What's new
By:

Do any of you drive hybrids? (prius, volt, leaf, etc)

Sounds like taxis. I bet the problem with larger scale private transportation is the barriers to entry into the market. Not to mention that often it means modifying existing infrastructure which falls in the states domain. That makes it very hard to start something up privately that can approximate public transportation (trains, subways, etc.).
 
babe said:
The problem with these government-run services is just that they don't do it right. Really. If these public transportation developments were just developed from a real business point of view, I bet the developer would plan for all the hubs to have relevant, demand-based businesses providing services like this. Two or three competitive businesses, maybe, bidding up the rent on the concession space and competing for customers on price.

No need for a dictator, freedom will do the job.
Click to expand...

It's called transit oriented development. And it's the job of both local governments, banks, and developers to make it happen. It's not just an economic issue, it's a land use issue.

This is nothing new. Utah is just catching on. They have 4-5 TOD's planned and under way. City Creek Center in one of them.
 
Agoxlea said:
The comparison of incentivizing environmentally friendly transportation for an apparent societal gain to genocide is a little ridiculous. A lot ridiculous. My problem with the "stay away from me government" movement is that there are some decisions that are beneficial to society as a whole, but the rational individual decision doesn't get us there. That's why I think we need the incentives.

Really my life would be great if everybody else took public transit and I reaped the health and economic benefits, but I still personally got to drive everywhere for convenience. I think everyone would agree with me there, which is why some things just wont happen without an incentive. It's not fun to be the one who has to make a change. I feel this is in some way similar to a free rider problem in that everyone wants the benefits, but nobody wants to be the one to pay.
Click to expand...


The problem comes in when we try to define what constitutes "beneficial to society" because I'm pretty sure the Nazis thought shoving Jews and Gypsies into furnaces was good for society, which is why my comparison is not ridiculous at all.

In my opinion what's good (best) for society is individual freedom, because each individual is the best entity to determine what's best for them-self. Each individual has the greatest incentive to protect their own interests. The problem you and I will have in this debate is that I place the value of the individual above the value of society.
 
Gameface said:
The problem comes in when we try to define what constitutes "beneficial to society" because I'm pretty sure the Nazis thought shoving Jews and Gypsies into furnaces was good for society, which is why my comparison is not ridiculous at all.

In my opinion what's good (best) for society is individual freedom, because each individual is the best entity to determine what's best for them-self. Each individual has the greatest incentive to protect their own interests. The problem you and I will have in this debate is that I place the value of the individual above the value of society.
Click to expand...

Your honesty kicks ***! Most are never willing to admit motives. You lay them out front.
 
Gameface said:
The problem comes in when we try to define what constitutes "beneficial to society" because I'm pretty sure the Nazis thought shoving Jews and Gypsies into furnaces was good for society, which is why my comparison is not ridiculous at all.

In my opinion what's good (best) for society is individual freedom, because each individual is the best entity to determine what's best for them-self. Each individual has the greatest incentive to protect their own interests. The problem you and I will have in this debate is that I place the value of the individual above the value of society.
Click to expand...

I think what is good for society is good for the most individuals in the long run. There are clear health benefits to reducing pollution, and it is arguable there will be economic benefits in the future. I see your point and happen to disagree, but you have to admit that your public transportation = nazis is a pretty terrible example.
 
Agoxlea said:
I think what is good for society is good for the most individuals in the long run. There are clear health benefits to reducing pollution, and it is arguable there will be economic benefits in the future. I see your point and happen to disagree, but you have to admit that your public transportation = nazis is a pretty terrible example.
Click to expand...

I think a strong society is a byproduct of strong individuals.

I never said public trans = Nazis. Public transportation can exist without having to manipulate (and if that fails, force) people into using it for their own good. Also, if the producers and consumers of unhealthy products were held responsible for their destructive actions they'd probably stop.
 
Utah should have never redone the freeways like a million times over. The best way for public transportation to work is to make it more convenient then driving. It should be faster to get from Sandy to downtown on Trax. Yet this is not the case.
 
Gameface said:
I think a strong society is a byproduct of strong individuals.

I never said public trans = Nazis. Public transportation can exist without having to manipulate (and if that fails, force) people into using it for their own good. Also, if the producers and consumers of unhealthy products were held responsible for their destructive actions they'd probably stop.
Click to expand...

That's exactly what a gas tax is. It's a tax for polluting that people not driving don't have to pay. It would happen to encourage public transit. I think we might be close to agreeing, but coming from different directions.
 
Agoxlea said:
That's exactly what a gas tax is. It's a tax for polluting that people not driving don't have to pay. It would happen to encourage public transit. I think we might be close to agreeing, but coming from different directions.
Click to expand...

