SOV countdown

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic

   Again - what does your delegate say? Do you have the courage to both ask and to post the response?

Author	Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic
NoSUV Members Profile Find Members Posts New Slug Joined: 14 Jan 2005 Status: Offline Points: 0	Post Options Post Reply Quote NoSUV Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 03 Jan 2007 at 9:08am
	Again - what does your delegate say? Do you have the courage to both ask and to post the response?

scottt Members Profile Find Members Posts Senior Slug Joined: 12 May 2004 Location: VA Status: Offline Points: 106	Post Options Post Reply Quote scottt Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 03 Jan 2007 at 4:09pm
	quote: Originally posted by NoSUV [br] quote: Originally posted by scottt [br]NoSUV, I still don't see you coughing up the extra money for those of us to buy Hybrids. If a Hybrid vs a non-Hybrid were the same price, then fine, you can gripe. But until then, please go away. Indeed, you represent some of the worst qualities of the human race. You make far more than is necessary to have that "extra" money, but you have made personal choices with how you want to spend that money. Everytime you are faced with choosing between instant gratification and altruistic benefits, you put your funds into the "me first" category and then whine that you have insufficient money for anything else. I've posed the question and gotten the predictable response - if the ONLY vehicles permitted in the express lanes were mass transit and SULEV, would you then have the "extra" money to buy a hybrid? Please tell me the last "instant gratification and altruistic benefits" that came my way. There are lots of SULEV's that aren't Hybrids. Why do you keep interchanging the two?

n/a Members Profile Find Members Posts New Slug Joined: 17 Dec 2001 Location: VA Status: Offline Points: 0	Post Options Post Reply Quote n/a Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 05 Jan 2007 at 3:31pm
	Scott, while your conviction to argue with the likes of NoSUV is admirable, it's futile. Although (to my recollection) no one on this forum has ever supported these assertions, NoSUV won't be happy until everyone agrees with the insane statements that NoSUV tries to pass of as fact. Actually NoSUV may never be happy, and will certainly never concede, so what's the use debating it. As I have said before, many of NoSUV's arguments are, by definition, radical; simple proposed solution to a complex problem, and most are clearly insane. At the least, these claims are certainly unrealistic, and as someone who has spent the past few years debating with the nuts, I have abandoned the nut house! Let it burn! Most of the participants in this forum understand that real, acheivable, positive steps toward a solution include those that are easily implementable (in real world situations), and require little adaptation by those affected. Carpooling solves many, many problems. "Hey, I'm going into DC anyway. Why not pick up a few slugs and ride in the express lanes. I get a fast ride, they get a fast ride, everyone's happy!" And guess what, the environment benefits, traffic congestion is eased, fossil fuel demands are reduced, etc. Small changes = big results! I'd even support HOV-4. Why do hybrid drivers demand special treatment when they are not a substitute for common sense real solutions?! Force feeding SOV hybrids solves no problems. "Hey, I'm going to spend $25,000. on a car anyway, why not spend $30,000. instead?!" Sorry, that is a tough pill to swallow. Its not realistic to assume the general public can stomach the extra $$. We can't afford it, nor can most people justify the argument that they can spend their way out of our eco/traffic/fuel problems. We're too smart to fall for the hype. And while were at it NoSUV, let's mandate masss transit. "Sure, I'll give up my nice clean, reliable, convenient, comfortable car ride for a standing-room-only spot on a dirty, crowded, smelly, expensive bus or metro train." How bonehead is this assumption? Well, in NoSUV's world its already the only feasible solution. How about mandating "bicycle only" lanes for commuting? It's about as realistic as your "HOV 40" proposal. Like I said, the nuts can have the nut house! Its fantasy land. I live in the real world!

scottt Members Profile Find Members Posts Senior Slug Joined: 12 May 2004 Location: VA Status: Offline Points: 106	Post Options Post Reply Quote scottt Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 08 Jan 2007 at 4:54pm
	Couldn't have said it better myself

N_or_S_bound Members Profile Find Members Posts New Slug Joined: 20 May 2005 Location: VA Status: Offline Points: 0	Post Options Post Reply Quote N_or_S_bound Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 10 Jan 2007 at 2:12pm
	quote: Originally posted by NoSUV [br]dark - I have a problem with the usurping of mass transit. Take your slug line, for example. How many people go from that location to the Pentagon in a 30 min period? Enough to fill a bus? The best way to ease congestion is for HOV-40; and the best way to ease pollution and slow global warming is to use SULEV. The current system has negative incentives for both. Buses are for OTHERS, not for SOME of the privileged. I find the latest attempt to self-justify why SOME should be allowed their SOV-privileged status while directing OTHERS to take mass transit somewhat amusing. Seems the true colors of selfishness start to show through the thin veneer of altruism previously espoused. Mildly amusing this time. Grows tedious over time. Truth wins the battle though....except where big biz buys more clout than the average man's vote is worth. NoSb SOV because you can, HOV because you care!

Jody Members Profile Find Members Posts New Slug Joined: 01 Aug 2006 Status: Offline Points: 0	Post Options Post Reply Quote Jody Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 11 Jan 2007 at 11:38am
	Great post, Raymond.

