local
>residents and not people who are commuting in from other municipalities or
>tourists.
>So this will not make the point for savings from ticket sales and controls.
>Currently hardly anyone buys tickets from drivers because it is made
>relatively more expensive to buy it on the bus compared to kiosk or mobile
>ticket
>
>Mari
>
>On 31 January 2012 16:24, J.H. Crawford
<<mailto:mailbox%40carfree.com>mailbox@...> wrote:
>
>> **
>>
>>
>>
>> Mari said:
>>
>> >Tallinn (capital of Estonia) City government will Poll Citizens on Free
>> >Public Transport this March
>> >
>>
><<http://news.err.ee/society/ecb6cbaf-3521-4bcf-8979-570dcfe8ab87>http://news.e\
rr.ee/society/ecb6cbaf-3521-4bcf-8979-570dcfe8ab87>
>> http://news.err.ee/society/ecb6cbaf-3521-4bcf-8979-570dcfe8ab87
>>
>> I suppose that this proposal will actually cost nearly
>> nothing. Here's why:
>>
>> Most fares are already discounted or free so the revenue
>> loss is not so great.
>>
>> The fare recovery ratio is only 40%.
>>
>> The costs of collecting a fare are large for both the
>> transit operator and the passenger. Nearly all bus
>> operations are delayed by fare collection (BRT is an
>> exception). This directly increases operating costs.
>> The cost of printing, collecting, and checking tickets
>> is quite significant, and often quite expensive machines
>> must be purchased and maintained. Dealing with all of
>> the coins collected also costs some money.
>>
>> For the passenger, time is wasted (a lot of it). The need
>> to always have exact change or a ticket or transit pass
>> in hand is a substantial irritation and time consumer.
>>
>> The fear of "doing something wrong" and getting caught
>> without a valid ticket, even when a good-faith effort
>> was made, is a subtle deterrent to the use of public
>> transport. Most people would be acutely embarrassed if
>> caught traveling on an invalid ticket.
>>
>> Transfers are bad enough without adding the complication
>> of additional fare payment and transfer tokens or scrip.
>>
>> So, even though the direct savings to the passengers may
>> not be all that great, I think the increase in ridership
>> may be greater than expected (although probably not huge).
>>
>> I see this as a win-win approach and have long advocated
>> free urban public transport.
>>
>> This story ought to go to the Free Public Transport
>> organization. I don't have a contact handy.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Joel
>>
>> ----- ### -----
>> J.H. Crawford
>> <mailto:mailbox%40carfree.com>mailbox@...
>> http://www.carfree.com
>> Twitter: <http://twitter.com/carfreecities>http://twitter.com/carfreecities
>> Video channels:
>> <http://vimeo.com/jhcrawford/videos>http://vimeo.com/jhcrawford/videos
>> http://www.youtube.com/user/CarfreeCities
>>
>>
>>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
----- ### -----
J.H. Crawford
mailbox@...
http://www.carfree.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/carfreecities
Video channels:
http://vimeo.com/jhcrawford/videoshttp://www.youtube.com/user/CarfreeCities
Hi All,
This landed in my in-box just now. It's a pretty good
barometer of how Americans feel today. It's maybe not
such a bad idea, either.
Best,
J.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Warren Buffett, in a recent interview with CNBC, offers one of the best
quotes about the debt ceiling:
"I could end the deficit in 5 minutes," he told CNBC. "You just pass a law
that says that anytime there is a deficit of more than 3% of GDP, all
sitting members of Congress are ineligible for re-election. The 26th
amendment (granting the right to vote for 18 year-olds) took only 3 months
& 8 days to be ratified! Why? Simple! The people demanded it. That was in
1971...before computers, e-mail, cell phones, etc. Of the 27 amendments to
the Constitution, seven (7) took 1 year or less to become the law of the
land...all because of public pressure.
Warren Buffet is asking each addressee to forward this email to a minimum of
twenty people on their address list; in turn ask each of those to do
likewise.
In three days, most people in The United States of America will have the
message. This is one idea that really should be passed around.
*Congressional Reform Act of 2011*
1. No Tenure / No Pension. A Congressman collects a salary while in office
and receives no pay when they are out of office.
2. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security. All
funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social Security
system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social Security system,
and Congress participates with the American people. It may not be used for
any other purpose.
3. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all Americans do.
4. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay
will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.
5. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the
same health care system as the American people.
6. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American
people.
7. All contracts with past and present Congressmen are void effective
1/1/12.
