Talk about mpg's....

On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 10:10:39 -0700 (PDT), JR >
wrote:

>On Tuesday, June 18, 2013 11:38:08 AM UTC-5, Ashton Crusher wrote:
>> On 17 Jun 2013 22:44:24 -0400, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >Geoff Welsh > wrote:
>>
>> >>Ignoramus20642 wrote:
>>
>> >>> aOn 2013-06-17, Existential > wrote:
>>
>> >>>> Ahm watchin some sci channel ditty in the background, on cruise ships.....
>>
>> >>>>
>>
>> >>>> 60 FEET per gallon..... LOL
>>
>> >>>>
>>
>> >>>> Almost reminds me Kidding's bloatVolt, ito ROI.... as in.... NEVER....
>>
>> >>>> lol
>>
>> >>>
>>
>> >>> And it is carrying how many people? 2,000?
>>
>> >>>
>>
>> >>> That's 120,000 feet per gallon per person. Or 22 miles per gallon.
>>
>> >>>
>>
>> >>> i
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >>you have solved the fuel crisis!
>>
>> >
>>
>> >Public transit, indeed, is a big part of the solution.
>>
>> >--scott
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> How do you figure? there are literally dozens of cars you can buy
>>
>> that get way more than 22 mpg. Generally speaking, public transit if
>>
>> more expensive per mile then personal transportation. And that's with
>>
>> the GOAL of public transit to be as inexpensive as possible. Most
>>
>> people don't buy their car with the GOAL being to get the absolute
>>
>> lowest cost per mile. If they did, personal transport would
>>
>> completely eclipse public in terms of efficiency - of course it
>>
>> already is better even without the singular focus on operating cost.
>>
>> The only reason anyone "votes" for public transit is because they get
>>
>> most of the cost paid by "other people". When they have to pay the
>>
>> full freight themselves they won't pay for it.
>
>The food on some of those cruise ships is terrible.

Yeah but you get so much of it that it balances out.

Ashton Crusher wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 10:10:39 -0700 (PDT), >
> wrote:
>
>> On Tuesday, June 18, 2013 11:38:08 AM UTC-5, Ashton Crusher wrote:
>>> On 17 Jun 2013 22:44:24 -0400, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Geoff > wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Ignoramus20642 wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> aOn 2013-06-17, Existential > wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>> Ahm watchin some sci channel ditty in the background, on cruise ships.....
>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>
>>>>>>> 60 FEET per gallon..... LOL
>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>
>>>>>>> Almost reminds me Kidding's bloatVolt, ito ROI.... as in.... NEVER....
>>>
>>>>>>> lol
>>>
>>>>>>
>>>
>>>>>> And it is carrying how many people? 2,000?
>>>
>>>>>>
>>>
>>>>>> That's 120,000 feet per gallon per person. Or 22 miles per gallon.
>>>
>>>>>>
>>>
>>>>>> i
>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>>> you have solved the fuel crisis!
>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>> Public transit, indeed, is a big part of the solution.
>>>
>>>> --scott
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> How do you figure? there are literally dozens of cars you can buy
>>>
>>> that get way more than 22 mpg. Generally speaking, public transit if
>>>
>>> more expensive per mile then personal transportation. And that's with
>>>
>>> the GOAL of public transit to be as inexpensive as possible. Most
>>>
>>> people don't buy their car with the GOAL being to get the absolute
>>>
>>> lowest cost per mile. If they did, personal transport would
>>>
>>> completely eclipse public in terms of efficiency - of course it
>>>
>>> already is better even without the singular focus on operating cost.
>>>
>>> The only reason anyone "votes" for public transit is because they get
>>>
>>> most of the cost paid by "other people". When they have to pay the
>>>
>>> full freight themselves they won't pay for it.
>>
>> The food on some of those cruise ships is terrible.
>
> Yeah but you get so much of it that it balances out.

Don't suppose anybody else remembers the "Johnny Canal" sketch from SNL
in the 80's?? I think it was Dana Carvey in a Daniel Boone outfit...I
remember the dumbest things.....

