U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Missouri > Kansas City
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-09-2011, 07:54 PM
 
Location: IN
20,170 posts, read 34,496,158 times
Reputation: 12508

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by CrownVic95 View Post
The freedom to live in low density areas was made possible by the automobile. And the automobile, the most wonderful and important invention in the last 200 years, has been under attack now for many years by various fringe ideological groups who will stop at nothing to eliminate what they're convinced is a scourge upon the planet.

So, no, they haven't yet succeeded in taking away the freedom enabled by individual mobility, but they're sure as hell trying....and trying harder every day.

I will fight them with all of my energy until I draw my last breath. We are finished as a nation if we continue our retreat from what made us great 50 years ago. And the automobile played no small part.
And our interstate highway system is subsidized by the federal government, the same way as transit. All roads cost money and state gas tax acts as a a revenue source for that maintenance. I also don't like driving long distances and prefer to live and work within close proximity because it allows me to save large amounts of money. No one is saying that a particular lifestyle is wrong as we all have differing opinions on what constitutes "quality of life." Also, look at cities with higher real estate prices in urban areas vs suburban areas in metro areas and note where the inverse is true. Desirability, amenities, location, schools, and inherent proximity to employment as well as cultural attractions are quite important.

Oh, if I want to live in the "country" it sure wouldn't be in a suburban area, but out in a rural area. I prefer to not live in areas that have HOA's, covenants, fees, chem-lawns, etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-10-2011, 07:48 AM
 
Location: Tower Grove East, St. Louis, MO
12,064 posts, read 27,216,465 times
Reputation: 3739
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrownVic95 View Post
Ya know, you may be onto something there. The ignore button is right up there, too.
I have no problem conversing and arguing important points with someone with whom I disagree. No need to ignore you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2011, 11:58 AM
 
Location: Denver, Colorado U.S.A.
14,174 posts, read 22,505,000 times
Reputation: 10428
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrownVic95 View Post
Don't kid yourself.

You better believe they're after my car....and your car....and everybody else's car. What do you think this fire-breathing incessant push for "transit" is all about? And the charade over the last 15-20 years predicting certain global catastrophe within our lifetime from CO2 emissions? And the constant drumbeat of attacks on all things "suburbia"?

And peak oil? Neither you nor I nor almost anyone else on earth has any idea how much oil remains. We only know the propaganda we're fed for the purpose of price manipulation. But there's no logical reason to believe we are anywhere near a supply crisis.

You may appreciate your 47 mpg putt-putt car. But that's only because you're too young to have experienced driving the greatest American cars....of the 50s and 60s. What has happened since is sad, sad, sad, as with each passing year and more stifling regulations, cars have become a little less exciting and a little more demonized.
I think you've safely entered "tin foil hat" territory here
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2011, 12:46 PM
 
Location: IN
20,170 posts, read 34,496,158 times
Reputation: 12508
I don't think most people prefer to spend $300-400 a month in gas when they could be spending more of that sum in other places. That is one reason why the economy has yet to recover when consumer spending is still 70% of the economy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2011, 02:35 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
7,661 posts, read 5,643,038 times
Reputation: 7505
Quote:
Originally Posted by denverian View Post
I think you've safely entered "tin foil hat" territory here
Of course you do! That's exactly what you've been taught to think.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GraniteStater View Post
I don't think most people prefer to spend $300-400 a month in gas when they could be spending more of that sum in other places. That is one reason why the economy has yet to recover when consumer spending is still 70% of the economy.
I don't know anyone who spends $300-400 a month in gas. I spend about $180 in an area with the highest gas prices in the nation.

But whatever you spend, you know as well as I that you don't just wave a wand and make it go away. Transit isn't cheap - and usually far exceeds the cost of gasoline for a commute. And by the time you build a new transit system that would give the masses a serious option to abandon their cars, you've spent multiple times what we're spending currently on transportation. And one more minor incidental....most people prefer using their cars and are not going to move to mass transit anyway for that reason alone. It's not going to happen because, frankly, most people know that it's a big step backward in life quality. It's 95% pain and 5% gain. For what?

But wait....how could I forget. We're all supposed to live stacked on top of each other in high-rises so you can walk to everything. No trade-offs or collateral costs there....no sir.

Guys - it is what it is - and it is what it is because most people want it that way and want no part of your high-density utopia. You're swimming upstream and that is not going to change.

I'm done with this. Good day.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2011, 02:58 PM
 
Location: Florida and New England
1,101 posts, read 1,305,361 times
Reputation: 1358
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifelongMOgal View Post
IMO, the status quo game is throwing money at projects that don't fix the fundamental flaws of Kansas City and its livibility, primarily, the nearly half centry of the cr*ppy school district.

Build bigger and better sports stadium, arenas, more convention centers, and airports is all very nice but the tax base will not expand and Kansas City will not become a place more people want to relocate to and live until it has a public school district to which people find safe and worthy of sending their children. So, IMO, your approach is the one Kansas City has been using and it is the status quo. Of course, I'm only a taxpayer in the county and city who has watched her tax dollars to the school district and to special "revenue" projects be wasted x 30 years; so, my vote doesn't count.
Bingo. The sequence of priority items to revitalize a city:
(1) Reduce crime and the perception of danger
(2) Good public schools
(3) Good streets and viable neighborhoods
(4) Shopping and entertainment options
(5) Cheap and abundant parking and/ or public transit
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2011, 03:50 PM
 
Location: Washington, DC area
10,705 posts, read 18,504,291 times
Reputation: 5415
Quote:
Originally Posted by westender View Post
Bingo. The sequence of priority items to revitalize a city:
(1) Reduce crime and the perception of danger
(2) Good public schools
(3) Good streets and viable neighborhoods
(4) Shopping and entertainment options
(5) Cheap and abundant parking and/ or public transit
KCI has almost nothing to do with any of those or any other basic city service. It's fully independent and funded via its own aviation department and or the federal government. It's makes no sense to use schools, shopping, streets or anything else as an excuse to not improve kci.

So do nothing with KCI. That's not going to fix the schools or rebuild bridges, but it could actually create its own problems such as the city not being as well connected to other cities as it could be which hurts business recruitment. Just like transit, kc can do nothing and watch some other city get federal money to improve their airport.

It's not my home airport anymore, I don't know why I still care, other than the fact that it's depressing walking off the plane into the place (although waiting for a flight is MUCH worse). It's a good thing the doors are 75 feet away from that perspective I guess.

Speaking of home airports. BWI (my primary airport) is becoming a major Southwest hub (or whatever you want to call it). I already like BWI. It's easy to use, quick to get through and yet it has places to get drinks and food and go to the bathroom and sit. But they are about to make it even better and each time they do, southwest builds up more traffic. Hmmm, interesting concept.

BWI airport plans $100M expansion, will include new security lanes, more food and retail space - The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/bwi-airport-plans-100m-expansion-will-include-new-security-lanes-more-food-and-retail-space/2011/11/10/gIQAZLVH8M_story.html - broken link)

Who wants to fly through KCI unless people just want to see what stuff looked like in 1970 and enjoy going through security multiple times and like being crowded into tiny gate areas while tumble weeds blow down the concourses of the rest of the airport. Oh yea and starve and thirst to death, possibly even crap their pants waiting to use the tiny stalls while wishfully thinking they can fly over the glass wall and enter the massive vacant bathrooms they can see but can't use. But they will get peanuts soon as they continue on to a city without an annoying airport and then they will think. I'm never flying through KC again. That's good for the city!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


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 > Missouri > Kansas City
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

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