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.
Liberals HATE anything having anything to do with enhancing or preserving freedom. They are all about power and control.
A car represents freedom and independence, and can't, therefore, be allowed to exists.
Once you realize the Liberalism is all about power and control, they are easy to read, being the simpletons that they are.
Can we have a serious discussion and stop making crap up for once??
I am a liberal, and you know what not only do I have a car, but I also like my car and drive my car. Gasp... Yet, I realize that for certain things using mass transit is a hell of a lot more convenient than driving everywhere. Oh wow the concept of convenience.....
Can we have a serious discussion and stop making crap up for once??
I am a liberal, and you know what not only do I have a car, but I also like my car and drive my car. Gasp... Yet, I realize that for certain things using mass transit is a hell of a lot more convenient than driving everywhere. Oh wow the concept of convenience.....
Ah, yes, reminds me of something I forgot to mention in my other post. Only on mass transit can you sit back and read a book, catch up with the morning's news, daydream, or take a little nap while en route to your destination. Every morning on the DART Red Line I see commuters catching up on a little sleep during the ride downtown. Try THAT behind the wheel of a car and then get back to me.
Why are liberals always trying to force buses, rail systems, bike lanes, etc. down our throats when we're clearly an automobile-centric society? Why are liberals always trying to coerce people out of their automobiles and onto trains like cattle by enacting high gasoline taxes, using highway funds to subsidize mass transit, and by tearing down roadways to build bicycle lanes? Why is it that liberals have such contempt for private automobiles?
Some people just like to tell other people how to live their lives.
Can we have a serious discussion and stop making crap up for once??
I am a liberal, and you know what not only do I have a car, but I also like my car and drive my car. Gasp... Yet, I realize that for certain things using mass transit is a hell of a lot more convenient than driving everywhere. Oh wow the concept of convenience.....
Of course, who doesn't love the freedom offered by a car, shouldn't really matter if you are Liberal or Conservative, at least no to me anyway.
A few months back in the American Conservative Magazine, there was a piece on light rail systems in which the author pointed out that there was a time when 'conservatives' took a far more pragmatic approach of "what works". Didn't matter if it was cars or trains or teleporters, whatever.
If you can build a light rail, high speed rail or buses and trolleys that work for a given area or community, then by all means do it. They won't work in every town or city, but they can work in many. We used to have a massive light rail and trolley system in America as far back as the 1920's and 30's, and even then we were a very mobile population.
One of the failings of this I see is everyone wants some gizmonic riddled advanced system of every bell and whistle. Were talking about putting a box on wheels that runs on tracks, powered by electric in many cases that is far more efficient for moving a kilogram of weight from A to B than even the best internal combustion motors can and we have gazillions of tons of coal. Is the cost up front for a light rail that much greater than the cost of adding new interstates when there are already so many unused rail lines sitting idle?
I'm pretty sure I'm more conservative than yourself, and I'll be happy to take a train or trolley if it is available to me and is cheaper than driving.
Ah, yes, reminds me of something I forgot to mention in my other post. Only on mass transit can you sit back and read a book, catch up with the morning's news, daydream, or take a little nap while en route to your destination. Every morning on the DART Red Line I see commuters catching up on a little sleep during the ride downtown. Try THAT behind the wheel of a car and then get back to me.
You are correct. There are certainly advantages to mass transit. Most of us do not have work or play patterns that allow us to use mass transit and never will. We just want mass transit users to pay their own way.
Why are liberals always trying to force buses, rail systems, bike lanes, etc. down our throats when we're clearly an automobile-centric society? Why are liberals always trying to coerce people out of their automobiles and onto trains like cattle by enacting high gasoline taxes, using highway funds to subsidize mass transit, and by tearing down roadways to build bicycle lanes? Why is it that liberals have such contempt for private automobiles?
And don't give me this garbage about how we're all gonna die because cars cause "global warming". First of all, automobiles don't pollute (CO2 is not a pollutant), second there's no such thing as global warming, everyone knows it's just a scheme for rich liberals in the government to further enrich themselves by taxing us all into poverty in the name of "saving the planet."
Third, we're not running out of oil. On the contrary, there's an abundance of oil. The only problem is that we rely almost 100% on an unstable part of the world to meet our oil supply needs. We could drill our own oil, but for decades liberals have cut off our access to our own oil because they say it's bad for the environment. Either way, there's more than enough oil. Most liberals wish we would run out of oil, but it's ain't happening.
Oil is efficient, clean, cheap, and renewable, and it's the lifeblood of our economy. Private automobiles represent freedom, individual liberty, private property, and free enterprise. We would never be such a prosperous society without the invention of automobiles. With automobiles, we can go where we want, when we want, how fast we want, in the comfort and privacy of our own car. It seems to me liberals want to take that freedom away from us and make us all beholden to the government for our transportation needs.