GW

On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 10:31:13 -1000, Geoff Welsh >
wrote:

>Ashton Crusher wrote:
>> On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 10:10:39 -0700 (PDT), >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tuesday, June 18, 2013 11:38:08 AM UTC-5, Ashton Crusher wrote:
>>>> On 17 Jun 2013 22:44:24 -0400, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Geoff > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Ignoramus20642 wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>> aOn 2013-06-17, Existential > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ahm watchin some sci channel ditty in the background, on cruise ships.....
>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> 60 FEET per gallon..... LOL
>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> Almost reminds me Kidding's bloatVolt, ito ROI.... as in.... NEVER....
>>>>
>>>>>>>> lol
>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> And it is carrying how many people? 2,000?
>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> That's 120,000 feet per gallon per person. Or 22 miles per gallon.
>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> i
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> you have solved the fuel crisis!
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Public transit, indeed, is a big part of the solution.
>>>>
>>>>> --scott
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> How do you figure? there are literally dozens of cars you can buy
>>>>
>>>> that get way more than 22 mpg. Generally speaking, public transit if
>>>>
>>>> more expensive per mile then personal transportation. And that's with
>>>>
>>>> the GOAL of public transit to be as inexpensive as possible. Most
>>>>
>>>> people don't buy their car with the GOAL being to get the absolute
>>>>
>>>> lowest cost per mile. If they did, personal transport would
>>>>
>>>> completely eclipse public in terms of efficiency - of course it
>>>>
>>>> already is better even without the singular focus on operating cost.
>>>>
>>>> The only reason anyone "votes" for public transit is because they get
>>>>
>>>> most of the cost paid by "other people". When they have to pay the
>>>>
>>>> full freight themselves they won't pay for it.
>>>
>>> The food on some of those cruise ships is terrible.
>>
>> Yeah but you get so much of it that it balances out.
>
>Don't suppose anybody else remembers the "Johnny Canal" sketch from SNL
>in the 80's?? I think it was Dana Carvey in a Daniel Boone outfit...I
>remember the dumbest things.....
>
>GW


It's not ringing any bells here.

On Tuesday, June 18, 2013 3:31:13 PM UTC-5, Geoff Welsh wrote:
> Ashton Crusher wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 10:10:39 -0700 (PDT), >
>
> > wrote:
>
> >
>
> >> On Tuesday, June 18, 2013 11:38:08 AM UTC-5, Ashton Crusher wrote:
>
> >>> On 17 Jun 2013 22:44:24 -0400, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
>
> >>>
>
> >>>
>
> >>>
>
> >>>> Geoff > wrote:
>
> >>>
>
> >>>>> Ignoramus20642 wrote:
>
> >>>
>
> >>>>>> aOn 2013-06-17, Existential > wrote:
>
> >>>
>
> >>>>>>> Ahm watchin some sci channel ditty in the background, on cruise ships.....
>
> >>>
>
> >>>>>>>
>
> >>>
>
> >>>>>>> 60 FEET per gallon..... LOL
>
> >>>
>
> >>>>>>>
>
> >>>
>
> >>>>>>> Almost reminds me Kidding's bloatVolt, ito ROI.... as in.... NEVER....
>
> >>>
>
> >>>>>>> lol
>
> >>>
>
> >>>>>>
>
> >>>
>
> >>>>>> And it is carrying how many people? 2,000?
>
> >>>
>
> >>>>>>
>
> >>>
>
> >>>>>> That's 120,000 feet per gallon per person. Or 22 miles per gallon.
>
> >>>
>
> >>>>>>
>
> >>>
>
> >>>>>> i
>
> >>>
>
> >>>>>
>
> >>>
>
> >>>>> you have solved the fuel crisis!
>
> >>>
>
> >>>>
>
> >>>
>
> >>>> Public transit, indeed, is a big part of the solution.
>
> >>>
>
> >>>> --scott
>
> >>>
>
> >>>
>
> >>>
>
> >>>
>
> >>>
>
> >>> How do you figure? there are literally dozens of cars you can buy
>
> >>>
>
> >>> that get way more than 22 mpg. Generally speaking, public transit if
>
> >>>
>
> >>> more expensive per mile then personal transportation. And that's with
>
> >>>
>
> >>> the GOAL of public transit to be as inexpensive as possible. Most
>
> >>>
>
> >>> people don't buy their car with the GOAL being to get the absolute
>
> >>>
>
> >>> lowest cost per mile. If they did, personal transport would
>
> >>>
>
> >>> completely eclipse public in terms of efficiency - of course it
>
> >>>
>
> >>> already is better even without the singular focus on operating cost.
>
> >>>
>
> >>> The only reason anyone "votes" for public transit is because they get
>
> >>>
>
> >>> most of the cost paid by "other people". When they have to pay the
>
> >>>
>
> >>> full freight themselves they won't pay for it.
>
> >>
>
> >> The food on some of those cruise ships is terrible.
>
> >
>
> > Yeah but you get so much of it that it balances out.
>
>
>
> Don't suppose anybody else remembers the "Johnny Canal" sketch from SNL
>
> in the 80's?? I think it was Dana Carvey in a Daniel Boone outfit...I
>
> remember the dumbest things.....
>
>
>
> GW

One time I went on a gambling boat, it was a Greek registered gambling boat.. The wall covering and the carpeting on the floor was torn and tatty. I went to the dining room. I tried to pull a piece of chicken off of a chicken breast, it was so tough a piece of it flew across the room. The food looked like it was cooked the day before.

