Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« Today The Stranger Suggests | "I don't feel sorry for Larry ... »

Friday, October 5, 2007

Bullshit Pro-Roads Argument No. 9,257

posted by on October 5 at 11:24 AM

“I like polar bears as much as anyone, but…”

No, Chris Vance (for Crosscut). No, you don’t.

And now, I’m off to hear some enviros (Transportation Choices, Washington Conservation Voters) present their case for passing a massive new freeway package. Want to join me? It’s at the downtown YMCA, 909 4th Ave., from noon to 1:30 p.m.

RSS icon Comments

1

I think his earlier Crosscut article was much more insightful. Explaining why Kemper Freeman should support RTID/Sound Transit. Vance argued that this is the last best chance for a big freeway package in the puget sound region.

He's right.

After this turkey goes down, we'll get to vote on transit/light rail by itself, and it will pass, just like in 1996.

Posted by Chris | October 5, 2007 11:28 AM
2

Yes. Chris Vance and the Repuclican Party do not een wan to preserve the Northen Alaska wilderness.

They certainly don't care about the rapid detachment of the ice shelf from Alaska which will strand us all and mak us be Russion, Canacian or Grenlander bears only --no Americans bears wll be let pretty soon.

And yes the argument that 90% use roads now is stupid.

90% used horse drawn carriages before.....90% used first grade through sixthgrade only before.no high chool, no college.........if fact earlier, 90% of all people didn't even have the vote and were serfs! So that means existing affairs are always optimal? Not.

100% of us need that ice shelf that is melting rapidly. Vote no.

Posted by Polar Bears Against Prop. 1 | October 5, 2007 11:29 AM
3

Yeah, I just love the "economic imperative" vs. "fate of the planet" argument. As if our economy could continue if the environmental calamity we're on a collision course with happens.

Yeah, the environment, the ecosystem, the source of all life . . . that stuff's all right. The important thing, though, is the economy and making sure corporations can do whatever they want forever. What a frickin' tool.

Posted by Levislade | October 5, 2007 11:33 AM
4

If the taxes were on businesses - payroll tax, tax on dividends, corporate income tax - Vance would be screaming against it. Because people and families pay sales taxes and MVETs the most, he's cool with it. Tool.

Posted by realist | October 5, 2007 12:27 PM
5

Vance is a tool and a lying sack of shit, but the fate of the polar bears is not going to be significantly affected by this package either way.

80% reduction in US GHG emissions means that we'll have to either stop using cars entirely (not going to happen) or stop using GHG-emitting fuels, and even then we'll have to do most of our reductions at power plants. How does ST2/RTID advance or slow the elimination of the internal combustion engine or the use of renewable energy sources? It doesn't.

The best things we can do to eliminate the cars portion of emissions is join a global carbon-trading system, argue for constantly reducing caps through a stabilization date in 2050, and institute policies at all level of government to meet these goals, through the institution of tolls and carbon taxes, and more urban density and trains. Even with all that, the one thing that will enable us to meet our goals is plug-in hybrids, using electricity sources that generate 20% of current emissions. That seems like an insurmountable goal, but it's achievable with a 4% annual reduction in emissions sustained over just under 40 years.

Until we have that long-term commitment in place, the best thing we can do is make sure that we build a regional train system, move toward the creation of a regional toll system, and keep building urban density. The best way we can do that is to vote yes on Prop 1, institute tolls on 520, and then use that as the standard for the larger tolling system that comes.

Posted by Cascadian | October 5, 2007 12:56 PM
6

His argument is basically "because me and my friend and other suburbanites can't use transit, transit shouldn't be built". But if SOME people CAN use transit, say 20%, wouldn't that reduce congestion for you Chris? Also I love how right wingers around here talk about transit like its some newfangled hippie fad. Almost every other major city in the world has comprehensive rail transit. This isn't some unproven concept.

Posted by matt | October 5, 2007 2:00 PM
7

Anyone who calls climate change the "emotional issue de jour" clearly doesn't get it. Or, doesn't want to get it.

Posted by Bill LaBorde | October 5, 2007 4:30 PM
8

I support the right to arm polar bears and give quarters to soldiers who help them learn how to hit a Republican at 1000 feet.

It's called karmic payback.

Posted by Will in Fremont | October 7, 2007 4:40 AM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).