MetroRiderLA

los angeles transit oriented lifestyle

There are 13 Responses to “Daily Transit Links Roundup for 6/13/08”:

1. LOL. That Jeffrey essay is a laugh riot. The automobile is free-market? LOL.

   Like many conservatives, he doesn’t even take into account the moral hazzard from declining economic productivity and environmental quality from congestion and the inability to provide everyone with a high quality automobile-based lifestyle. The costs these automobile addicts push onto society in other ways aren’t internalized by them either.

   Well, I hope he enjoys his “freedom and independence” to pay $5/gallon gasoline, and sit in ever worsening congestion. What a laugh riot. He said he hoped the increased public transit ridership is a trend which can be “reversed”. LOL. He opposed parking restrictions, carpool lanes, anything that gets in the way of his automobile entitlement.

   Despite all the nonsense about lost freedom and independence, buried within the article is this gem:

   In a socialist transportation system, a person may be compelled to travel in the company of people he does not know and who could even be a danger to him.

   This is what conservatives REALLY fear about public transit: “Oh my God, I might have to sit next someone of a different race, class, ethnicity, religion or sexual orientation. What if they actually end up interacting with me? What if I find out they are just like me?”

   Thanks for reposting your article, Fred.

   Comment by Dan Wentzel on June 13th, 2008 at 10:24 am »Reply«
   
   

2. fuck that guy. seriously someone should repeal his right to bloging

   Comment by jeremy on June 13th, 2008 at 10:34 am »Reply«
   
   

3. This is what conservatives REALLY fear about public transit: “Oh my God, I might have to sit next someone of a different race, class, ethnicity, religion or sexual orientation. What if they actually end up interacting with me?

   Newspaper (or good book) and Ipod. You’re not morally compelled to “interact” with anyone you don’t choose to.

   Comment by cph on June 13th, 2008 at 11:11 am »Reply«
   
   

4. We should drill our own oil — now. And, when the supply naturally diminishes to where prices drive the market elsewhere, American entrepreneurs must create another fuel whose production the government cannot readily curtail, and that keeps Americans driving where they want to, when they want to, in privately owned cars.

   Faeries! We can run cars off of pixie dust! (with all apologies to Peter Pan). Do these people realize that there isn’t a magical alternative fuel out there? Ethanol “works” in small quantities because of crazy Federal farm subsidies. But if the entire country switched to it, it’d collapse. Folks, there isn’t anything else out there.

   If I didn’t know better, I’d swear that article was an SNL skit.

   Comment by aaron on June 13th, 2008 at 12:52 pm »Reply«
   
   

5. Freedom machines? Jeffrey should be forced to try to get to Santa Monica from Downtown on the 10 freeway during rush hour. That’ll change his tune.

   Comment by Spokker on June 13th, 2008 at 1:41 pm »Reply«
   
   

6. That Kummant interview is great too and shouldn’t be overlooked.

   Comment by Dan Wentzel on June 14th, 2008 at 10:33 am »Reply«
   
   

7. fear not the bus

   I don’t think it’s fear but the slowness of the bus system. A few years ago, a friend of mine missed the last Blue Line to LB and had to take the bus. Even though the roads were virtually empty (read NO CARS), the trip STILL took about 4 hours (not including waiting for the bus to arrive while the same line in the opposite direction ran like clockwork). Blue Line takes 1 hour.

   Therefore, if you have to go somwhere in a hurry (like the airport), the bus would be your worst bet. I perfer to use either a private shuttle service or the Green Line. Busses are for when you can take your time (weekend) shopping.