On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 10:31:13 -1000, Geoff Welsh >
wrote:

>Ashton Crusher wrote:
>> On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 10:10:39 -0700 (PDT), >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tuesday, June 18, 2013 11:38:08 AM UTC-5, Ashton Crusher wrote:
>>>> On 17 Jun 2013 22:44:24 -0400, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Geoff > wrote:

>>>>
>>>> The only reason anyone "votes" for public transit is because they get
>>>>
>>>> most of the cost paid by "other people". When they have to pay the
>>>>
>>>> full freight themselves they won't pay for it.
>>>
>>> The food on some of those cruise ships is terrible.
>>
>> Yeah but you get so much of it that it balances out.
>
>Don't suppose anybody else remembers the "Johnny Canal" sketch from SNL
>in the 80's?? I think it was Dana Carvey in a Daniel Boone outfit...I
>remember the dumbest things.....
>
>GW

The above is pretty funny. Never saw the transition from public
transit to cruise ships, but that doesn't matter. I had a workmate
who took cruises, and always talked about the food and the weight gain
he would suffer. Food seemed the entire focus of the cruises for him.
Only thing he ever mentioned about the cruises.
Same with the guys who always hit the bars for the "happy hour" to
wolf down free crap food. Just figured they had a goofy view about
food, and their wives couldn't cook worth a damn.
Never heard of Johnny Canal, but found it. Great skit.
http://tinyurl.com/n8cost4

On Jun 18, 9:38*am, Ashton Crusher > wrote:
> On 17 Jun 2013 22:44:24 -0400, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >Geoff Welsh > wrote:
> >>Ignoramus20642 wrote:
> >>> aOn 2013-06-17, Existential > *wrote:
> >>>> Ahm watchin some sci channel ditty in the background, on cruise ships.....
>
> >>>> 60 FEET per gallon..... * LOL
>
> >>>> Almost reminds me Kidding's bloatVolt, *ito ROI.... * as in.... *NEVER....
> >>>> lol
>
> >>> And it is carrying how many people? 2,000?
>
> >>> That's 120,000 feet per gallon per person. Or 22 miles per gallon.
>
> >>> i
>
> >>you have solved the fuel crisis!
>
> >Public transit, indeed, is a big part of the solution.
> >--scott
>
> How do you figure? *there are literally dozens of cars you can buy
> that get way more than 22 mpg. *Generally speaking, public transit if
> more expensive per mile then personal transportation. *And that's with
> the GOAL of public transit to be as inexpensive as possible. *Most
> people don't buy their car with the GOAL being to get the absolute
> lowest cost per mile. *If they did, personal transport would
> completely eclipse public in terms of efficiency - of course it
> already is better even without the singular focus on operating cost.
> The only reason anyone "votes" for public transit is because they get
> most of the cost paid by "other people". *When they have to pay the
> full freight themselves they won't pay for it.

I live an hour away from Spokane, WA. There has been an on going
proposal there for years to build a rail
public transportation system. Just one single line, no side
extensions. I just can't see what you gain that way
over buses. More expense up front for the land/track/construction
plus when done it is fixed forever, no
changing destinations without rebuild, etc.

At least with buses, routes can be redone in an instant as
demographics change.

Harry K

On 6/19/2013 10:35 AM, Harry K wrote:

> I live an hour away from Spokane, WA. There has been an on going
> proposal there for years to build a rail
> public transportation system. Just one single line, no side
> extensions. I just can't see what you gain that way
> over buses. More expense up front for the land/track/construction
> plus when done it is fixed forever, no
> changing destinations without rebuild, etc.
>
> At least with buses, routes can be redone in an instant as
> demographics change.
>
> Harry K


For most of my life I've wondered why the railroads done carry autos.
Load the cars on a flatbed and the people in the club car. Or dining car?

