How Did I Miss This One?
 

In article >, Scott en Aztlán wrote:
> [I have long held that a system like this is the ONLY way we will ever
> eliminate traffic congestion - we simply cannot build roads fast
> enough to outpace the ability of incompetents and LLBs to clog things
> up.]

I hold the same view. However I favor a cheaper solution. That is to remove
the incompetents and LLBs from the road.

BTW, the goal of congestion pricing etc and so forth is one of logging
and controling travel. If they really wanted to reduce driving a simple
increase in the gasoline tax would be enough. However the solution always
seems to involve government control.

How Did I Miss This One?
 

"Brent P" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, Scott en Aztlán
> wrote:
>> [I have long held that a system like this is the ONLY way we will ever
>> eliminate traffic congestion - we simply cannot build roads fast
>> enough to outpace the ability of incompetents and LLBs to clog things
>> up.]
>
> I hold the same view. However I favor a cheaper solution. That is to
> remove
> the incompetents and LLBs from the road.
>
> BTW, the goal of congestion pricing etc and so forth is one of logging
> and controling travel. If they really wanted to reduce driving a simple
> increase in the gasoline tax would be enough. However the solution always
> seems to involve government control.

The analysis of congestion pricing in London found it was no better than a
traffic control system using present technology. Congestion pricing is
mainly a way for Governments to increase taxes, not to improve traffic.

You of course want it because you hope you Luddite fantasies will come true
by getting people to use transit, which will never happen. Transit is the
equivalent of trying to get people to go back to 8 track tape in an iPod
world. A very sophomoric view of the world.

How Did I Miss This One?
 

Jack May wrote:

> "Brent P" > wrote:

>>I hold the same view. However I favor a cheaper solution. That is to
>>remove the incompetents and LLBs from the road.
>>
>>BTW, the goal of congestion pricing etc and so forth is one of logging
>>and controling travel. If they really wanted to reduce driving a simple
>>increase in the gasoline tax would be enough. However the solution always
>>seems to involve government control.

> The analysis of congestion pricing in London found it was no better than a
> traffic control system using present technology. Congestion pricing is
> mainly a way for Governments to increase taxes, not to improve traffic.
>
> You of course want it because you hope you Luddite fantasies will come true
> by getting people to use transit, which will never happen.

Having problems with reading comprehension?

How Did I Miss This One?
 

How Did I Miss This One?
 

Scott en Aztlán wrote:

> A gasoline tax increase would punish people for driving on empty roads
> and do nothing to relive congestion on crowded ones.

Depends on how high it is. People typically get better mileage on empty
roads and will go further on the same tank of gas as compared to those
stuck in perpretual traffic jams.

In my car, I get around 25 to 26 mpg on empty roads (which I drive quite
often). If I were to drive in conjested stop and go traffic, I get
around 18 mpg.

How Did I Miss This One?
 

"Scott en Aztlán" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 19:03:04 GMT, Arif Khokar >
> wrote:
>
>>> The analysis of congestion pricing in London found it was no better than
>>> a
>>> traffic control system using present technology. Congestion pricing is
>>> mainly a way for Governments to increase taxes, not to improve traffic.
>>>
>>> You of course want it because you hope you Luddite fantasies will come
>>> true
>>> by getting people to use transit, which will never happen.
>>
>>Having problems with reading comprehension?
>
> You have to understand Jack - he views the world through
> rail-hating-autophile-colored glasses.

I view through glasses of an engineer wanting thing to work instead of
pouring money down the rat holes of failed technology

How Did I Miss This One?
 

Jack May wrote:
> "Scott en Aztlán" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 19:03:04 GMT, Arif Khokar >
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>The analysis of congestion pricing in London found it was no better than
>>>>a
>>>>traffic control system using present technology. Congestion pricing is
>>>>mainly a way for Governments to increase taxes, not to improve traffic.
>>>>
>>>>You of course want it because you hope you Luddite fantasies will come
>>>>true
>>>>by getting people to use transit, which will never happen.
>>>
>>>Having problems with reading comprehension?
>>
>>You have to understand Jack - he views the world through
>>rail-hating-autophile-colored glasses.
>
>
> I view through glasses of an engineer wanting thing to work instead of
> pouring money down the rat holes of failed technology
>
>
For a self titled "engineer" your contributions are light on for
dispassionate, verifable analysis and high on emotional rhetoric! For
example "Luddite fantasies", "rat holes of failed technology".

Greg

How Did I Miss This One?
 

In article >, Jack May wrote:

> You of course want it because you hope you Luddite fantasies will come true
> by getting people to use transit, which will never happen.

I don't want the tracking taxing scheme. I am dead set against it. I
believe transit should be built and run so it's useful. People will then
choose it because it is useful.

> Transit is the
> equivalent of trying to get people to go back to 8 track tape in an iPod
> world. A very sophomoric view of the world.

That's because US transit is more or less a broken down 1940s system. In
some places of chicago and NYC it's a 19th century system.

How Did I Miss This One?
 

In article >, Jim Yanik wrote:

> yes,it's always said that driving is a privelege,not a right. Thus,only
> those who can do it properly should have the privelege;that's the basis
> behind our current license system,although not enforced.

That concept is only brought up when they wish to force us to sign away
rights to be able to drive.

>> BTW, the goal of congestion pricing etc and so forth is one of logging
>> and controling travel. If they really wanted to reduce driving a
>> simple increase in the gasoline tax would be enough. However the
>> solution always seems to involve government control.

> Driving is freedom.
> One(or more) can go when they want,where they want.

Being allowed to drive IMO should be a right, being able to do it on a
public road should require demonstration that a person would not
interfere with the rights of others on the roadway. (competence)

How Did I Miss This One?
 

In article >, Scott en Aztlán wrote:

> The testing and administrative costs alone are staggering. We'll need
> an order of magnitude more cops for enforcement, since the people who
> lose their licenses will continue to drive anyway. And we'll need tons
> more jail space to house the ones who continue to flout the law.

I don't think you grasp how expensive the controller technology will be
and who will be in control of that technology.

> Unless we somehow find a way to force the perpetrators to pay for all
> of these costs directly, it is competent drivers like you and I who
> will be footing the bill.

Sell their vehicles.

> Now here is something I would support: if you are caught driving
> without a license, whatever vehicle you are driving is immediately
> confiscated and sold at auction. Very few scofflaw drivers can afford
> to keep purchasing a new vehicle every time they get pulled over, and
> the money thus raised could be used to fund the testing and
> enforcement programs.

See, you already know....


>>BTW, the goal of congestion pricing etc and so forth is one of logging
>>and controling travel. If they really wanted to reduce driving a simple
>>increase in the gasoline tax would be enough.

> A gasoline tax increase would punish people for driving on empty roads
> and do nothing to relive congestion on crowded ones. Congestion
> pricing, OTOH, actively discourages the use of overcrowded roads and
> shifts that traffic either to other, less congested roads, other, less
> congested times of the day, or other, less congested modes.

If there was an empty road to use, people wouldn't be on the congested
one.