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.
I'm not going to get into a discussion of psychiatry, but many people do not accept reality. For example, many people in your area still think the steel mills will come back. (Ironically, one of the big uses of steel is in the making of cars!)
"Between 1850 and 1871 the United States government used a portion of the public domain (federally owned land) to assist and encourage the building of railroads. In all, during that twenty-one year period approximately 1.31 million acres of land were transferred to private ownership. This represented 9.5 percent of the public domain as it stood in 1850 (1.39 billion acres). . . . The law provided that companies agreeing to undertake the construction of transcontinental railroad lines would be eligible for loans ranging from $16,000 to $48,000 per mile of track laid. The precise amount of the loan was determined by the difficulty of the terrain through which the construction passed. The government loaned a total of $64,623,512 to the transcontinental companies. These loans were for the most part paid back at six percent interest. The law also provided that a company could be given up to twenty sections (a section is a square mile) of land for every mile of track put down. This land would be granted in alternate sections (a kind of checkerboard pattern) within an area lying forty miles on either side of the proposed right of way. To qualify for the subsidies a company had to agree to actually build track or forfeit the grant, and carry mail, government passengers, and freight at reduced rates."
My inflation calculator only goes back to 1914. $64,000,000.00 in 1914 had the same buying power as $1,545,164,800.00 in 2017. 1 1/2 billion dollars in loans alone, plus 9.5% of all the land in the public domain.
Yes, 130 million acres is a lot of land, and was, indeed, a subsidy. The value of that subsidy would be very difficult to determine, since the US was land rich and cash poor, especially during and after the war.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katarina Witt
Aren't we all?
Yes, I've had to unlearn some things. Peptic ulcers are no longer caused by personality disorder for one. Likewise, infertility is no longer a psychiatric disease. However, some things are tried and true. Having the patient, in this case the CD Urban Planning posters, accept reality is one such.
From many of these posts here, a lot of cities, including mine, have combined transit systems, cars, buses, light rail, heavy rail, subways in some cases. Nor do I think there was any grand conspiracy to get people out of PT and into their own cars. It was simply more convenient for people to drive their own cars on their own time schedule.
Most cities have at least a little public transit, and some cities even have enough to be useful, in certain areas. But, I'm going to use the link I provided above, to--hopefully--give some perspective.
Quote:
The United States has an extensive transportation network. In addition to 4.12 million miles of roads, transportation infrastructure consists of:
608,445 bridges
5,145 public-use airports, 13,863 private airports that serve recreational and business air travel and 286 military airports.
138,565 miles of railroad track that carries much of the nation’s heavy freight and agricultural output. This includes track operated by the nation’s Class 1 freight railroads, regional freight railroads and local freight railroads. Amtrak operates 21,225 miles of passenger rail service in the U.S., much of it over track owned by the freight railroads.
Over 271,000 route-miles of scheduled bus service plus 12,413 miles of fixed rail transit including trolley buses, commuter rail, subways and light rail systems. The fixed-rail transit systems serve 3,216 stations where passengers can board or exit trains.
If my math is right, there are almost 24 miles of road for every mile of rail. Or, about 122 miles of road for every mile of passenger rail. 271k route-miles of bus service seems reasonable, IMO, but then you have to ask: how frequent are the buses?
It wasn't more convenient, until the government built a lot of improved roads. House work would be a lot more convenient, too, if the government would pay half the cost to hire a housekeeper.
The point about "accepting reality" was a general statement. Too many on this forum seem unwilling to do so. Many want to go back to the "glory days" of pre-WW II, in some cases pre-1900.
haha. Yes. Hypocrites.
They type on their laptops and enjoy speech-to-text technology on their cell phones to compose posts that will be communicated over a private network connected to a public network for transport to computer servers hosting social network forum software. So they enjoy their computers, cell phones, an international electronic communications network, microwaves, refrigerators, and all modern conveniences while seeking a "return" to an environment that never existed to begin with and which none of them were alive to "miss" to begin with. Don't think any of them would be willing to give up all the technology advances, societal changes, civil rights, etc. over the past hundred years in exchange.
Last edited by IC_deLight; 03-15-2017 at 10:17 PM..
"It (driving) wasn't more convenient, until the government built a lot of improved roads."
Actually, driving was more convenient for many individuals to get where they wanted to go on their own schedules, not have to wait for a bus, train, etc to carry a group of people to a destination that may not be the final destination. Therefore, they voted money to build roads! "The government" is the people.
Of course it's not going back to the way it was. I, for one, am glad to live without the threat of cholera.
But nursing, like every profession, develops with the accrual of knowledge, of learning by experience and studying the past. In medicine, it's not unheard of to stop prescribing a certain treatment upon later review. Plenty of medicines have gone out of favor for that reason.
So why is it that it's somehow wrong to do that--look at our history and our data and assess the success or failure of a choice--with city planning?
And part of that is understanding that people can and will drive and that some accommodation must be made for that fact.
