Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [CarFree] Re: Psychology of the Car

Expand Messages
  • jo.gurney
    ... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ... Jon
    Message 1 of 10 , May 4, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      Al Raden wrote:

      > jym@... wrote:
      >
      >
      > > =v= However, the truly artificial situation is the availability
      > > of cheap gasoline! As it used to be in Cuba, the price of
      > > gasoline is heavily subsidized in the U.S.; and of course there
      > > are costs (environmental and health) that few stop to think
      > > about, which also amount to a subsidy.
      > >
      >
      > But again, even a subsidy comes from our pockets through taxes. So, people
      > are paying the price of expensive gasoline indirectly. And, I doubt that
      > many would want to change that.
      >

      - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
      - - -
      - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

      > But why should the non-driving taxpayer like me subsidise someone else
      > driving a car (and exposing me to accident / polutant risk).

      Jon
    • Al Raden
      ... Because you are in a tiny minority. I pay a lot of taxes that subsidize programs that I get no benefit from. I don t think we get to pick and choose. -
      Message 2 of 10 , May 5, 2000
      • 0 Attachment
        "jo.gurney" wrote:

        > Al Raden wrote:
        >
        > > jym@... wrote:
        > >
        > >
        > > > =v= However, the truly artificial situation is the availability
        > > > of cheap gasoline! As it used to be in Cuba, the price of
        > > > gasoline is heavily subsidized in the U.S.; and of course there
        > > > are costs (environmental and health) that few stop to think
        > > > about, which also amount to a subsidy.
        > > >
        > >
        > > But again, even a subsidy comes from our pockets through taxes. So, people
        > > are paying the price of expensive gasoline indirectly. And, I doubt that
        > > many would want to change that.
        > >
        >
        > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
        > - - -
        > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
        >
        > > But why should the non-driving taxpayer like me subsidise someone else
        > > driving a car (and exposing me to accident / polutant risk).
        >

        Because you are in a tiny minority. I pay a lot of taxes that subsidize programs
        that I get no benefit from. I don't think we get to pick and choose.

        - al
      • Peter Saint James
        ... Auto transport is the most inefficient mode of travel one could think of. The problem is that people don t associate the inconvenience with the act of
        Message 3 of 10 , May 5, 2000
        • 0 Attachment
          > Cars have become dominant for one simple reason - they are the most
          >efficient way of getting from point A to point B, in relative comfort, when
          >desired, with little effort.



          Auto transport is the most inefficient mode of travel one could
          think of. The problem is that people don't associate the inconvenience with
          the act of driving. That does not mean the inconvenience does not exist.

          Suppose auto transportation didn't exist and someone was trying to
          sell you on the system. With truth in advertising, their pitch would look
          like this:

          "We're going to create a system that will cost you about 40 percent
          of your income, make destinations much farther apart so everything is harder
          to do, create demands on your time you never had before, kill your children,
          dirty your air and water, pave over the earth, use enormous amount of space,
          endanger your life, inspire great wars, create alienation, foster global
          warming, and make cities as stressful as battlefields. Just sign here."
        • Al Raden
          Peter, I don t disagree with you. My statement was made as representing most people s perception. Given that perception, weaning people from their car
          Message 4 of 10 , May 5, 2000
          • 0 Attachment
            Peter, I don't disagree with you. My statement was made as representing most
            people's perception. Given that perception, weaning people from their car
            dependence is unlikely. Unfortunately, no one is going to paint the picture of
            reality you've listed below. Even with truth in advertising, all car
            commercials show their products being driven fast on empty roads, with
            beautiful, winding horizons...not quite reality. And, I'm sure that if they had
            to show reality, with cars in traffic jams, the focus would quickly change from
            how fast and relaxing your drive can be, to the numerous ammenities they provide
            to make your inevitable time in the traffic jam enjoyable - lush leather seats,
            premium sound systems, internet access, TV for the kids, etc. Makes you want to
            go out and get in a traffic jam... certainly sounds better than my living room.

            What frightens me is the rapidity with which developing countries are becoming
            car-dependent. When I see the growth of the car in these countries, without the
            pollution controls, without the infrastructure, etc. I see a very ominous
            picture emerging.

            - al

            Peter Saint James wrote:

            > > Cars have become dominant for one simple reason - they are the most
            > >efficient way of getting from point A to point B, in relative comfort, when
            > >desired, with little effort.
            >
            >
            >
            > Auto transport is the most inefficient mode of travel one could
            > think of. The problem is that people don't associate the inconvenience with
            > the act of driving. That does not mean the inconvenience does not exist.
            >
            > Suppose auto transportation didn't exist and someone was trying to
            > sell you on the system. With truth in advertising, their pitch would look
            > like this:
            >
            > "We're going to create a system that will cost you about 40 percent
            > of your income, make destinations much farther apart so everything is harder
            > to do, create demands on your time you never had before, kill your children,
            > dirty your air and water, pave over the earth, use enormous amount of space,
            > endanger your life, inspire great wars, create alienation, foster global
            > warming, and make cities as stressful as battlefields. Just sign here."
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Community email addresses:
            > Post message: CarFree@onelist.com
            > Subscribe: CarFree-subscribe@onelist.com
            > Unsubscribe: CarFree-unsubscribe@onelist.com
            > List owner: CarFree-owner@onelist.com
            >
            > Shortcut URL to this page:
            > http://www.onelist.com/community/CarFree
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.