U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old Yesterday, 03:52 PM
 
537 posts, read 413,062 times
Reputation: 883

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by samiwas1 View Post
I don't think anyone is arguing that interstate construction may have divided minority neighborhoods. The focus of the discussion is whether traffic would exist if the interstates weren't racist.
I canít believe that you and so many others donít seem to want to address Kruseís actual argument rather than a straw man he didnít articulate. His argument isnít that racist transportation policy regarding the placement of interstates is the clause of traffic congestion. He states, ďIn the end, Atlantaís traffic is at a standstill because its attitude about transit is at a standstill, too. Fifty years after its Interstates were set down with an eye to segregation and its rapid-transit system was stunted by white flight, the city is still stalled in the past.

Is he wrong? Did white flight not happen? Did those same white people not prevent the expansion of public transit? If youíve got an argument to refute Kruseís actual claim and not your imagined one, letís hear it.

 
Old Yesterday, 04:15 PM
 
13,700 posts, read 22,192,384 times
Reputation: 4698
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR Valentine View Post
I canít believe that you and so many others donít seem to want to address Kruseís actual argument rather than a straw man he didnít articulate. His argument isnít that racist transportation policy regarding the placement of interstates is the clause of traffic congestion. He states, ďIn the end, Atlantaís traffic is at a standstill because its attitude about transit is at a standstill, too. Fifty years after its Interstates were set down with an eye to segregation and its rapid-transit system was stunted by white flight, the city is still stalled in the past.

Is he wrong? Did white flight not happen? Did those same white people not prevent the expansion of public transit? If youíve got an argument to refute Kruseís actual claim and not your imagined one, letís hear it.
BR Valókeep on...you are the accurate one here. It is very clear and obvious what the argument is.


This thread has contained some of the most willfully ignorant posts and comments that I have seen in a really long time.
 
Old Today, 01:03 PM
bu2
 
10,232 posts, read 6,568,701 times
Reputation: 4320
Quote:
Originally Posted by atler8 View Post
In all candor your words can be applied in both directions politically-speaking.
You focused only on "progressive ideas" & the idiocy thing here but as you wrote the last sentence you surely realized how it goes both ways. Right? If not, there's a tremendous dose of irony to be found there in your post.
It was a progressive calling a liberal an idiot in this thread. It was very amusing.
 
Old Today, 01:04 PM
bu2
 
10,232 posts, read 6,568,701 times
Reputation: 4320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Need4Camaro View Post
Possibly impactful at that time but no more than any other major city. I-35 in Austin was built as a barrier to keep the African American population in East Austin out of downtown. DFW, where do I begin? Same for Chicago and NYC. The real bulk of the metro's major transportation issues did not occur until after its explosive growth and negligence in expanding transportion routes and options.
But none of this caused the current traffic problems which is the claim of the author.
 
Old Today, 01:13 PM
bu2
 
10,232 posts, read 6,568,701 times
Reputation: 4320
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR Valentine View Post
I canít believe that you and so many others donít seem to want to address Kruseís actual argument rather than a straw man he didnít articulate. His argument isnít that racist transportation policy regarding the placement of interstates is the clause of traffic congestion. He states, ďIn the end, Atlantaís traffic is at a standstill because its attitude about transit is at a standstill, too. Fifty years after its Interstates were set down with an eye to segregation and its rapid-transit system was stunted by white flight, the city is still stalled in the past.

Is he wrong? Did white flight not happen? Did those same white people not prevent the expansion of public transit? If youíve got an argument to refute Kruseís actual claim and not your imagined one, letís hear it.
And cities like Los Angeles and Portland who have expanded mass transit have some of the worst traffic. Transit ridership is declining around the country despite all the money spent on it.

Commuter rail is not a solution for traffic.

While race played a factor here in the referendums, a lot was pure economics. In Houston and Dallas, heavily white conservative suburbs approved transit referendums. In Houston it was the ethnically mixed, Democratic blue collar east that refused to join the transit system. In Cobb and Gwinnett there were a lot of people who would never use MARTA who didn't want to pay taxes for something they saw no personal benefit in, same as those east of Houston. Same as those white neighborhoods in Dekalb that opposed the Oak Grove/Tucker MARTA line that never got built.
 
Old Today, 01:15 PM
bu2
 
10,232 posts, read 6,568,701 times
Reputation: 4320
Traffic in Atlanta is at a standstill because the Atlanta metro has done next to nothing about highways, arterial roads or transit in the last 25 years while the population has doubled. Its those decisions, not ones made in the 70s, causing the issues.
 
Old Today, 01:32 PM
 
Location: Kirkwood
23,594 posts, read 17,782,202 times
Reputation: 5491
Quote:
Originally Posted by bu2 View Post
And cities like Los Angeles and Portland who have expanded mass transit have some of the worst traffic. Transit ridership is declining around the country despite all the money spent on it.
So we should give up and begin expanding roads?
If you dive into the ridership declines, it's the bus systems dragging everything down because of traffic clogged streets. Transit systems that have redesigned their bus systems are experiencing ridership growth. LA's Orange Line continues to grow in ridership.
 
Old Today, 01:39 PM
 
2,358 posts, read 922,359 times
Reputation: 1829
Quote:
Originally Posted by bu2 View Post
And cities like Los Angeles and Portland who have expanded mass transit have some of the worst traffic. Transit ridership is declining around the country despite all the money spent on it.

Commuter rail is not a solution for traffic.


While race played a factor here in the referendums, a lot was pure economics. In Houston and Dallas, heavily white conservative suburbs approved transit referendums. In Houston it was the ethnically mixed, Democratic blue collar east that refused to join the transit system. In Cobb and Gwinnett there were a lot of people who would never use MARTA who didn't want to pay taxes for something they saw no personal benefit in, same as those east of Houston. Same as those white neighborhoods in Dekalb that opposed the Oak Grove/Tucker MARTA line that never got built.
While I do enjoy driving and the redundant highway systems found in certain metro's, this is where I have to disagree. One thing I do agree with that the anti-car nazi's push is that we really -can't- build enough highways to satisfy everyone's transportation needs. While I don't agree with some of their radical approaches to implement multi-model transportation and some of their unrealistic commuting expectations, not everything they say is balogne - they have some pretty strong and very concerning points.

Now I do agree that Atlanta's highway network definitely could use improvements to bring them up to modern standards and redundancy, but I feel overall in this nation as a whole we REALLY need to fix the boundaries (financially, politically, wealth classes) and issues haulting transit expansion and ridership rather than shunning transit and entirely focusing everything on cars. I think thats a very bad idea especially from a future perspective outlook when there is no longer room to expand roads while cities continue to grow. American's in general have a very self-centered outlook and for any form of positive progression to grow from out, some people 'do' need to feel alittle more comfortable with sharing means of transportation with others. Catering 100% to automobiles is literally blowing efficient means of transportation out the window.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top