Austin's ranks low in "Allstate America’s Best Drivers Report" (Orange: dangerous, vs)

[TexasHorseLady]

Originally Posted by CptnRn

joejitsu's statements are entirely reasonable. Austin's drivers come from all over the US, moving to Austin doesn't automatically make them bad drivers so there have to be other factors at work here. If all other factors were equal, Austin's drivers would be average since they represent a cross section of the US.

Except that they are all being thrown together with their various ideas of what "good" driving is based on the customs and laws where they came from, and those don't all match. It's not as bad as which side of the road to drive on, but sometimes it's just as different.

[austinite45]

Originally Posted by joejitsu

Now, you are arguing for the sake of arguing and acting very immature.

you've got to be kidding me. Immature would be something like an adult blaming the road or highway after a collision. Frankly, this childish attempt of blaming Austin's roads for collisions is a first as far as I can remember.

Yours was not really an argument (some sense of logic is required for that) And I was just making some light-hearted retorts and ridicule.

You can believe what you want. I agree that there are bad drivers in Austin that drive too fast or talk on their cell phones. Also, I believe that the infrastructure is inadequate for the amount of cars the road.

1. infrastructure doesn't cause collisions!
2. too many cars? or too much senseless human breeding?

There are bigger cities that have a better ranking. You also must take into account that they probably have better infrastructure too.

I just gave you a bunch of cities with higher car densities and yet lower collision rates. What does it mean?

[austinite45]

Originally Posted by CptnRn

joejitsu's statements are entirely reasonable.

I totally disagree.

Austin's drivers come from all over the US, moving to Austin doesn't automatically make them bad drivers so there have to be other factors at work here. If all other factors were equal, Austin's drivers would be average since they represent a cross section of the US.

That's a theory. And I don't buy it.

NY's drivers come from all over the world. NY has a far higher car density than Austin!

[CptnRn]

Originally Posted by austinite45

I totally disagree.



That's a theory. And I don't buy it.

NY's drivers come from all over the world. NY has a far higher car density than Austin!

The growth rate of land locked NYC is very low compared to Austin, so your comparison is totally irrelevant.

[austinite45]

Originally Posted by CptnRn

The growth rate of land locked NYC is very low compared to Austin, so your comparison is totally irrelevant.

growth rate? land locked? now that's irrelevant.

NY has a far higher car density than Austin, and therefore NY's roads are more crowded than Austin's. And since NY ranks a lot better than Austin on collision rate, the lame excuse of crowded roads causing Austin's collisions is exposed and refuted, not that it actually needs any elaborated refutation.

Austin has too many bad drivers, so does Texas as a whole.

I can accept it; why can't you?

[joejitsu]

Originally Posted by austinite45

I was just making some light-hearted retorts and ridicule.

Yes, thats all you have done and thats all your argument is ridicule. I look forward to your compelling response. Remember to say childish, lame, and pathetic a few times to prove your point. Do you ridicule everyone that disagrees with you when you don't present any facts?

1. infrastructure doesn't cause collisions!

No, but people driving on poor infrastructure does.

2. too many cars? or too much senseless human breeding?

What the hell are you talking about?

I just gave you a bunch of cities with higher car densities and yet lower collision rates. What does it mean?

That they probably have better infrastructure.

You are failing to grasp what I am saying that is apparent to everyone else. So, I will try and break it down for you. You blame the collisions on bad driving, right? Ok, what causes bad driving? Earlier I remember you saying people talking on their cell phones, speeding, having bad attitudes, etc. I've lived in several cities throughout my life, and these problems exist anywhere not only in Austin, its no worse than anywhere else. So does it make sense to you that Austin's poor infrastructure, which leads to congestion COMBINED with bad driving, can lead to an increase in collisions?

[austinite45]

Originally Posted by joejitsu

Yes, thats all you have done and thats all your argument is ridicule. I look forward to your compelling response. Remember to say childish, lame, and pathetic a few times to prove your point. Do you ridicule everyone that disagrees with you when you don't present any facts?



No, but people driving on poor infrastructure does.



What the hell are you talking about?



