On the family money issue - Clearly there can be an economic advantage to not having to buy a 2nd car (that is if the bus goes where you need it to go when you need it to go there). What people could do with this cash is anyone's guess (how big is the PowerBall??) but as someone who is maintaining a home and paying good chunk of the health insurance premium for a family of 4 I can tell you what I'm doing with the cash I'm saving.
On the pollution issue - Charles Swope has noted the efficiency gains. But I'd also argue moving pollution CAN be important. To bring this topic back to St. Paul - on Monday the Minnesota Citizen's for Environmental Advocacy was at the W7th community center presenting their plans to map the correlation between children's asthma attacks and a school's proximity to heavily traffic arteries in St. Paul. Studies in other states have shown higher rates of asthma hospitalizations among children living within 200 meters of high traffic density roads. (Contact MCEA public health scientist Samuel Yamin for specific information on the scientific basis and goals of this study - see www.mncenter.org for info). Now you may think 'Of course the air is more polluted around high traffic roads - why the heck waste the time & effort on something like this. ' Well...It's one thing to be able to say this happens in California - It's quite another to be able to point to schools and streets and kids right here in St. Paul to document that it is a problem here. I'm not saying transit is THE solution to this problem - but it certainly can be part of the solution. PS - On Eric's note about the State Auditor's Report date - I stand corrected - though it should be the 2000 Local Highway Finance Report (if anyone is interested). My mistake. Kevin Somdahl Sands - Administrator - Transit for Livable Communities Midway resident ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 13:47:01 -0800 (PST) From: John Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [StPaul] Vision for Transit > - giving families the option to take the money they would have spent on an > additional car and instead spend that money on other things - like investing in a home or paying their health care bills I wanted to buy in until the above statement. Maybe i am naive but are there really people out there buying 2nd automobiles instead of buying a home and or paying their health care bills? I so suppose that it has come to where you need to sensationalize the issue to win arguments. on the pollution, doesn't it really just move where the pollution occurs? creating electricity, creates pollution. john harris camden _____________________________________________ To Join: St. Paul Issues Forum Rules Discussion Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ____________________________________________ NEW ADDRESS FOR LIST: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, modify subscription, or get your password - visit: http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/stpaul Archive Address: http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/private/stpaul/
