Dennis, Alex, Bill, Stephen

alex lantsberg wideye at ziplink.net
Tue Sep 21 09:04:01 PDT 1999


Amazing, that you cannot hear the Gradgrind austerity in your own

comments. Keep the costs down! the workers are consuming too much! More?

What do you mean more, boy? From whose perspective are the funds running

out? From the perspective of the ruling class, for whom all expenditure

on working class consumption is a waste.

jim, you are clinging to the misguided belief that more consumption equals more prosperity. if all of the money that is shoveled into the pockets of road builders and the rest of the car lobby went to sensical transit, i would rejoice. throw in the savings from the military budget and the pollution costs then its a virtual transit utopia. the reality of the matter is though when planners hear that transit costs too much, is unreliable, and doesnt get people where they want to go they dont try to heal the sick mode, they cut transit funding and divert into road building. plain and simple, working people pay for the car dominated society and they are getting the shaft

>

>the campaign for car free cities goes beyond simply doing away with the car.

>the redesign of cities

>to a more human scale, with adequate public transport, would make the doing

>away

>of cars a feasible

>option for many. for those who need to rely on mechanized transport, car

>sharing or shuttle travel

>can be a real option. the point is that the car is a horrible thing to

>organize

>a transportation

>system around.

Horrid horrid car! I don't share your East European vision of social

progress, where some fat controller dictates all possible movements on

his railway timetable. But more to the point, nor does anyone else in

their actions. If you don't like car travel, don't do it. Nobody is

making you. Take the bus, or cycle (I do). But car travel is increasing

by the hour, because it is closest to what people need in the narrow

confines allowed to them.

it's one thing to not travel by car, but its another when the choices are generally withing the confines of "car-chitecture." do people really WANT to sit in traffic and the smog? do they really WANT the road rage that erupts when their oiled up lazy boy is stuck with thousands of others?

the simple answer is no. as long as the car is the most accomodated transport mode, it will remain in the lead no matter how many discentives are piled on top of it. i guarantee that if people could get from A to B quicker and cheaper than by car, then the travel mode would shift. it's not a place where "some fat controller dictates all possible movements on his railway timetable" but a place where transit is reliable, fast, and cheap.

You should really listen to yourself. The psychological meaning of what

you are saying is entirely directed at car-users, who you think of as

horrible.

its not the car users. its actually directed at the idiot planners who accomodate the narrow, self-interest of capitalist developer scum who push people further and further into the fringes to feed their insatiable dollar lust. the car driver is pawn in the system and is merely playing the role he is stuck into. this isnt a denunciation of the working class, its an indictment of the ruling class.

In message <14310.60380.72302.170233 at lisa.zopyra.com>, William S. Lear

<rael at zopyra.com> writes

>God you are awful sometimes, Jim. What is curious is how you can

>seriously pose such questions.

Nothing like religious dogma...

In message <Pine.GSO.4.10.9909201443040.9453-100000 at uhunix1>, Stephen E

Philion <philion at hawaii.edu> writes

>I think perhaps James is relying on the common senseical working class

>response to questions like, "Would you like to own a nice new car?"...But

>if they are asked if they would like efficient, comfortable, and cheap

>public transportation, even those who think of themeselves as 'middle

>class' will be quite interested in the idea.

Enrique gave the definitive answer to this. But I'm curious, why do you

see trains and buses on the one hand, and cars on the other as mutually

exclusive? It's like thinking that just because there is cinema there

will be no theatre. Do you really imagine that a drop in fares and a

better timetable will make people think, oh, yes, now I don't need my

car. They just aren't the same activity at all.

like we said earlier, cars have their place in a transport system. its just that that place should be last in line.

--

Jim heartfield



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list