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

Re: [carfree_cities] urban mobility study

Expand Messages
  • mtneuman@juno.com
    Good stuff Pat. But it s mainly employee focused. That s fine, but it s not enough traffic reduction. My proposal would be available to even people who don t
    Message 1 of 8 , Oct 2 7:27 PM
      Good stuff Pat. But it's mainly employee focused. That's fine, but it's
      not enough traffic reduction.

      My proposal would be available to even people who don't have a job. In
      that sense, it would be good for the poor. Give them some extra money.
      Better than nothing.

      But mostly it would be aimed at commuters who come from outside the city.
      Those are the folks who are ruining the cities with all the extra
      driving and pollution, and who contribute the most greenhouse gases that
      are known now to be causing the warming. It is much more radical. It
      would pay $2,800 for an individual to not drive at all. The money would
      also come from raising fuel taxes by $.50 a gallon.

      When someone question the sanity of it, just ask them if they would
      preferred global warming to go out of control. Then ask them who's
      sensible and who isn't.

      Mike Neuman

      On Thu, 2 Oct 2003 20:08:08 -0400 "Patrick McDonough"
      <patrick1@...> writes:
      > Mike-
      > There are ways transit subsidies can be directed at non-motorized
      > modes.
      > Check out this link:
      > http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm8.htm
      > And do a FIND for the word "hill"- it's part of the company name
      > that
      > expanded transit subsidies to be a "non-drive alone" subsidy. T

      The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
      Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
      Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.