NoSUV Members Profile Find Members Posts New Slug Joined: 14 Jan 2005 Status: Offline Points: 0	Post Options Post Reply Quote NoSUV Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 16 Jan 2007 at 8:25am
	quote: Originally posted by raymond [br] As I have said before, many of NoSUV's arguments are, by definition, radical; simple proposed solution to a complex problem, and most are clearly insane. At the least, these claims are certainly unrealistic... Most of the participants in this forum understand that real, acheivable, positive steps toward a solution include those that are easily implementable (in real world situations), and require little adaptation by those affected. Carpooling solves many, many problems. "Hey, I'm going into DC anyway. Why not pick up a few slugs and ride in the express lanes. I get a fast ride, they get a fast ride, everyone's happy!" And guess what, the environment benefits, traffic congestion is eased, fossil fuel demands are reduced, etc. Small changes = big results! I'd even support HOV-4. Why do hybrid drivers demand special treatment when they are not a substitute for common sense real solutions?! Force feeding SOV hybrids solves no problems. "Hey, I'm going to spend $25,000. on a car anyway, why not spend $30,000. instead?!" Sorry, that is a tough pill to swallow. Its not realistic to assume the general public can stomach the extra $$. We can't afford it, nor can most people justify the argument that they can spend their way out of our eco/traffic/fuel problems. We're too smart to fall for the hype. And while were at it NoSUV, let's mandate masss transit. "Sure, I'll give up my nice clean, reliable, convenient, comfortable car ride for a standing-room-only spot on a dirty, crowded, smelly, expensive bus or metro train." How bonehead is this assumption? Well, in NoSUV's world its already the only feasible solution. How about mandating "bicycle only" lanes for commuting? It's about as realistic as your "HOV 40" proposal. OK, let's do as the Sponge and summarize: - you believe that there is no such thing as a simple solution to a complex problem - solutions should be easily implementable and require little adaptation by those affected [Wow! talk about your contridictions! But let's proceed...] - Carpooling solves many problems; hybrids do not. - The general public won't pay an additional $5K for a vehicle that helps with the eco/traffic/fuel problems. - Commuting in cars is better that commuting in mass transit. Did I get it right?

n/a Members Profile Find Members Posts New Slug Joined: 17 Dec 2001 Location: VA Status: Offline Points: 0	Post Options Post Reply Quote n/a Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 17 Jan 2007 at 12:34pm
	So far so good, Einstein. But it is not that I believe there is no one simple solution to our complex problems, this is a fact. You have provided examples of radical solutions and Webster defined it for us. Look it up under "radical," as in "radical social change," you'll find "carried to the farthest limit, extreme, sweeping," "revolutionary changes," or "One who advocates soicial revolution." Are you proposing social revolution? Here iti is used in a sentence, "Suicide is a radical and permenant solution to temporary problems." Our probelms are many, and complex. Your radical solution proposals take a narrow prespective and address an ego-centric view of what is best for society, namely what is best for you. Anyone who knows anything about change management knows that in order for changes to be effective, they must take place in planned, predictable and measured steps. Mandating public transportation, forcing the commuting public to pay 10 - 20% or more for their vehicles, kicking carpoolers out of the back seat to make way for nearly empty hybrids, is not only poor change management, its absurd! Carpooling solves many problems! That's self-explanatory but I'll elaborate; It takes vehicles off the road, it reduces fuel consumption, it reduces traffic congestion, it reduces pollution, it makes better use of existing investments in our chosen method of transportation, it is easy, it requires small changes in our habits, its voluntary, it promotes friendliness/sharing/positive relationships, it feels good. How many reasons do you need? I will not accept your proposal that I can buy my way out of our society's problems. The net long-term benefits of hybrid technology are still unproven, its application as a solution to our many problems is still debatable, and the sources that advocate it are dubious. The only clear winner with hybrids are the manufacturers. Can you say that your vehicle ownership costs are less with a hybrid than with a comparable car? Can you say that your SOV hybrid contributes to reduced traffic congestion? I'll go back to the PMPG arguments of previous posts and ask you to prove that even the ecological claims you make with a hybrid cannot be matched on a Passenger Miles Per Gallon basis with a frugal normal car driver. There are many qualitative reasons why commuting in cars is "better" than commuting via mass transit, not to mention the individual needs of many commuters who have transportation needs that do not fit a bus schedule. And I won't even attack the smog spewing half-full busses that clog up the HOV lanes. I'm usually HOV 4 commuting when I see that! Got it?!

NoSUV Members Profile Find Members Posts New Slug Joined: 14 Jan 2005 Status: Offline Points: 0	Post Options Post Reply Quote NoSUV Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 17 Jan 2007 at 12:52pm
	quote: Originally posted by raymond [br]Anyone who knows anything about change management knows that in order for changes to be effective, they must take place in planned, predictable and measured steps. raymond - actually, that's not even close to being true! Almost every successful change has been through a radical departure from the established norm. Some examples? How about the creation of the United States? "planned, predictable and measured steps"? Of course, you could claim that the change was NOT effective.

NoSUV Members Profile Find Members Posts New Slug Joined: 14 Jan 2005 Status: Offline Points: 0	Post Options Post Reply Quote NoSUV Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 17 Jan 2007 at 12:54pm
	quote: Originally posted by raymond [br] I'll go back to the PMPG arguments of previous posts and ask you to prove that even the ecological claims you make with a hybrid cannot be matched on a Passenger Miles Per Gallon basis with a frugal normal car driver. Speaking of which, does YOUR car get better miles per gallon at 40 mph or 60 mph?