Slog - Comments on Driven to Extinction

Comment by neo-realist

neo-realist — Sat, 21 Apr 2007 11:00:34 -0800

Congestion pricing is perfectly rational in a place like nyc with vast 24 hour subway/bus options, but in the seattle area, where some people commute from areas w/ few or no public transporation options, they have no choice but to drive into the city.

Comment by crazycatguy

crazycatguy — Sat, 21 Apr 2007 11:13:42 -0800

You could ride on one of those digusting buses that Dan was ranting about yesterday.

Comment by mrobvious

mrobvious — Sat, 21 Apr 2007 11:40:00 -0800

You must have missed the article in the NY Times a few months back indicating that, despite the perception, at least half the traffic in NYC is actually from people driving in from another part of NYC. It's not just people from the 'burbs driving in.

Comment by fnarf

fnarf — Sat, 21 Apr 2007 13:53:50 -0800

It's too late to do anything about global warming so we should stop pretending we can make a difference

Comment by cressona

cressona — Sat, 21 Apr 2007 15:04:44 -0800

fnarf: It's too late to do anything about global warming so we should stop pretending we can make a difference

Fnarf is right. We're already too far gone to prevent 100% of the effects of global warming. Therefore, we should resign ourselves to preventing 0% of the effects of global warming.

It's like during World War II, if the Allies had come up with an aggressive plan to save Jews from the Holocaust. And someone says, "If we do everything we can now, a million Jews will still perish. So why bother?" I mean, one million, six million. What's the difference at that point?

It's like Stalin said, "One death is a tragedy; a million is a statistic."

Comment by cressona

cressona — Sat, 21 Apr 2007 15:17:59 -0800

Um, I need to apologize for my last post. I went off-topic by discussing global warming. Back to the actual topic of congestion pricing in NYC. One passage from the NYT story caught my eye:

Even seemingly simple proposals lacking in controversy, like one to expand a system of cameras that capture the license plates of drivers who run red lights, have foundered in Albany because of the opposition of a single legislator.

This feat requires a bit of explanation. I mean, does the New York legislature have its own Frank Chopp? Uh-oh, I think I'm going off-topic again.

Comment by Mokawi

Mokawi — Sat, 21 Apr 2007 15:44:31 -0800

fnarf: "Oops. I accidentally put a knife one inch in my chest. It's too late to prevent the injury, let's just cut all the way to the heart."
Dan: I've never been to NYC, but experience tells me public transit sucks in America. It's acceptable to have such a fee in London because you can get downtown with suburb trains from everywhere, but is it the case in NYC?

Comment by keshmeshi

keshmeshi — Sat, 21 Apr 2007 16:36:43 -0800

@7,

Yes.

Comment by Dan

Dan — Sat, 21 Apr 2007 17:18:48 -0800

Not just trains, trains with beer.

Comment by Mike of Renton

Mike of Renton — Sat, 21 Apr 2007 17:20:30 -0800

Their constituents, of course, regard the ability to drive their SUVs where ever they like, when ever they like, without a thought for the environment or the quality of life of the people who actually live in, say, the most congested parts of Manhattan, a sacred constitutional right.

Oh, I remember, "Life, Liberty, and a really big, tank like vehicle to move around/run over people with."

Comment by maxsolomon

maxsolomon — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 21:19:52 -0800

new york better not have a frank chopp - they'll never get anything done.