I guess it makes sense, since this only makes it easier for liberals to enslave us to a large, central, authoritarian government. Like liberal economic policies that ensure everyone has the same amount of wealth, no matter how hard they work, socialized (public) transportation ensures everyone has the limited mobility, no matter how much money they have. Ergo, we can't all be rich, so no one should be allowed to be rich. We can't all own fancy cars, so no one should be allowed to own a car (with the exception of rich liberals of course). Rich liberals are always the exception to their own rules. Rich liberals are allowed to have billions of dollars and pay less taxes than the middle class. They're allowed to ride around in limousines while us plebes are forced by the government to ride around packed in buses like cattle. Maybe that's the real reason liberals want to abolish private automobiles, so that they can have the roads all to themselves, and the peasants are forced into buses and trains. Discuss.
Because it's the right thing to do......IF every person on Earth had 2 to 3 cars like most Americans the planet would be covered with parking lots!
AND....since most Republicans want to tell everyone who to love and marry and what to do with our bodies... and pushing a crazy "family values" agenda.....I think "you guys" can stand a bit of a reality check with cars!
Good for the goose; then it's good for the gander...... OR...do as I SAY but not as I DO. Especially on "your" so called "family values" crap!
You are correct. There are certainly advantages to mass transit. Most of us do not have work or play patterns that allow us to use mass transit and never will. We just want mass transit users to pay their own way.
As they should. I mean if you are someone who puts floors in for a living, you can't exactly carry your materials on the trolley or L train, but considering how many people work in service related industries, it is an alternative for them if they choose.
Its not for everyone or every situation, but there are examples of where it has worked as well, as The American Conservative magazine pieces have shown.
It's called a gasoline tax, payed for by the people who utilize the roads. Meanwhile who pays for all the maintenance and operating costs of mass transit? Motorists, that's who, through the gasoline tax. If users had to pay the full costs of mass transit, it wouldn't be so attractive.
wrong. That tax doesn't come close to covering the cost. There have been multiple attempts to raise or piggyback the gasoline tax multiple times in recent years, all failed. This is why you're seeing the huge rush on HOT lane projects, run by public-privates as well as multiple toll highways as you see in places like Texas that are doing heavy new highway building.
Let me tell you about Texas. Our Republican led state congress would not even let the gas tax increase past one side of the leg. Instead proposing public-private partnerships on HOT lane projects to fund the ultra freeway projects in Dallas and Houston. Yes, Ultra Freeways of volume and complexity the country hasn't seen. All with sections over 20 lanes wide and High Occupancy Toll freeways built right into them. Not HOV, but full sized highways built above, below or in the middle. Anyways, when a Spanish company outbid Texas companies and offered more efficient and technologically advanced projects, the Legislature fought that, not wanting a non-American company running these projects. I LOL'd because Spain has awesome highways. The other problem is, Texas suburbs are expanding rapidly. Something like 9 of the 10 fastest growing counties are in suburban Dallas, Houston or Austin. Freeways were needed to match, so virtually all of these that aren't major interstates are pure tollroads. You can't travel to Frisco, TX or The Colony, TX by freeway without taking a Tollroad. Well, the people of Texas hate this too.
Mass Transit on the other hand, has never been pushed in Dallas as a replacement. Each municipality can vote to pay into DART if it chooses to. Only those municipalities get service. It runs off of a raised sales tax in said municipalities of 1/2 of a cent and of it own revenues. Its construction and expansion has been largely federally funded. Why you may ask? Perhaps its the pollution and congestion in cities like Dallas that have cost billions in lost revenues as well as the pollution that many companies complain about having to regulate for.
Another thing is, perhaps this has been studied to death and it has been realized that our car culture is simply not sustainable as is. Perhaps a system of electric vehicles that are self propelled and driven. But then the problem becomes land usage. Not only are we gobbling up enough land to affect the weather in places. But we're ruining watersheds, killing off native animals and plants, and using lots of space for no reason.
I'm not an environmentalist by any stretch, nor do I consider myself Repub or Democrat. I just like to see efficiency. We're wasting a lot of dollars on roads. Our economy is a slave to one commodity more than it is to anything else in the world. That's bad. If you don't believe in global warming, then believe we're choking ourselves out. Its not about taking your car. Its more about we know there are alternatives to what we're doing, but we let big oil dictate things in this country. Its the type of New World Order conspiracy theorist tin-foil hat types are always searching for, except this one is real. Of course its ok, because we want our cars that are less efficient than those made 30 years ago when we last had a severe crisis.
You are correct. There are certainly advantages to mass transit. Most of us do not have work or play patterns that allow us to use mass transit and never will. We just want mass transit users to pay their own way.
Those who use mass transit pay to use mass transit, those that use roads, pay to use the roads. Those that use both, pay for both, and the government does fund both mass transit and roads.....
You are correct. There are certainly advantages to mass transit. Most of us do not have work or play patterns that allow us to use mass transit and never will. We just want mass transit users to pay their own way.
I guess then, as a driver, you will also agree to pay your own way? The gas tax does not cover the true cost of driving, ya know. Not to mention what the cost of gas would be without subsidies.
The simple fact is, both roads and mass transit require massive subsidies in order to work. Next.
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.
Especially on "your" so called "family values" crap!
