Talk about mpg's....

On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 12:33:12 -0700, Gunner Asch >
wrote:

>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

There has never been a public transit system in modern times that
covers it's own cost. Typically less then 50% of the construction
costs are paid by the actual users and once operating it's rare that
more then 20% of the ongoing costs are paid by the users. People in
thousands of small towns all over the US pay for the transit subsidies
of perhaps a dozen large cities. And those subsidized systems mainly
benefit the construction and real estate industries of those few
cities. It's just like Football stadiums - socialism for the rich.

On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 21:53:36 -0700, Ashton Crusher >
wrote:

>On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 16:05:02 -0700, Gunner Asch >
>wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:47:05 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Gunner Asch wrote:
>>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>>
>>> They used to run a high speed passenger service between Cincinnati &&
>>>Cleveland back in the '70s. It passed my area twice a day, and was the
>>>weirdest train that I ever saw. One long car, with controls on each end
>>>so they didn't need a roundhouse to turn it around for the return trip.
>>
>>Most of the commuter trains in So Cal are that way..engine on each
>>end..or on one end only. Often times the engine is on the back of the
>>train going one direction..and on the front going the other way.
>>
>>"Metrolink"
>>
>>It usually works fine. However...occasionally......
>>
>>http://www.millennium-ark.net/NEWS/0...ter.train.html
>>
>>Though its not as bad as some places....
>>
>>http://img859.imageshack.us/img859/8...iantrain21.jpg
>
>
>If the city planners had their way that's how we'd all be living.
>Density Density Density combined with public transit, not those nasty
>personal cars.

In my little town..they tore out the train tracks 20 or so years ago.
No taxis in 18 yrs and we have a community bus that spends most of its
time sitting in a shady spot waiting for someone to call for a ride. I
wonder how much thats costing the California taxpayers?

http://www.cityoftaft.org/pview.aspx?id=5385&catid=563

A buck a ride. But even the wetbacks avoid it..cause it costs them
like $6 for them and their anchor babies. And they can walk from one
end of town to the other in 15 minutes


--
""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 21:56:54 -0700, Ashton Crusher >
wrote:

>On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 12:33:12 -0700, Gunner Asch >
>wrote:
>
>>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
>
>There has never been a public transit system in modern times that
>covers it's own cost. Typically less then 50% of the construction
>costs are paid by the actual users and once operating it's rare that
>more then 20% of the ongoing costs are paid by the users. People in
>thousands of small towns all over the US pay for the transit subsidies
>of perhaps a dozen large cities. And those subsidized systems mainly
>benefit the construction and real estate industries of those few
>cities. It's just like Football stadiums - socialism for the rich.

Very well stated!

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)