the downside of the Greens

[Johannes Schneider]

Dennis wrote:
>On Fri, 2 Oct 1998, Johannes Schneider wrote:
>
>> Perhaps from the point of view of a North-American tourist mass transit
in
>> Germany might look nice. For a person who has to use it every day to get
to
>> work in time its not like this. Trains are crowded, dirty and unreliable.
So
>> I can understand everyone who does not want to it.
>
>My friend, I rode buses, street trams, U-Bahns and S-Bahns galore, and I
>did not see a single interior which wasn't spic and span. Things ran
>pretty much on time (though the train delays could be a little annoying).
>May I ask where exactly you live in Germany and which mass transit
>services you're referring to?
Dennis,
I live and work in the Munich area and I use U and S-Bahn on a daily basis
to get to work. From what I hear from other regions in Germany public
transport here is one of the best in Germany. If I took a car I would be
twice as fast as by train, this is even a good ratio. In the seventies
left-wingers demanded, the time to get to work should be included within
paid working time. Perhaps this sounds utopian today, but I this could
people make to use public transport.
When you look at the country-side, things are much worse. After the rail
system has become an ordinary commercial enterprise (before it was a
state-run service), there are even less trains in areas, where one cannot
make any money from it. So in these areas people need their cars to get to
work. The same goes for the growing number of people who have to work during
unusual hours at night or on weekends.
For lets say university students train delays are just 'a little annoying',
because it doesnt realy matter, whether they are in time for their lectures.
But for people who have to be at work at an exact time, it just means they
have to go earlier, not to miss any connections and be sure to be punctual
at their working place.
Just another example about how effective public transport is in Germany: At
one party convention delegates voted for a motion demanding that all party
officials and MP only use traisn and public transport within Germany instead
of car and plane. Immedieatly the party leadership declared they wont obey
this motion, because they could not meet up any important dates, if they
used only trains and public transport. A nice display of green
double-standards: Where as the Greeen nomenklatura is breathlessly saving
the planet, the working class people dont have anything to do in live, so
they can afford hanging around in delayed trains. No wonder the Greens
scored just 3% among blue-collar workers in recent elections.
>> Thats what the Greens are saying, but in the end it will just another tax
>> increase common people have to bear. At the end of the day we will hear
taht
>> any reductions wont be possible because of the 'current budget'
situation.
>> Since nobody likes to pay taxes, its sounds much better if you are saying
>> one has to pay taxes to protect the atmoshere instead of saying its
cannons
>> instead of butter.
>
>Taxing the rich is not enough, not unless you plan to move the population
>of Northern Europe (which is pretty much a giant floodplain) into
>house-boats in the year 2050, once the Antarctic glaciers melt.
Both of us, we are no prophets, so its extremely difficult to know what will
happen in 2050. The only thing one could do is an educated guess and see
what scientists are saying today. When it comes to world climate a lot of
research is based on computer simulation and highly hypothetical. E.g.
predictions about a global warming have been revised recently. Though I
doubt your the probability of your doomsday scenario I agree from what
scientist say today some concern is justified.
But if your predictions were true, the steps the Greens are proposing
wouldnt be appropiate, much stricter measure had to be taken. So it seems
not even the Greens ( at least here in Germany ) dont believe in it. In this
context the flooding of Northern Europe gets the opposite of science. Its
sheer ideology and obscurancy justifying another tax burden on the working
class and making the use of cars a privilege for the rich.
Johannes