On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 08:35:39 -0700 (PDT), Harry K >
wrote:

>On Jun 18, 9:38*am, Ashton Crusher > wrote:
>> On 17 Jun 2013 22:44:24 -0400, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >Geoff Welsh > wrote:
>> >>Ignoramus20642 wrote:
>> >>> aOn 2013-06-17, Existential > *wrote:
>> >>>> Ahm watchin some sci channel ditty in the background, on cruise ships.....
>>
>> >>>> 60 FEET per gallon..... * LOL
>>
>> >>>> Almost reminds me Kidding's bloatVolt, *ito ROI.... * as in.... *NEVER....
>> >>>> lol
>>
>> >>> And it is carrying how many people? 2,000?
>>
>> >>> That's 120,000 feet per gallon per person. Or 22 miles per gallon.
>>
>> >>> i
>>
>> >>you have solved the fuel crisis!
>>
>> >Public transit, indeed, is a big part of the solution.
>> >--scott
>>
>> How do you figure? *there are literally dozens of cars you can buy
>> that get way more than 22 mpg. *Generally speaking, public transit if
>> more expensive per mile then personal transportation. *And that's with
>> the GOAL of public transit to be as inexpensive as possible. *Most
>> people don't buy their car with the GOAL being to get the absolute
>> lowest cost per mile. *If they did, personal transport would
>> completely eclipse public in terms of efficiency - of course it
>> already is better even without the singular focus on operating cost.
>> The only reason anyone "votes" for public transit is because they get
>> most of the cost paid by "other people". *When they have to pay the
>> full freight themselves they won't pay for it.
>
>I live an hour away from Spokane, WA. There has been an on going
>proposal there for years to build a rail
>public transportation system. Just one single line, no side
>extensions. I just can't see what you gain that way
> over buses. More expense up front for the land/track/construction
>plus when done it is fixed forever, no
> changing destinations without rebuild, etc.
>
> At least with buses, routes can be redone in an instant as
>demographics change.
>
>Harry K

You guys think you have problems?

Google California High Speed rail......

Sounds great on ...paper....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_High-Speed_Rail

But then...reality pokes up its fang filled head....

http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-...est-firm-start

http://la.curbed.com/archives/2013/0... pporters.php

http://againstcaliforniahsr.com/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1332763.html

http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?se...ate&id=9123838


Lots and lots more out there.

Good luck!!

Gunner

--
""Almost all liberal behavioral tropes track the impotent rage of small
children. Thus, for example, there is also the popular tactic of
repeating some stupid, meaningless phrase a billion times" Arms for
hostages, arms for hostages, arms for hostages, it's just about sex, just
about sex, just about sex, dumb,dumb, money in politics,money in
politics, Enron, Enron, Enron. Nothing repeated with mind-numbing
frequency in all major news outlets will not be believed by some members
of the populace. It is the permanence of evil; you can't stop it." (Ann
Coulter)

On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 14:31:05 -0500, Richard >
wrote:

>On 6/19/2013 10:35 AM, Harry K wrote:
>
>> I live an hour away from Spokane, WA. There has been an on going
>> proposal there for years to build a rail
>> public transportation system. Just one single line, no side
>> extensions. I just can't see what you gain that way
>> over buses. More expense up front for the land/track/construction
>> plus when done it is fixed forever, no
>> changing destinations without rebuild, etc.
>>
>> At least with buses, routes can be redone in an instant as
>> demographics change.
>>
>> Harry K
>
>
>For most of my life I've wondered why the railroads done carry autos.
>Load the cars on a flatbed and the people in the club car. Or dining car?

Europe has tried this for years with varying degrees of sucess.

Amtrak actually does have an AutoTrain

http://www.amtrak.com/auto-train

Between DC and Orlando

I didnt bother looking up the cost. Probably cheaper than the gas...or
maybe not.


--
""Almost all liberal behavioral tropes track the impotent rage of small
children. Thus, for example, there is also the popular tactic of
repeating some stupid, meaningless phrase a billion times" Arms for
hostages, arms for hostages, arms for hostages, it's just about sex, just
about sex, just about sex, dumb,dumb, money in politics,money in
politics, Enron, Enron, Enron. Nothing repeated with mind-numbing
frequency in all major news outlets will not be believed by some members
of the populace. It is the permanence of evil; you can't stop it." (Ann
Coulter)

Richard > wrote:
>
>For most of my life I've wondered why the railroads done carry autos.
>Load the cars on a flatbed and the people in the club car. Or dining car?

They do. You can take the Auto-Train from Northern Virginia down to Florida
and back. It's very popular with the summer-in-miami crowd.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."