That they probably have better infrastructure.

You are failing to grasp what I am saying that is apparent to everyone else. So, I will try and break it down for you. You blame the collisions on bad driving, right? Ok, what causes bad driving? Earlier I remember you saying people talking on their cell phones, speeding, having bad attitudes, etc. I've lived in several cities throughout my life, and these problems exist anywhere not only in Austin, its no worse than anywhere else. So does it make sense to you that Austin's poor infrastructure, which leads to congestion COMBINED with bad driving, can lead to an increase in collisions?

Napolean once said "It's impossible to defeat a fool in argument."

I say "It's a waste of time to defeat a fool in argument."

[CptnRn]

Originally Posted by austinite45

growth rate? land locked? now that's irrelevant.

NY has a far higher car density than Austin, and therefore NY's roads are more crowded than Austin's. And since NY ranks a lot better than Austin on collision rate, the lame excuse of crowded roads causing Austin's collisions is exposed and refuted, not that it actually needs any elaborated refutation.

Austin has too many bad drivers, so does Texas as a whole.

I can accept it; why can't you?

Growth rate and land locked are totally relevant.

The growth rate in NYC since 1940 has varied from -10.4 to a +9.4% every 10 years, far below Austin's growth rates of 65 to 35% every 10 years. In addition NYC is land locked so its horizontal expansion is limited. Austin has no limits on its horizontal expansion, so its growth has meant far more linear miles of highways needed to accomodate it. The challenge of keeping up with the growth rate and building new highways in Austin is obviously much more difficult and expensive per capita then NY.

NY has a far higher car density than Austin

I don't believe it. Show me your reference for car density on the roads. Most NY's who own cars don't drive them.

NY has a high density of people but not a high density of automobiles. New Yorkers rely on automobiles for commuting and drive less then most any other community in the US.



According to this report on NY density: http://www.architects.org/emplibrary/C6_b.pdf (broken link) NY has far fewer vehicles per household then any place else in the United States.

NY has one of the highest percentages of people who commute by walking or bicycling. 10.9%

NY has the hightest percentage of people who commute by mass transit 52.8%

NY has the lowest number of vehicles per household of the US. 0.62

NY has the lowest gasoline consumption per capita. NY 146 gal/year versus USA 463 gal/year.

Obviously far fewer people in NY drive a car every day then they do in Austin.

[austinite45]

Originally Posted by CptnRn

Growth rate and land locked are totally relevant.

The growth rate in NYC since 1940 has varied from -10.4 to a +9.4% every 10 years, far below Austin's growth rates of 65 to 35% every 10 years. In addition NYC is land locked so its horizontal expansion is limited. Austin has no limits on its horizontal expansion, so its growth has meant far more linear miles of highways needed to accomodate it. The challenge of keeping up with the growth rate and building new highways in Austin is obviously much more difficult and expensive per capita then NY.



I don't believe it. Show me your reference for car density on the roads. Most NY's who own cars don't drive them.

NY has a high density of people but not a high density of automobiles. New Yorkers rely on automobiles for commuting and drive less then most any other community in the US.



According to this report on NY density: http://www.architects.org/emplibrary/C6_b.pdf (broken link) NY has far fewer vehicles per household then any place else in the United States.

NY has one of the highest percentages of people who commute by walking or bicycling. 10.9%

NY has the hightest percentage of people who commute by mass transit 52.8%

NY has the lowest number of vehicles per household of the US. 0.62

NY has the lowest gasoline consumption per capita. NY 146 gal/year versus USA 463 gal/year.

Obviously far fewer people in NY drive a car every day then they do in Austin.

You are so totally off the track. Do you still remember what the original question was? instead of wasting your time digging for irrelevant info, try to find some hard facts about NY's traffic and car density (I think it's common knowledge) ...

If you question NY's car density being far higher than Austin's, or make speculative AND irrelevant claims about most NY car owners not driving their cars, then I'd like to stop here and rest.

[Jebra]

Entrance and exit ramps on the lower level of I-35 = Nightmare

I've seen drivers less than an inch from scraping on the concrete barriers