Comments on: Ray LaHood: “People Want Out of Their Cars”

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 04 Oct 2010 19:56:33 +0000

I’ve been thinking a lot about this topic the last few days–I’m actually writing a paper on it. It seems very clear to me that public transit an non-motor transportation is the most sustainable solution set. I bike 45 minutes to my school campus every day, and from there take a shuttle to class. Its fun, healthy, and energizing. People are shocked when I tell them it takes me an hour to get to school only a few miles away. I tell them I’m not in a hurry.

By: xprojected

xprojected — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 16:29:33 +0000

"Government wants TOTAL CONTROL on how you can get anywhere! Get away from foreign OIL, but let the people decide!"

"The people", as a whole, are dumb. They would decide on oil until it runs out, then panic.

By: ex-EV1 driver

ex-EV1 driver — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 14:17:27 +0000

Geoff,
I agree with the need for mass transit but I don't consider buses to be much good except for keeping the poor poor and the rich (who don't use them) rich. We need rapid mass transit. It must be fast, independent of clogged roads, more economical, consume less real-estate, and be more efficient. It needs to require less labor and energy to operate in off-hours so that it can be available 24/7 and get people where they need to be, when they need to be there.
Modern rail lines, of course, offer this the best. Buses that are synchronized with rail stops can probably offer last-mile connections but I don't know of any mass transit authority that is competent enough to make this work.
Without a good, economical, mass-transit system, the poor will use the mass-transit and the rich (or those who aspire to get rich) will use private transportation.

By: Geoff

Geoff — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 16:32:27 +0000

Some cities with older infrastructures and narrow lanes will take longer to adapt to bicycles. Longer commutes make 100% bicycle commuting impractical, but pairing bus and bikes can resolve a lot of that. I found I could comfortably commute by bicycle 100% when the ride was 10-13 miles, but longer commutes (18 miles) require a bus one-way on occasion, even with good bike routes and paths.

The comments of Steven Wood and Carter LaTourette above completely miss the point of the initiative. Like, the only way to run our economy is to build cars? And by getting 1-2% of the current drivers out of their cars now and then is a bad thing? So then we should stop working on mass transit, that kills jobs too. No, wait, mass transit is good, isn't it? Wood and LaTourette can put a sock in it.

By: Chewie

Chewie — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 04:34:10 +0000

When you build a city densely (more people per acre) and mix up things like homes, stores and offices, many things end up in easy walking or cycling distance, and you can support frequent transit service. Then you've got to have a commitment to make the streets bike friendly. You can design a road to make the traffic move slower and to include space for bike lanes, but it takes political will.

The desire to drive is based on the incentives created by the built environment. If we build places that make it take forever to do anything besides drive (e.g. suburbia), and make it terrifying to get on a bike, surprise surprise, most people end up driving for most trips. But that has serious environmental, social, and economic costs.

Cleaner cars have to be part of a broader conversation about the way we build cities. Really, we need cleaner cars, and we need to find ways to use cars less.

By: Joe

Joe — Fri, 09 Apr 2010 16:33:18 +0000

Government wants TOTAL CONTROL on how you can get anywhere! Get away from foreign OIL, but let the people decide!

By: JBob

JBob — Thu, 08 Apr 2010 23:14:05 +0000

Hi Charles,

I did not mean that Steve is not a tool because of his weight. The picture on his website is Photoshopped, you need to look at news photos to get a true sense of his bulk (and I’m revising my estimate, more like 230-240). I myself am 215 and look like a flyweight compared to this guy…

Examples..
http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2009/05/22/PH2009052203557.jpg
http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/NA-BD667_HEALTH_G_20100121181121.jpg

I meant he’s a tool because he makes assumptions that bike projects are a waste of money compared to large highway projects as far as job creation and tax generation. A good bike infrastructure coupled with public transport costs significantly less to build and maintain and promotes that growth just as effectively.

~ fin

By: Charles

Charles — Thu, 08 Apr 2010 21:51:25 +0000

Hello JBob;

I have not tried baby wipes for whole body cleaning. I will give it a try.

As for Steven LaTourette being a tool because of his weight. I have to disagree. I think he looks more like 220-230 (on his web site). I am 220-230 and I have biked at 4000-6000 miles a year for 19 of the last 20 years. Now I do agree he is a tool for big business, but what Republican is not.

By: Shines

Shines — Thu, 08 Apr 2010 20:25:55 +0000

I am a fair weather bike to worker. More Americans would do well to bike to work more frequently. Nothing nicer than feeling and breathing the fresh air and enjoying outdoors on the way to work or the store or just for fun. Biking is healthy and good for the environment.
On the other hand, biking to work on a path next to a freeway or along a buisy traffic clogged road is not particularly fun. It can be very noisy and smelly and dangerous. I have no desire to commute on my bike on a rainy day. Still it sometimes seems worth it.
As far as "wanting out of my car" - that's right I want teleportation!
"Beam me over Scotty!"

By: Susan Cloud

Susan Cloud — Thu, 08 Apr 2010 18:41:16 +0000

Yes, biking is not the answer for everyone, and yes, it takes a while for any new thing to become mainstream. But neither of these is a reason to outright reject biking as a viable transportation option.