[lbo-talk] London's congestion boondoggle

Dwayne Monroe dwayne.monroe at gmail.com
Thu Apr 10 07:25:28 PDT 2008


Wojtek wrote:

The opponents of user fees on this list (Jordan & James, LLC:) ) do so more for philosophical and emotional than utilitarian reasons.

....................

Considering the way Jordan and James have presented their cases, this is an astoundingly wrong thing to say.

Both have offered detailed critiques of the shortcomings of congestion pricing plans. James has gone further by diving his hand into the whirring machinery of London's well established implementation.

I'm extremely irritated by your tendency -- when faced with hard headed, "utilitarian" arguments -- to open a can of hand wavium, dismissing your debating opponent's presentations and turning, once again, to rarely relevant sociological and always inadequate psychoanalytical responses.

If you're serious about getting to the bottom of this, here are the posts you should study and refute, if you can, with data:

London Congestion Charge

<http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/pipermail/lbo-talk/Week-of-Mon-20080407/006515.html>

London's Congestion Boondoggle

<http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/pipermail/lbo-talk/Week-of-Mon-20080407/006527.html>

RTFAs and get back to us with information-built rebuttals.

.d.



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list