The American people did not make this contract with Congressmen. Congressmen
made all these contracts for themselves. Serving in Congress is an honor,
not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, so ours
should serve their term(s), then go home and back to work.
------------------------------------
If each person contacts a minimum of twenty people then it will only take
three days for most people (in the U.S.) to receive the message. Maybe it is
time.
THIS IS HOW YOU FIX CONGRESS!!!!! If you agree with the above, pass it on.
If not, just delete. You are one of my 20. Please keep it going.
----- ### -----
J.H. Crawford
mailbox@...
http://www.carfree.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/carfreecities
Video channels:
http://vimeo.com/jhcrawford/videoshttp://www.youtube.com/user/CarfreeCities
Debt spending is a vitally important way out of major crises. Consider on a
personal level, that one needs occasionally to take on debt to study, or
make an investment of other types. The national case is also clear.
/Aaron
On 31 January 2012 20:29, J.H. Crawford <mailbox@...> wrote:
> **
>
>
>
> Hi All,
>
> This landed in my in-box just now. It's a pretty good
> barometer of how Americans feel today. It's maybe not
> such a bad idea, either.
>
> Best,
>
> J.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Warren Buffett, in a recent interview with CNBC, offers one of the best
> quotes about the debt ceiling:
>
> "I could end the deficit in 5 minutes," he told CNBC. "You just pass a law
> that says that anytime there is a deficit of more than 3% of GDP, all
> sitting members of Congress are ineligible for re-election. The 26th
> amendment (granting the right to vote for 18 year-olds) took only 3 months
> & 8 days to be ratified! Why? Simple! The people demanded it. That was in
> 1971...before computers, e-mail, cell phones, etc. Of the 27 amendments to
> the Constitution, seven (7) took 1 year or less to become the law of the
> land...all because of public pressure.
>
> Warren Buffet is asking each addressee to forward this email to a minimum
> of
> twenty people on their address list; in turn ask each of those to do
> likewise.
>
> In three days, most people in The United States of America will have the
> message. This is one idea that really should be passed around.
>
> *Congressional Reform Act of 2011*
>
> 1. No Tenure / No Pension. A Congressman collects a salary while in office
> and receives no pay when they are out of office.
>
> 2. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security. All
> funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social Security
> system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social Security system,
> and Congress participates with the American people. It may not be used for
> any other purpose.
>
> 3. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all Americans
> do.
>
> 4. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay
> will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.
>
> 5. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the
> same health care system as the American people.
>
> 6. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American
> people.
>
> 7. All contracts with past and present Congressmen are void effective
> 1/1/12.
>
> The American people did not make this contract with Congressmen.
> Congressmen
> made all these contracts for themselves. Serving in Congress is an honor,
> not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, so ours
> should serve their term(s), then go home and back to work.
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> If each person contacts a minimum of twenty people then it will only take
> three days for most people (in the U.S.) to receive the message. Maybe it
> is
> time.
>
> THIS IS HOW YOU FIX CONGRESS!!!!! If you agree with the above, pass it on.
> If not, just delete. You are one of my 20. Please keep it going.
>
> ----- ### -----
> J.H. Crawford
> mailbox@...
> http://www.carfree.com
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/carfreecities
> Video channels:
> http://vimeo.com/jhcrawford/videos
> http://www.youtube.com/user/CarfreeCities
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Aaron responded:
>Debt spending is a vitally important way out of major crises. Consider on a
>personal level, that one needs occasionally to take on debt to study, or
>make an investment of other types. The national case is also clear.
Yes. The problem is, of course, that the other half
of the Keynesian formula is never followed: in the
fat years, you pay off the debt.
I recently ran into an analysis of US debt (IIRC it was
in the print edition of the NY Times). The real issue
is that the per-capita federal debt has rises from about
half of average annual income to nearly twice average
annual income. (I forget the time span; it's probably
since about 1970.)
At some point, debt becomes insupportable, a fact that
several European countries are now rediscovering.
As far as the screed that I re-posted, if you want the
actual facts, see this:
http://www.factcheck.org/2011/03/congressional-reform-act/
I think, basically, that this is one more symptom of
the anger so many people feel against the 1% and their
notions of their own exceptionalism.
Best,
J.
----- ### -----
J.H. Crawford
mailbox@...
http://www.carfree.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/carfreecities
Video channels:
http://vimeo.com/jhcrawford/videoshttp://www.youtube.com/user/CarfreeCities
Aaron said:
>Sorry to say that the economic analysis you're proposing is about as
>sustainable as the economic ideas that created the current mess:
>unregulated markets.
and I responded:
First, what economic analysis am I proposing, exactly?
