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.
Are folks here familiar with the Snell Report and the "National City Lines" scandal? Something along the lines of GM, Firestone Rubber, and Standard Oil conspiring together and then carrying out a program to buy and rip up roughly 85% of American urban light rail transit in the 1930s or so in order to promote automobile dependence? My memory is a bit hazy on the details but Wiki seems to have a decent article on it:
Are folks here familiar with the Snell Report and the "National City Lines" scandal? Something along the lines of GM, Firestone Rubber, and Standard Oil conspiring together and then carrying out a program to buy and rip up roughly 85% of American urban light rail transit in the 1930s or so in order to promote automobile dependence? My memory is a bit hazy on the details but Wiki seems to have a decent article on it:
I'm one of those NY'ers who would love to have a car but do not because it's simply not the rational thing to do (the insurance more so than the car). For myself, owning a car at this point would be financially unsound even though I could technically afford it.
That is exactly my position. The plusses of car ownership simply do not equal the minuses but I consider more than just financial, although financial is a biggie. Is there anything worse than the feeling of a dead battery with the street cleaners due in 10 minutes? Anything more soul sucking than being hit by a cab? Or leaving the theater and finding your car missing and you don't know if it's been stolen or towed? Or going to some crooked mechanic who tells you that your head gasket is shot and it will cost $3000 or you've blown your tranny (that's short for transmission in this context. ) Or spending an hour in the Lincoln Tunnel.
And thus I want a City that is more amenable to bike travel, good public transportation, and pedestrian enhancements.
Last edited by Kefir King; 10-24-2011 at 06:57 AM..
An article of faith belied by the enormous costs of NYC. If dense urban construction is so much more economically sound, why does it cost so much?
Urban construction is more efficient. Multi-unit developments need less heat compared to the same number of private developments, people don't need autos because you walk to places, less land usage, cities are better for self sustainment, there are plenty of reasons why.
NYC is expensive due to a lack of housing. Thank NIMBYs against high density.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wawaweewa
NYKiddo has things a bit backwards.
European cities are't the way they are because Europeans want it that way. Their geography forced them to adapt to their circumstances.
So NYC must have all the land in the world? What city do you live in?
Quote:
Originally Posted by grigou
JColtrane, I pray at your altar of wisdom.
And we all know what that means:
Thanks for explaining to us once again what reality looks like. Because clearly simple mathematical rules can't account for it.
His numbers are wrong! Most NYkers do NOT drive! Even less commute to work. Both numbers are on the decline.
I'm one of those NY'ers who would love to have a car but do not because it's simply not the rational thing to do (the insurance more so than the car). For myself, owning a car at this point would be financially unsound even though I could technically afford it.
One major draw to NYC is it's walkability. You are one of the few.
Urban construction is more efficient. Multi-unit developments need less heat compared to the same number of private developments, people don't need autos because you walk to places, less land usage, cities are better for self sustainment, there are plenty of reasons why.
And yet it's more expensive to live in Manhattan, the most densely populated place in the US by far, than almost anywhere else.
It's almost like there are offsetting drawbacks for all those efficiencies you claim.
Nybbler, the high rent rates in Manhattan show just how attractive those efficiencies are!
They also demonstrate the power of reputation. There's not much of a difference between living in Manhattan and any of the other boroughs. But the perceptions people have make a world and a half of difference!
The only thing it is doing is making the city fill up with YUPSTERS and Snobby Snotty brats that are overgrown children. It's like a bunch of guys walking around like they are in Jr. High School. Especially Manhattan and the gentrified areas with these Yupster types. They have beards, funny 80's glasses, skin tight pants, vans and converse and other vintage beat up shoes, janitor key rings, rusty crappy old bikes, they have california accents, they don't shave, their from places like California, Georgia, Oregon, Texas, Ohio, they really get on my freakin nerves.
And here he is hijacking this thread too. Beat it joey!
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.