I also want to see people limit their driving to a minimum. I think car sharing is a way to help some people limit their driving.
Some people drive for the sake of driving, but I don't think those people join Community Car. Community car is for people who *need* to drive sometimes, to get to doctors' appointments, stores, friends' houses or whatever. If you own a car, it's easy to jump in the car and drive where you want to go, even if it would be almost as easy to walk or bike or take the bus. If you rent a car by the hour, you are likely to think twice before you drive somewhere. Community Car's literature says that car-sharing cuts car usage by 50%. I don't know if that's actually true, but it sounds plausible to me. And if that figure is inaccurate -- that's a pragmatic issue, not a religious one. I asked if you own a car because I wanted to see if you really believe that all driving is evil, unneccessary and self-indulgent. If you're totally opposed to all driving, you should send your own car to the crusher. If you accept that some driving is legitimate and necessary, why should access to cars be limited to people who own them? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Didn't appear that way to me, Tim. Neither does your "question". > > I didn't see either of you testifying at the Capitol yesterday to the > "Road to the Future" committee. I came in late, and managed to be the > last person who testified. I told them my concern was that they would > over investigate in highway expansion some more. I said them if they > keep adding more highway capacity, it won't be used because environmental > conditions in particular, due to global warming and air quality, will > force us all to greatly reduce our driving levels. > > I didn't tell them people shouldn't own cars; rather, what is important > is that they limit their driving to a minimum. It is the driving of them > that is creating all the environmental and human health impacts, not > merely that they own them. > > I told them I've been saying this since 1999, when the state finalized > it's 2020 highway plan (but only as a individual), since I was reassigned > from reviewing state highway plans back then, and was prohibited from > talking about global warming on my job or face further disciplinary > actions if I did. I told them environmental conditions relating to the > climate warming and air quality degradation due to fuel burning, the > largest share coming from motorized transportation in the U.S., including > Wisconsin, would force us all to change our lifestyles, so that we should > rely on our legs, bicycles and mass transit more, and cars and airplanes > less. I concluded we shouldn't use roads for solely for more motor > vehicles, but needed to invest more in bicycle paths and mass transit, > that the "Road to the Future" should not involve more roads. > > Did anyone else here testify at the hearing and care to share what they > said or have any information about what was said in the other > testimonies? > > Mike Neuman > > On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 00:16:03 -0500 "timwong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Wasn't this a yes or no question? >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: <[email protected]> >> Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2006 10:13 PM >> Subject: [Bikies] Re: Community Car Seeking... >> >> >> >> Mike -- do you own a car? >> > >> > "At every crossways on the road that leads to the future, each >> > progressive spirit is opposed by a thousand men appointed to guard >> the >> > past." >> > - Maurice Maeterlinck >> > >> > Any more questions, Mitch? >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Bikies mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies > > _______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies
