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

Re: [carfree_cities] Car Free Cities

Expand Messages
  • Andrew Preble
    ... cost on life, it is definitely cheaper to take public transportation, especially when every 40 seconds somebody dies from an automobile (American Public
    Message 1 of 6 , Feb 7, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Andy Morris wrote:

      > The most expensive housing in the country is in central London, one of the
      > major features of living there is that you don't need a car. Not having to
      > drive to work is becoming a status symbol in itself.

      >> This is also true in New Orleans, Louisiana.

      > As I see it the major barriers to car free existence are:
      >
      > The critical mass. Being a car-free individual in a car-addicted city is
      > hard. Once you own a car, the perceived incremental cost per journey is
      > lower than public transport.

      >> This is not true- the car is still very expensive to maintain and if you put a
      cost on life, it is definitely cheaper to take public transportation, especially
      when every 40 seconds somebody dies from an automobile (American Public
      Transportation Association).

      > A few months back I went on a works outing to a go-kart track, we racing
      > karts with 100c ( maybe less) engines on an indoor track, with an top speed
      > of around 20 mph, sounds dull, but it was the most thrilling thing I've done
      > in years, it feels incredibly fast, you can drive with total aggression,
      > corner up to and beyond the edge. After one hour I was exhausted and was
      > stiff for a week. After that you realise that driving at all aggressively is
      > just a silly fantasy, its not the real thing.
      >
      > People get great pleasure from playing racing driver, let them, but not on
      > public highways.

      >> I agree completely, and I think that you have made a good point. Most people
      only enjoy driving when they are pretending to be race car driver on highways,
      causing danger to all around them.

      --Andrew
    • J.H. Crawford
      ... I ve often wondered why the manufacturers are not routinely sued in any case in which speeds in excess of the posted 65 mph (in the USA) are involved. It
      Message 2 of 6 , Feb 8, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        Andy Morris said:

        >One last point, if someone its me at speed, in a car that exceeds the 'farty
        >car' spec, can we not make the manufacturer and retailer take some
        >responsibility? They sold a machine that was dangerously over powered and
        >encouraged an irresponsible attitude in the driver.

        I've often wondered why the manufacturers are not routinely
        sued in any case in which speeds in excess of the posted
        65 mph (in the USA) are involved. It would be simple to prove
        in court that the manufacturers are encouraging illegal
        behavior. Take this quote (from the book):


        Distant thunder, cold as stone,
        a V8 screams down from its throne.
        One by one, each car succumbs.
        Something wicked
        this way comes.

        Naught-to-sixty in 5.7 seconds: Once a figment of the
        imagination, now a fixture of intimidation. All courtesy of
        the 300-horsepower, 32-valve V8 which seethes within
        this, the fiercest automatic sedan in the world.

        The new GS
        Faster. Sleeker. Meaner.

        and my comment:

        Full text of a Lexus advertisement. The car is shown hurtling through
        a burned-out forest. What an odd way to sell a car.
        The New Yorker Magazine
        2 February 1998, inside cover


        ###

        J.H. Crawford Carfree Cities
        postmaster@... Carfree.com
      • Doug Salzmann
        ... Hi, Andrew. I don t think Andy meant that the per-journey cost of auto operation is lower than public transit. He was reminding us that, once a car owner
        Message 3 of 6 , Feb 8, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          At 06:07 PM 2/7/2001, Andrew wrote in part:

          >Andy Morris wrote:
          >
          > > Being a car-free individual in a car-addicted city is
          > > hard. Once you own a car, the perceived incremental cost per journey is
          > > lower than public transport.
          >
          > >> This is not true- the car is still very expensive to maintain and if
          > you put a
          >cost on life, it is definitely cheaper to take public transportation,
          >especially
          >when every 40 seconds somebody dies from an automobile (American Public
          >Transportation Association).

          Hi, Andrew.

          I don't think Andy meant that the per-journey cost of auto operation is
          lower than public transit. He was reminding us that, once a car owner is
          paying all of the other costs of ownership, it may *seem* to that owner
          that the additional (incremental) cost of hopping into the car for a trip
          to the store is very low, perhaps even cheaper than taking the tram or bus.

          This problem of perceived cost is a major barrier to discussing the
          relative economies of auto operation vs. public transit. So many of the
          costs of automobility are either hidden or paid by society as a whole that
          it often seems much cheaper than it really is.

          -Doug
        • Ronald Dawson
          ... farty ... Do you think speed governors or photo radar would help? Dawson
          Message 4 of 6 , Feb 8, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            J.H. Crawford wrote:




            >>One last point, if someone its me at speed, in a car that exceeds the
            'farty
            >>car' spec, can we not make the manufacturer and retailer take some
            >>responsibility? They sold a machine that was dangerously over powered and
            >>encouraged an irresponsible attitude in the driver.

            >I've often wondered why the manufacturers are not routinely
            >sued in any case in which speeds in excess of the posted
            >65 mph (in the USA) are involved. It would be simple to prove
            >in court that the manufacturers are encouraging illegal
            >behaviour. Take this quote (from the book):

            Do you think speed governors or photo radar would help? Dawson
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.