Politics Generations

[Blarghagh]

Sitting in a traffic jam just seems like mass transit with extra steps to me.

[Chilloutman]

18 minutes ago, TrueNeutral said:

Sitting in a traffic jam just seems like mass transit with extra steps to me.

well thats the point, if there was proper infrastructure you would not be sitting in jams...

[Hurlshort]

41 minutes ago, Chilloutman said:

mass transit is anti individual. I don't drive only because I need to, but because I want to. Don't get me wrong. If someone CHOOSE to drive by mass transit its fine with me and more power to them, just don't take away my choice not to

Uh...what?

I mean, how many seats do you have in your car? If you really want to be an individual, ride a bike. 

Also no one said anything about taking away your choice, but the idea that we need to throw a bunch of money at the infrastructure of individuals in cars instead of mass transit sounds flawed on a number of levels.

[Chilloutman]

2 minutes ago, Hurlshot said:

Uh...what?

I mean, how many seats do you have in your car? If you really want to be an individual, ride a bike. 

Also no one said anything about taking away your choice, but the idea that we need to throw a bunch of money at the infrastructure of individuals in cars instead of mass transit sounds flawed on a number of levels.

does it? Are not my tax money spend on someone else mass transit? Again don't take it as I am complaining about mass transit but I don't see reason why I could not expect tax money to be spend on infrastructure for cars same way its spend on mass transit. Its not like there is some kind of tax on gas for example...

[Malcador]

59 minutes ago, Chilloutman said:

mass transit is anti individual. I don't drive only because I need to, but because I want to. Don't get me wrong. If someone CHOOSE to drive by mass transit its fine with me and more power to them, just don't take away my choice not to

Who's taking away your choice though ?  Never heard anyone suggest that cars be banned in total - I guess stuff like London's congestion tax or pedestrian areas counts ?

If people in suburbs or outer areas of city have reliable rail/subway to get into work and a good tram/subway/bus network to hook into, a lot will take that as it's likely to be cheaper and less stressful.  People can still drive if they want, and likely the traffic would be better. 

[Chilloutman]

whats the point of question if you answer it yourself? 

[Hurlshort]

13 minutes ago, Chilloutman said:

does it? Are not my tax money spend on someone else mass transit? Again don't take it as I am complaining about mass transit but I don't see reason why I could not expect tax money to be spend on infrastructure for cars same way its spend on mass transit. Its not like there is some kind of tax on gas for example...

I don't believe your DMV fees and gas taxes cover as much of those costs as you might think...https://usa.streetsblog.org/2013/01/23/drivers-cover-just-51-percent-of-u-s-road-spending/

But really I don't think it is just about who is paying for what. If we have a decent mass transit system, then we have less congested car traffic, which makes it soooooo much easier for you to be an individual and drive your car around. It also makes it easier to breathe. 

edit: Also, this is primarily a need for urban centers.

Edited November 1, 2019 by Hurlshot

[Gfted1]

I never use mass transit even when it faster and more economical. Too many dirtbags to deal with.

[Maedhros]

4 minutes ago, Gfted1 said:

I never use mass transit even when it faster and more economical. Too many dirtbags to deal with.

You should move to Norway. Mass transit here is awesome since we're all too socially awkward to talk to each other.

[Gfted1]

The mass transit in Japan is phenomenal too! Quiet, orderly, polite...a real system shock to Chicago mass transit.

[Malcador]

6 minutes ago, Chilloutman said:

whats the point of question if you answer it yourself? 

I didn't though, just trying to guess at why you think the choice to drive is removed necessarily as part of mass transit.   For taxes, eh, is a common good (although I'm sure that offends the libertarians here) and cars do share infrastructure with buses or trams so it's not as if you're paying for something with no benefit to you.  

 

6 minutes ago, Gfted1 said:

I never use mass transit even when it faster and more economical. Too many dirtbags to deal with.

Well, you still have to deal with dirtbags ensconced in a steel beast

[ShadySands]

3 hours ago, Malcador said:

Ideally mass transit would be better, then people wouldn't need to drive.  Is the constant solution everyone is aware of here but no one wants to do - it takes longer to build than a term of office so...

Mass transit should be a viable alternative for people but here when you have some actively fighting against it . The Koch brothers were particularly egregious in that area and for all I know the remaining brother may still be at it. I'm not sure where Chillout is from but in a lot of places here in the US you don't have many options other than owning a car.