There is a gas tax and it goes towards public transit (UTA) and UDOT - to build roads and highways.

They key to encourage the use of public transit, biking, and walking is to create an environment in which it is safe and convenient to do so. Unfortunately Salt Lake County saw it's largest growth period when the automobile was growing in popularity and land use patterns follow suit. We've paved our way into sprawl and congestion and it's a bitch getting out of it.

But they are trying now, slowly but surely, and it's a tough process. Undoing over 100 years of bad land use and transportation planning is no small feat. Gameface is right, people should have a choice and be able to dictate their own actions. The key is offering them more options. Usually the cheapest and most efficient wins out. Right now, the car seems like the best option and for many it is. More dense and compact growth patterns, better accessibility, and a more connected public transit and pedestrian network will eventually fix this.
 
Beantown said:
Utah should have never redone the freeways like a million times over. The best way for public transportation to work is to make it more convenient then driving. It should be faster to get from Sandy to downtown on Trax. Yet this is not the case.
Click to expand...

Once the West Valley and Mid Jordan lines open in August, those trains will run twice as often. If the trip is too long for you and you really want to use it, you'll have to plan your day around it. The $$$ savings and piece of mind are worth it. Promise.
 
Not everyone lives in Utah, but Utah actually has one of the better public trans systems in the US.
 
Agoxlea said:
Yes, but higher gas tax to encourage other options so cars aren't far and away the cheapest and easiest way to get around. I think the gas tax is so low that it doesn't really hurt enough to make you think twice about driving. Plus a higher tax could also pay to get more convenient public trans options in place more quickly. Also not everyone lives in Utah, but SLC has one of the better public transportation systems in the US. If it makes you happy I'd be ok lowering the income tax an equal amount. That way you would be taxed more based on harmful actions and less for the simple act of making money.
Click to expand...

Under current conditions, cars will still be cheaper. Keep in mind, time is a cost as well. Driving is faster and more convenient and a higher tax will not change that, nor will it change behavior. Encouraging the use public transit is going to take much more than increased fixed costs like taxes. Just wait, the incremental cost of gas will deter more people from driving than anything. We've already seen that occur.

As for the income tax supplement. You'd bankrupt the state, that won't work.
 
BabyPeterzz said:
Under current conditions, cars will still be cheaper. Keep in mind, time is a cost as well. Driving is faster and more convenient and a higher tax will not change that, nor will it change behavior. Encouraging the use public transit is going to take much more than increased fixed costs like taxes. Just wait, the incremental cost of gas will deter more people from driving than anything. We've already seen that occur.

As for the income tax supplement. You'd bankrupt the state, that won't work.
Click to expand...

I disagree it wouldn't bankrupt the state if it is an equal amount to the increase in gas tax, but I deleted my post for another reason. The gas tax would probably end up being pretty regressive, so I feel like also giving an income tax cut would compound that problem so I take that part back.

Think of if while gas was cheap we had been paying a tax for the past decade or two to pay for improved public transportation, so that now when gas is a lot more expensive we could get rid of the tax, but we would have other options because in a lot of places it is pretty impractical to take public transportation right now. It just isn't developed enough.
 
Gameface said:
Yes, you're right. People are toys for the government to manipulate into whatever behavior is currently preferred. In this instance it's driving hybrids, in another it might be shoving undesirable people into ovens. Whatever the government needs humans for it should manipulate them into doing.
Click to expand...

...Do me a favor? Go smoke a little weed and relax. It will really take the edge off.
 
after we're done solving this problem, let's discuss the issue of compact florescent light bulbs. I think we can probably resolve that one as well.
 
TroutBum said:
Quoted for truth.

Also, I'd still like to know wtf The Internet Son was talking about -- Hybrids are destroying the planet? Huh?
Click to expand...

There is an argument to be made that hybrids extend the illusion that the resource is infinite which will do more damage in the long term. That's a valid perspective. However, I didn't want to comment on it until TIS had an opportunity to explain what he meant.
 
I'd have one if I could afford it. If only to avoid going to the gas station. I hate fueling up my car. It's just a waste of time.
 
If they ever figure out the hydrogen fuel-cells properly you can solve the electric car's battery issues- cost, capacity and toxicity. An electric would be by far a superior vehicle.


Couple that with either natural gas power plants or nuclear power and we could cut our emissions by significant amount. Though I have to admit I am yet to see data to proves that we need to cut emissions.
 
Qman said:
If they ever figure out the hydrogen fuel-cells properly you can solve the electric car's battery issues- cost, capacity and toxicity. An electric would be by far a superior vehicle.


Couple that with either natural gas power plants or nuclear power and we could cut our emissions by significant amount. Though I have to admit I am yet to see data to proves that we need to cut emissions.
Click to expand...

This. +8
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top