   Comment by Jip on June 14th, 2008 at 3:26 pm »Reply«
   
   

8. I think the Cartard forgot to mention the socialist road system. Theres nothing free about being stuck on the 405.

   Comment by djm on June 14th, 2008 at 6:55 pm »Reply«
   
   

9. The primary fault of his argument is that what people are freely choosing public transit, it is not being “forced” upon them by some socialist government. They want public transit now and are asking for options. They want convenient, fast, inexpensive transportation, and trains and buses offer this now more than the car. It is difficult for people to change entrenched behaviors, but people will – they are now. He acknowledges the other fault of his argument, that the road and freeway infrastructure is extremely expensive, and is already subsidized by the government. In time, a substantial long term investment in rail in LA will provide faster and more convenient transportation to where people want to go.

   Dan W. you make excellent points, it is so apparent that this guy is really afraid of other people. This guy is laughable, but sadly not an isolated case. He reminds me of the libertarian James Moore who also opposes any investment in rail.

   His hope that increased interest in public transit ridership can be reversed wont be fullfilled, rather I think it is a trend that is here to stay and will only grow.

   Comment by Haven on June 15th, 2008 at 11:30 am »Reply«
   
   

10. Thanks to you Fred Camino for your work on this great blog, and your commitment to public transit and rail in LA. And thanks to all the other commited advocates here, Dan W. and others.

    Freedom machines?!, i mean really.. Where is George Lakoff? Lets see..

    1. polluting isolation machines
    2. individual carbon emitting machines
    …

    Comment by Haven on June 15th, 2008 at 11:55 am »Reply«
    
    

11. The National Interstate Freeway System was originally subsidized by the Govrnment as an efficent method to transport the military

    The primary fault of his argument is that what people are freely choosing public transit, it is not being “forced” upon them by some socialist government. They want public transit now and are asking for options. They want convenient, fast, inexpensive transportation, and trains and buses offer this now more than the car. It is difficult for people to change entrenched behaviors, but people will – they are now.

    My thoughts EXACTLY!! Bulling, and insulting people has NEVER made them change their ways or beliefs. Just ask the Animal Rights Activists…

    Comment by Jip on June 15th, 2008 at 2:40 pm »Reply«
    
    

12. I don’t think it’s fear but the slowness of the bus system…

    …Therefore, if you have to go somwhere in a hurry (like the airport), the bus would be your worst bet. I perfer to use either a private shuttle service or the Green Line. Busses are for when you can take your time (weekend) shopping.

    Agreed. There’s also a reliability issue with buses. My commute involves a train and a bus. The train is always on time or close enough to it not to make me late. The bus on the other hand has made me late on more then one occasion. Once because the bus driver simply decided not to stop to pick me up.

    I actually tend to feel a lot safer on a bus then on a train. I’ve been riding buses for a while now (although not in LA) and when I’ve witnessed
    altercations the bus driver has always interceded and stopped the guilty party (either by calling the police or just kicking the person off the bus). I’m not sure anyone would do anything to help on a train. I have yet to have a serious problem, but given that I’m a small woman usually on my own, my personal safety is a great concern whenever I leave the house. It would be nice if the train was one place I could feel safe from all that.

    Comment by sheri on June 15th, 2008 at 7:58 pm »Reply«
    
    

13. Also a discussion here:
    http://www.caglepost.com/column/Terrence+Jeffrey/6709/The+Threat+To+The+Car.html

    Comment by cph on June 23rd, 2008 at 9:58 am »Reply«
    
    

Disclaimer

MetroRiderLA

MetroRiderLA is an independent blog and has no affiliation with the Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro), its board, employees, vendors, or anyone else. The opinions and views expressed in MetroRiderLA belong soley to the individual contributors and do not represent those of Metro or any other outside entities beyond those independent contributors. Opinions expressed are never intended to offend, malign, or defame any religion, ethnic group, club, company, or individual. We strive for valid and accurate content, but due to the transient nature of information on the web, this cannot be guaranteed. Reader comments represent the opinions of the individual commenter and do not neccesssarily reflect the views of MetroRiderLA or its contributors. Bottom line, MetroRiderLA, despite all the fancy trimmings, is a blog and therefore contains all the innacuracies, rudeness, foul language, snap judgements, vitriol, and snark inherent to the medium.