Sorry for the repost

I don't think billionaires shouldn't exist or anything like that but I don't think they should be able to influence state and local governments to the detriment of millions of people

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/19/climate/koch-brothers-public-transit.html

Same type of stuff if you prefer to read it instead of watch it

[ComradeYellow]

The United States took a crazy rightward turn somewhere in the mid-to-late 1970's and has been there ever since.  The robber barons, financiers, Wall Street goons, and the ever lingering Military Industrial Complex (and not to mention others I will leave unannounced) have had a solid grip on general U.S. policy ever since.  Bill Clinton's takeover of the Democratic Party destroyed any credible leftist opposition.  As usual it's up to young people to turn out en masse to try to change course.

[Skarpen]

1 hour ago, ComradeMaster said:

The United States took a crazy rightward turn somewhere in the mid-to-late 1970's and has been there ever since.  The robber barons, financiers, Wall Street goons, and the ever lingering Military Industrial Complex (and not to mention others I will leave unannounced) have had a solid grip on general U.S. policy ever since.  Bill Clinton's takeover of the Democratic Party destroyed any credible leftist opposition.  As usual it's up to young people to turn out en masse to try to change course.

Crazy USA didn't want to starve to death in communistic utopia. What nutjobs.

[Elerond]

4 hours ago, Chilloutman said:

does it? Are not my tax money spend on someone else mass transit? Again don't take it as I am complaining about mass transit but I don't see reason why I could not expect tax money to be spend on infrastructure for cars same way its spend on mass transit. Its not like there is some kind of tax on gas for example...

Money spent on mass transit is money spend on infrastructure for cars. As roads already exists and are needed for logistical reasons as currently there is no other as effective way to pickup and deliver goods and raw materials for first mile and last mile cases. And our economies depend on that movement of goods and raw materials, which also means that there is constant economical need to invest in said infrastructure for cars, which is expensive and demands lots of land and space. Which is where mass transit comes in to help as it helps to lessen number of economically ineffective vehicles in transit, which frees roads for more important transit of goods and raw materials and same time it gives new opportunities for transiting goods and raw materials in non-first and last mile cases. So in short, by investing in mass transit country gets more from its existing infrastructure and leaves more room to build more goods and raw material production facilities (and possible more housing but that is usually after thought)  

[Zoraptor]

4 hours ago, Chilloutman said:

well thats the point, if there was proper infrastructure you would not be sitting in jams...

Strange as it may seem adding roads etc often does very little to improve traffic. Usually it just moves the bottle neck that was causing problems to a new place, eg new underground parking still has limited in/ out points. By its nature traffic engineering is always trying to fix the problems today that should have been fixed ten years ago because nobody plans anything properly, and there are fundamental problems like everyone having to be at work at more or less the same times rather than being staggered.

And unfortunately many of the people running transport networks are far more interested in forcing people to use bad mass transport options than they are actually improving the options so people want to use them. The old adage applies: "you can tell a mass transport system is good not when poor people are forced to use it, but when rich people choose to use it", but most just go for the first part because it's 'easy'.

3 hours ago, Hurlshot said:

I don't believe your DMV fees and gas taxes cover as much of those costs as you might think...

The US has unusually low taxes on petrol. Here and in much of Europe tax can be 2/3 or more of the pump price and that without any other fees. They definitely don't use all the fuel taxes here for road/ transport related stuff, a lot goes straight into the Consolidated Fund for general use. And when the funds are ringfenced that still doesn't mean they get spent on sensible stuff.

Example, the local regional fuel tax was introduced last year for a project which has, unsurprisingly, been delayed; so the council is busy spending it on projects of very marginal value because it has to be spent. It's also deeply unpopular in rural areas since it's a per litre tax and the people who mostly pay it are subsidising central city projects they'd never use that were, unsurprisingly, delayed. So, the local rural road which is potholed and has had bend dangerously camber reversed in some cases when they have done botched repairs got new road signs; literally every 20m, which were dangerously positioned, made it impossible to pull over if needed, were distracting, had dangerously high speed advisories on some bends and in some cases reflected headlights directly back at you if driving at night. Locals removed half, they got replaced, then eventually someone from the council actually drove the road and agreed that yes, they were a stupid idea. Company that made and placed the signs still got the money for them and their replacements though...

