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

metro in Hanoi

Expand Messages
  • Simon Norton
    One argument that is often used against those who don t want mass car ownership and use (or mass aviation) is that it consists of the better off, who can
    Message 1 of 1 , Sep 30, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      One argument that is often used against those who don't want mass car ownership
      and use (or mass aviation) is that it consists of the better off, who can
      afford to pay high prices for cars and flights, kicking the ladder of
      opportunity so that the mass of people can't take advantage of these amenities.

      It occurs to me to wonder whether a similar argument can be used against those
      who object to cities like Hanoi getting metros. If the people of London and New
      York can enjoy their benefits, why not those of Hanoi ?

      I think that there are ample environmental reasons to counter the original use
      of this argument, and I would also add that I believe that if we had a properly
      run public transport system and cycling network then the extra opportunities
      afforded by private cars would be negligible.

      However I am in no doubt that London's transport system is immeasurably improved
      by the availability of Tube trains. So can we really ask the people of Hanoi to
      do without these benefits ?

      The argument that the potential demand for underground travel has been
      abstracted by the ubiquity of powered 2 wheelers ignores the fact that these
      vehicles, like cars in industrialised countries, are causing immeasurable
      environmental damage and need to be curbed by whatever means.

      Simon Norton
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.