"It (driving) wasn't more convenient, until the government built a lot of improved roads."
Actually, driving was more convenient for many individuals to get where they wanted to go on their own schedules, not have to wait for a bus, train, etc to carry a group of people to a destination that may not be the final destination. Therefore, they voted money to build roads! "The government" is the people.
Actually improving the roads made it possible for buses.
Street cars were created when someone realized that an horse would be able to haul more if the "carriage" were placed on rails. Rail itself is a form of pavement. I find it strange that rail is good but wheels on asphalt is bad..... Street cars for the most part didn't carry cargo, didn't always run 24 hours, and didn't run where there were no rails.
"It (driving) wasn't more convenient, until the government built a lot of improved roads."
Actually, driving was more convenient for many individuals to get where they wanted to go on their own schedules, not have to wait for a bus, train, etc to carry a group of people to a destination that may not be the final destination. Therefore, they voted money to build roads! "The government" is the people.
Absolutely, it started that way. As was seen with the Lincoln Highway example, a few seed miles were built by private investors, and that convinced the public that they wanted some roads, and they voted to have the rest publicly funded. But, at some point, we became disconnected with how roads are funded, and road building got out of control. I mean, I've seen posters on this site (I don't remember if I've seen them in this sub-forum, but they're regulars in the P&OC sub-forum) who actually believe that all roads are paid for with user fees! I know that I've never had the opportunity to vote on a road related issue; they just keep getting built, widened, resurfaced, etc. But then, maybe I'm jaded, and it's better in other locations? How often do you vote on road issues?
Yes, I've had to unlearn some things. Peptic ulcers are no longer caused by personality disorder for one. Likewise, infertility is no longer a psychiatric disease. However, some things are tried and true. Having the patient, in this case the CD Urban Planning posters, accept reality is one such.
so your "diagnosing a poster"...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katarina Witt
I resent that; I have not done so and would not. Nor was I saying that anyone here is mentally ill. Just the opposite; I have said that no one should be diagnosing anyone else on CD. However, that particular message has stayed with me, ranking up there with "no surgery is minor to the patient".
==================
whether deserved or not, it's still not addressing a single argument a poster makes so it can't go far.
I know that I've never had the opportunity to vote on a road related issue; they just keep getting built, widened, resurfaced, etc. But then, maybe I'm jaded, and it's better in other locations? How often do you vote on road issues?
we don't build that much new roads out here; a few widenings.
Absolutely, it started that way. As was seen with the Lincoln Highway example, a few seed miles were built by private investors, and that convinced the public that they wanted some roads, and they voted to have the rest publicly funded. But, at some point, we became disconnected with how roads are funded, and road building got out of control. I mean, I've seen posters on this site (I don't remember if I've seen them in this sub-forum, but they're regulars in the P&OC sub-forum) who actually believe that all roads are paid for with user fees! I know that I've never had the opportunity to vote on a road related issue; they just keep getting built, widened, resurfaced, etc. But then, maybe I'm jaded, and it's better in other locations? How often do you vote on road issues?
Voting? Maybe at the beginning, although some places will still vote on road bonds, but that's what legislatures, Town Councils, County Commissioners and Congressmen are elected to do,
I'm probably one of those "roads are paid for by user fees" people you dismiss. The thing is, they could be if the trust funds over the years hadn't been raided at every level of government over the years. If there's anything elected officials hate is seeing a pot of money just sitting there and not being used (and I'm saying that as an elected official), even though road funding isn't really pay as you go but is used to pay off the bonds used to finance that road construction.
I'll use a couple examples from Maryland.
The State distributes Highway User Revenues to local jurisdictions, the 23 Counties, 157 municipalities and Baltimore City. Those funds come from the state gas tax.
The O'Malley Administration cut those HUR funds by 95% (except for Baltimore) and "redirected" that money to the General Fund as a "loan" (he did the same thing with the State Pension System) with the promise to pay that money back. Someday. At the same time the gas tax was steeply increased with 80% of that increase going to Baltimore for the transit system and to the DC suburbs for Metro.
Well, "Someday" is now so it's being paid back from general revenues. Is that a "subsidy" in real life?
As a note, some municipalities used that money to balance their general funds instead of for road projects. With the Hogan Administration replacing some of that 95% cut (we're now at 30% of what it was before the cuts) there is now a requirements that municipalities document how the HUR is used and it better be for road projects. That didn't happen before.
A second example is Maryland's Life Flight/Medevac program. There is a surcharge on every driver's license to fund the system, which is used for all medical emergencies (in fact a recent study found that over half the evacs are unnecessary because the patient isn't seriously ill or injured enough to justify an air extraction) not just car accidents. So are drivers subsidizing people suffering a heart attack?
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.
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.
I know that I've never had the opportunity to vote on a road related issue; they just keep getting built, widened, resurfaced, etc. 
But then, maybe I'm jaded, and it's better in other locations? How often do you vote on road issues?