[Guard Dog]

4 hours ago, Gfted1 said:

The mass transit in Japan is phenomenal too! Quiet, orderly, polite...a real system shock to Chicago mass transit.

No kidding on that one. But for some real excitement take a taxis. Those f-----g guy are NUTS! One guy got me from Naha all the way to Futenma in 20 minutes. I'd have been scared if I wasn't so drunk! 

[Guard Dog]

@ShadySands @ComradeMaster people with money buy favors and influence from the government because the people in government are willing to sell favors and be influenced. Folks love to talk about "getting money out of politics" but as long as the latter is true the former will always be true. The way to go is to take away the power of the government. If it can't sell favors or be influenced because it does not have the power to meaningfully help those with money THEN you will have a honest government. 

[Azdeus]

1 hour ago, Zoraptor said:

The US has unusually low taxes on petrol. Here and in much of Europe tax can be 2/3 or more of the pump price and that without any other fees. They definitely don't use all the fuel taxes here for road/ transport related stuff, a lot goes straight into the Consolidated Fund for general use. And when the funds are ringfenced that still doesn't mean they get spent on sensible stuff.

Example, the local regional fuel tax was introduced last year for a project which has, unsurprisingly, been delayed; so the council is busy spending it on projects of very marginal value because it has to be spent. It's also deeply unpopular in rural areas since it's a per litre tax and the people who mostly pay it are subsidising central city projects they'd never use that were, unsurprisingly, delayed. So, the local rural road which is potholed and has had bend dangerously camber reversed in some cases when they have done botched repairs got new road signs; literally every 20m, which were dangerously positioned, made it impossible to pull over if needed, were distracting, had dangerously high speed advisories on some bends and in some cases reflected headlights directly back at you if driving at night. Locals removed half, they got replaced, then eventually someone from the council actually drove the road and agreed that yes, they were a stupid idea. Company that made and placed the signs still got the money for them and their replacements though...

 

In Sweden up until the 80's the tax on petrol and diesel was properly earmarked and used for road maintainance and expansions, but since then that limit was removed and the money is spent on anything but the roads. Alot of this money does go as tax relief for rich people buying newer cars.

For fun, the costs @ the month of august;

Petrol 6.03SEK/Litre

Value added tax on the petrol, 1.51SEK

Energy tax, 3.95SEK/litre

Co2 Tax, 2.62SEK/Litre

Value added tax on the tax (Becuz Lulz) 1.64SEK

Total cost, 15.75SEK/Litre of wich 9.72SEK are taxes, or 62% if you so wish.

Oh, and then there's tax on the car itself aswell ofcourse.

 

 

[Guard Dog]

Just heard on the new the Trumpster wants to have a live "fireside chat" (channeling FDR's weekly radio address if you don't get the reference) and read the transcript of the Ukraine call. If you were one of his advisors, trying to keep him from hanging himself every day, would you ever reach the point where you say "You know what Don? Go right ahead. Do what you want"

[HoonDing]

4 more years

[ComradeYellow]

1 hour ago, Guard Dog said:

@ShadySands @ComradeMaster people with money buy favors and influence from the government because the people in government are willing to sell favors and be influenced. Folks love to talk about "getting money out of politics" but as long as the latter is true the former will always be true. The way to go is to take away the power of the government. If it can't sell favors or be influenced because it does not have the power to meaningfully help those with money THEN you will have a honest government. 

Noam Chomsky has been advocating for that for many decades.  You can be libertarian minded AND a socialist at the same time.

which brings me to @Skarpen

 

[Chilloutman]

1 hour ago, Guard Dog said:

Just heard on the new the Trumpster wants to have a live "fireside chat" (channeling FDR's weekly radio address if you don't get the reference) and read the transcript of the Ukraine call. If you were one of his advisors, trying to keep him from hanging himself every day, would you ever reach the point where you say "You know what Don? Go right ahead. Do what you want"

sounds like technocracy

[Skarpen]

7 minutes ago, ComradeMaster said:

which brings me to @Skarpen

 

Oh wow. You seriously want to convince anyone by refering to genocide denier? 

[ComradeYellow]

1 hour ago, Skarpen said:

Oh wow. You seriously want to convince anyone by refering to genocide denier? 

Noam Chomsky has fully confessed (with a little added interest, I might add) to the American genocide of the Native American population so I have no idea where you're getting your facts from.