Idiot Brown vetos allowing use of carpool lanes by all during non peak hours. (Sanger: insurance, neighborhoods)

[shooting4life]

Originally Posted by sonarrat

There are some roads in northern California that should have their carpool lane times extended, as well. At least to include the daytime hours on weekends, if not 24 hours a day. I'm thinking here of 101 on the peninsula, 80, and 880 primarily.

I see nothing wrong with parents carting around their kids in the carpool lane. I'd rather see that than the bobtail trucks with a ridealong like I usually do.

Carpool lane on the weekends won't make a difference since a larger percentage already have multiple riders.

An adult with a child has no reason why they should receive a benefit at the cost of other drivers.

[HockeyMac18]

Originally Posted by shooting4life

The democrats are the ones pushing the social engineering benefits towards electric cars. First it was the tax rebates, then the cities giving free parking, now the carpool lane. All those things are social engineering and as one party controls the state, it is being done by democrats.

But that's not what you wrote.

You wrote that the Democrats were benefiting from these incentives... Pretty sure a Republican can go buy an electric car and enjoy the same benefits.

Social engineering is a bit of a stretch, too. Do you think all government subsidies are social engineering? You should have an issue with most agriculture products in this country, if so (which, when you look at them, are deeply supported by Republicans).

[shooting4life]

Originally Posted by HockeyMac18

But that's not what you wrote.

You wrote that the Democrats were benefiting from these incentives... Pretty sure a Republican can go buy an electric car and enjoy the same benefits.

Social engineering is a bit of a stretch, too. Do you think all government subsidies are social engineering? You should have an issue with most agriculture products in this country, if so (which, when you look at them, are deeply supported by Republicans).

Every time the government pushes programs to change the natural buying habits of the general populace is social engineering.

Who receives the benefits has no bearing on who is pushing the benefits.

[LoriBee62]

Originally Posted by Bonez765

Idk about you guys but I only came here to see the popcorn show that v8vega does in every thread.

Unfortunately, the plot is predictable and has been done a thousand times.

[HockeyMac18]

Originally Posted by shooting4life

Every time the government pushes programs to change the natural buying habits of the general populace is social engineering.

Who receives the benefits has no bearing on who is pushing the benefits.

But that's exactly the point I was responding to...

Your words:

Originally Posted by shooting4life

Make carpool lanes actually be an incentive to get cars off the road, not a social engineering benefit for democrats.

How is this a social benefit for democrats when anyone on the road with an electric car can enjoy the same benefit equally (I'm fairly certain a republican can go out and buy a Tesla)? I just don't understand what point you're making (other than just wanting to throw a jab at "lol lihhbral 'merica"?).

And fine, you can call any government program social engineering...but it's definitely not exclusive to the democratic side of government. I see it happening ALL over, in basically every field/area/region of this country.

This isn't really directed at you, per se, but it seems that people often like to bring up programs they disagree with/are supported by the party they don't like (e.g. Republicans not liking any program set up by a Democrat), but conveniently ignore all of the programs put forth by their "side". I'm an independent, so don't really care. I see this behavior by both sides, and find it equally humorous (and stereotypical).

I also think many of these programs are generally good for society, for the most part (e.g. in relation to this topic, I personally think an incentive for electric cars is a good one, for now) - even if some can have bad (unintended) side effects, though (corn subsidies leading to the usage of stupid amounts of high-fructose corn syrup in basically everything we eat, for instance).

[shooting4life]

Originally Posted by HockeyMac18

But that's exactly the point I was responding to...

Your words:


How is this a social benefit for democrats when anyone on the road with an electric car can enjoy the same benefit equally (I'm fairly certain a republican can go out and buy a Tesla)? I just don't understand what point you're making (other than just wanting to throw a jab at "lol lihhbral 'merica"?).

And fine, you can call any government program social engineering...but it's definitely not exclusive to the democratic side of government. I see it happening ALL over, in basically every field/area/region of this country.

This isn't really directed at you, per se, but it seems that people often like to bring up programs they disagree with/are supported by the party they don't like (e.g. Republicans not liking any program set up by a Democrat), but conveniently ignore all of the programs put forth by their "side". I'm an independent, so don't really care. I see this behavior by both sides, and find it equally humorous (and stereotypical).