Second, I agree entirely about the current mess being
in large measure a result of unfettered capitalism.
Third, I believe in markets that are more tightly
regulated that those in the USA were even in the
days of FDR.
Fourth, I support a highly progressive income tax,
along the lines of the rates that were in effect
when that communist Dwight Eisenhower was president.
Top rate on unearned income was 93 or 94% during
that era. (Today they'll lynch you if you talk
about even 50%.)
Oh, and by the way, I agree with the fact checking
analysis, not the punish-congress screed.
Best,
J.
----- ### -----
J.H. Crawford
mailbox@...
http://www.carfree.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/carfreecities
Video channels:
http://vimeo.com/jhcrawford/videoshttp://www.youtube.com/user/CarfreeCities
On Jan 31, 2012, at 11:45 AM, Aaron Thomas wrote:
> Debt spending is a vitally important way out of major crises.
> Consider on a
> personal level, that one needs occasionally to take on debt to
> study, or
> make an investment of other types. The national case is also clear.
And of course try running an inventory-based business without debt!
As Krugman and others have pointed out, national debt is money owed
to ourselves. A country shouldn't be required to turn a profit, or
necessarily even be revenue-neutral.
The problem we have is that people want infrastructure and services
that are natural monopolies and thus appropriately provided through
collective action, but don't want to fund them through taxes. They
want them to be as free as they appear.
You can't have a market in roads or water supply etc--I can't go out
my door and choose from among five or six streets depending on which
street purveyor has a sale on this morning! Likewise water, sewage,
and fire & police protection, et al. Health care has also proven to
be something that the market provides inefficiently and ineffectively
(US vs. Europe & Japan).
Back to inventory--cities (and nations) provide inventories of spaces
and services--including squares, utilities, transport facilities, and
often transportation modalities themselves (eg, rail services; in
Japan private and government rail services coexist and cooperate);
none of this can be done with]out debt even in a high-tax society.
What we suffer from here is the perception prevalent among Americans
that everything must be bought and sold and that life is better when
you do so, and that taxation impedes the buying and selling of every
physical and social aspect of the culture.
Cars are so desperately defended by the neandercons because they are
thought to be a way of privatizing naturally public spaces.
Carfree cities, transit, national health insurance, and bicycling are
seen as threats to the "market," event though the market has
historically failed at providing transportation, water, and health
care in an equitable and effective manner.
Government debt, like business debt, simply provides a means to
engage in long-term projects, and is paid back to the public with
interest.
Rick
--
Richard Risemberg
http://www.bicyclefixation.comhttp://www.newcolonist.comhttp://www.rickrise.com
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
The February issue of The New Colonist is online now at:
http://www.newcolonist.com
This month's featured articles include:
"Don't Walk" Signs in Dallas http://newcolonist.com/dontwalksigns.html
We were eating at a cafe along McKinney Avenue in Dallas. McKinney
Avenue is a busy street, filled with a large number of sports bars
and restaurants and also having a streetcar line connecting Downtown
with Uptown. There's lots of foot traffic and auto traffic. Just then
traffic started to back up, and then came the sirens. Being the
curious sort....
The Learning Garden http://newcolonist.com/learning_garden.html
It's on an unassuming corner of Venice Boulevard in the far western
reaches of los Angeles, only a couple of miles from the beach and the
famous boardwalk. Even the folksy sign announcing "The learnign
Garden" is painted in rustic hues that almost disappear into the
shrubbery crowded up behind the fence....
What Makes a Healthy City? http://newcolonist.com/healthycities.html
Assessing a city's "health" has nothing to do with the impossibility
of stuffing an entire metropolis into a primary care physician's
waiting room. Defining a healthy city is a multi-layered and fluid
process that involves the contributions of policies and practices to
the quality of life of the city's inhabitants.
The Other American Tea Party http://newcolonist.com/teatime.html
In many American homes, hot tea has long been reserved for people
with colds. The unspoken idea: healthy people get coffee while those
under the weather get stuck with the stale chamomile from the far
reaches of the pantry. In many other countries, tea has long been
revered....
More....
...Our extensive archives, our blog, and our many services.
Check us out--we've been writing about sustainable cities since 1999!
Rick
--
Richard Risemberg
http://www.bicyclefixation.comhttp://www.newcolonist.comhttp://www.rickrise.com
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Send Email
