On Thu, Jan 30, 2003 at 12:41:17AM -0800, Bill Frantz wrote: > At 12:04 AM -0800 1/30/03, Tim May wrote: > >Sometime I take a bus when my car needs to be repaired. From my house > >to Santa Cruz, a total of 13 miles, it takes a minimum of 80 minutes by > >bus. For a working person, ... as soon as > >they can raise the money, they buy cars. Then that 80-minute each way > >trip drops to 20 minutes. And they can go when they wish, not when the > >bus schedule permits. > > I have had one case where taking the train was a big win over driving. I > was consulting in San Francisco, about 60 miles from my home. I found that > if I rode the train, I could work as I rode, and turn my travel time into > billable hours. I also avoided the ruinous parking charges in downtown. > Given those facts, I would have taken the train even if the ticket price > hadn't been subsidized. > Exactly. Trains are great. I currently live 80 miles from both Milwaukee and Madison. I wouldn't dream of commuting (or moving) to either, but if a train were available, I'd take a job in either in a flash. And I'd choose a train for longer trips, over a plane as well -- much more comfortable, safer, no bullshit with security, etc. I also really like what they do with buses in Portland, OR -- they have platforms for bikes, so you can both bike and bus around the city. Yes, there's some unpleasant folks on buses, but there are on the street as well. The fact is that if trucks hadn't received such a huge subsidy via the public highway system, trains would be self sufficient. Same with airports for the airlines.
-- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com
