RE: [carfree_cities] Cars, Trains, Planes, Bicycles, and Earthquakes
- Good thought! There's no better way of transportation than our self
mobility, depending on nothing but our own body: walking, cycling, skiing...
In my opinion, the second best mode is the metro (that doesn't interfere
with surface), then comes the train because it's limited to the railways.
I'd certainly enjoy an earthquake that would be strong enough to break the
bridges that suck in way too many cars in Montreal each day. Then the quick
solution will be shuttle boats (and metro if it survives!) to take people
into the city carrying at most a bike. When people get used to this
lifestyle, I believe government will think of a better solution than what
has been done in the past.
From: Canal1@... [mailto:Canal1@...]
Sent: 1 mars, 2001 02:28
Subject: [carfree_cities] Cars, Trains, Planes, Bicycles, and
At 10:55 this morning, as I was printing out some checks, I broke my
personal record by experiencing a 6.8 earthquake (my previous record
was 6.7). After recovering from this event, I jumped on my bicycle
to ride downtown to deliver one of the aforementioned checks to my
stockbroker at Pike and Fourth, in downtown Seattle. I live in the
Fremont district, downtown is three or four miles away (via Dexter Av
N, the perferred bike route, equipped with bike lanes). Meanwhile,
all arterials were jam packed. Later I heard that the time to get to
Kent (20 miles or so south) was three hours. Of course the railroads
were shut down as well as all air transportation. The monorail, a
tourist joke, was running, complete irresponsibility.
The solution to carless cities is for people to live in cities. We
do not need monorail, or light rail, or heavy rail, or any other
boondoggles designed to enrich contractors, construction trades, and
operating unions. As an in city property taxpayer, I think we should
encourage private jitneys and private bus operators (and private
light rail operators if they can get it together). But to hell with
highways and freeways, the very existance of which removes private
property from the tax rolls, while the government comes with a tin
cup to me to require that I to contribute tax money to make up that
difference and to finance the maintenance of those roads. There is
no reason why I should have to subsidize idiots and their cars.
I saw my broker, made my trade, and got home. All in less than an
hour. The cost: a couple drops of three-in-one oil. A 6.8
earthquake may bring the cars, trains, and planes to a halt, but not
John Crosby, age 55
Carless in Seattle
To Post a message, send it to: carfree_cities@...
To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
Group address: http://www.egroups.com/group/carfree_cities/
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
- Canal1@... wrote:
>The solution to carless cities is for people to live in cities. WeThen you might want to take a look at these. Dawson
>do not need monorail, or light rail, or heavy rail, or any other
>boondoggles designed to enrich contractors, construction trades, and
>operating unions. As an in city property taxpayer, I think we should
>encourage private jitneys and private bus operators (and private
>light rail operators if they can get it together).