I also think many of these programs are generally good for society, for the most part (e.g. in relation to this topic, I personally think an incentive for electric cars is a good one, for now) - even if some can have bad (unintended) side effects, though (corn subsidies leading to the usage of stupid amounts of high-fructose corn syrup in basically everything we eat, for instance).

Maybe you don't understand what social engineering is. It is government putting laws and regulations into place to contort the free market to change peoples decisions. Very few people would buy an electric car if the government wasn't taking money from others and giving it to the purchasers also making traffic worse for those who do not have either the funds or desire to purchase one of the approved vehicles.


In this state, social engineering is exclusively democrats as the republicans could pass a bill saying water is wet.

[HyperionGap]

Originally Posted by shooting4life

Every time the government pushes programs to change the natural buying habits of the general populace is social engineering.

Who receives the benefits has no bearing on who is pushing the benefits.

You didn't respond to this:

Originally Posted by HockeyMac18

But that's not what you wrote.

You wrote that the Democrats were benefiting from these incentives... Pretty sure a Republican can go buy an electric car and enjoy the same benefits.

Social engineering is a bit of a stretch, too. Do you think all government subsidies are social engineering? You should have an issue with most agriculture products in this country, if so (which, when you look at them, are deeply supported by Republicans).

And I know plenty of Republicans that drive prii (in the carpool lane).

[shooting4life]

Originally Posted by HyperionGap

You didn't respond to this:



And I know plenty of Republicans that drive prii (in the carpool lane).

I didn't write democrats are benefiting, I wrote democrats are in control of the social engineering.

[HockeyMac18]

Originally Posted by shooting4life

Maybe you don't understand what social engineering is. It is government putting laws and regulations into place to contort the free market to change peoples decisions. Very few people would buy an electric car if the government wasn't taking money from others and giving it to the purchasers also making traffic worse for those who do not have either the funds or desire to purchase one of the approved vehicles.


In this state, social engineering is exclusively democrats as the republicans could pass a bill saying water is wet.

Personally, I'd view this more as a subsidy to buy electric cars. Just like the subsidies that exist in...pretty much every single market.

Sure, you can go ahead and call that social engineering...but then again, pretty much every market in this country has some sort of subsidy (or social engineering) applied to it...

I'd actually love to see an example of a market in this country that doesn't have some sort of subsidy/incentive applied to it in some way (or didn't have one in the past at some point). Republicans apply subsidies fairly regularly to their favorite areas, so I don't really see the point of emphasizing democrats in this regard - sure in CA, they're making the laws, but if this is how it works in all states then I don't really get what point you're trying to get at (i.e. this is just how politics work in this country).



At any rate, I don't really care about this - this wasn't the point of my post.

This is what I was talking about - again, your words:

Originally Posted by shooting4life

I agree. The carpool lane should only be used for two people with a drivers license. No more toll lanes, no more electric vehicles and no more children in the carpool lane. Make carpool lanes actually be an incentive to get cars off the road, not a social engineering benefit for democrats.

Why would this be a benefit for democrats when all people, of any political party/affiliation, can enjoy said benefits. There is no regulation against an independent or a republican from buying and driving an electric car (and enjoying the carpool benefit). So, again, I don't understand what the point of your bolded statement was.



Also, I just thought of this as I read what you wrote again - wouldn't the very idea of an HOV lane fit your definition of social engineering (something you seem to be against)? Just curious about this logic.

Personally, regarding this topic, I don't really see any problems with the social engineering/subsidies/whatever you want to call it, being applied to electric cars for the HOV lane. We should definitely be incentivizing sustainable modes of transport - it should honestly be a central part of our planning for the future (a future that, as a young person, I'll have to live in - so I have a pretty big interest in that). I don't think it should be permanently applied, but in the early days of electric cars (where there are still very few of them), it's a good thing.

[kwong7]

I don't understand why you're complaining. Have you tried carpooling? The solution isn't to add another lane or two; our infrastructure isn't designed to support the number of vehicles out there. The solution is to reduce the number of vehicles on the road, especially during peak hours. This can be accomplished by expensive rapid transit systems, have a contrarian work schedule (have 20% of the workforce work between 11am-8pm), or promote carpooling.

I believe Uber is putting together a program that will help folks organize their carpool based on destination and time. Carpooling will also reduce the demand for gasoline, tires, and road repair. Even better…you can sleep or read in the car while you're not driving.